atw: Re: Should and would
- From: Howard Silcock <howard.silcock@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:12:39 +1100
Thanks for your input, Kirsty
I don't have the latest MMoS but I do have a version and strangely didn't
think to check it. (It's strange, because I even have a shortcut to it on my
desktop.) But I now find that my version says, under "Subjunctive"
Subjunctive Mood
There is seldom any reason to use the subjunctive mood, which expresses a
condition contrary to fact or a wish, desire, supposition, or hypothesis. In
general, write documentation in the indicative mood (for information) or the
imperative mood (for procedures).
and, under "Should"
Because *should* can be ambiguous, avoid its use. Instead, cast your
sentence in one of the following ways, depending on the context:
- Use the imperative mood.
- Use *must* to specifically instruct users that they must follow some
course of action.
- Use a phrase such as "we recommend" (in marketing information only) or
"it is recommended."
- Rephrase the instruction to recommend some action or condition.
All of which I generally tend to agree with.
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction!
Howard
2009/10/20 Kirsty Taylor <kirsty.taylor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Hi Howard,
>
>
>
> Modal verbs can be tricky. We have an internal style guideline to try to
> avoid them in most instances, as they can cause problems for translation.
> Our translation department has this in their guidelines:
>
> [image: *] *Modals are open to interpretation and can cause lengthy
> (and incorrect) translations*
>
>
>
> In an example from old documentation, they found a sentence stating “ xyz
> should be added to pqr”. Should it be? Or must it be? Is this a
> recommendation or a pre-requisite? Using should makes it unclear. Rewriting
> without using the modal makes the sentence clear.
>
>
>
> But, as far as a reference for this, beyond our translation department’s
> experience …
>
> I’ve had a quick look in MMoS, there’s an entry for should vs must and can
> vs may. They say to use should to describe a user action that is recommended
> but optional. Use must for an action that is required. Use can for ability
> and may for possibility, not to imply permission. Use might to connote
> greater doubt than may or eliminate ambiguity when may could be interpreted
> for permission. Do not use could when you mean can (except for past tense of
> can and it is not ambiguous).
>
> [My summary/paraphrasing of MMoS, this does not necessarily indicate my
> preferences or our internal style]
>
>
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> KT
>
>
>
> *Kirsty Taylor ***
>
> kirsty.taylor@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> *From:* austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Howard Silcock
> *Sent:*Tuesday, 20 October 2009 12:04 PM
> *To:* austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* atw: Should and would
>
>
>
> I have been reading through some of the administrative circulars here in
> the Government department where I work. I was struck by how much they use
> 'should' and, to a lesser extent, 'would'. Typically, you find phrases like
> 'Staff should follow this procedure when ...' or 'I would like to remind
> staff of the importance of keeping accurate records of meetings'. Why not
> just write 'Follow this procedure when...' and 'Keep accurate records of
> meetings', or maybe 'Remember to keep accurate records of meetings'?
>
>
>
> I was tempted to formulate a rule "avoid 'should' and 'would' in technical
> writing", but realised that there are a few cases (really very few, I'd say)
> when I would [yes, I'm doing it now myself] regard it as OK. Still, I
> wondered why so much is written about avoiding passives, and when not to use
> the future tense, but no-one seems to point to the deadening effect of
> strings of 'shoulds' and hypotheticals. Even a sentence like 'If your user
> name were jsmith, your personal site's URL would be
> http://mysite.com/personal/jsmith/default.aspx' probably reads better (at
> least, in my view) as 'For a user name jsmith, the personal site's URL is
> http://mysite.com/personal/jsmith/default.aspx '. (On the other hand, I
> don't think the sentence 'Edit the information as you would in a Microsoft
> Word document' needs changing.)
>
>
>
> Does anyone know of any usage guide that addresses this topic? I looked in
> 'Read Me First', but couldn't see anything. And can anyone suggest other
> good examples where 'would' and 'should' are OK - in other words, examples
> that go against my proposed rule? Maybe I can reformulate it as a 'rule with
> some exceptions' - something linguists would probably feel fine about but
> which my mathematical background makes me definitely reluctant to accept!
>
>
>
> Howard
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> This transmission is for the intended addressee only and is confidential
> information. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify
> the sender and delete the transmission. The contents of this e-mail are the
> opinion of the writer only and are not endorsed by the Mincom Group of
> companies unless expressly stated otherwise.
>
>
Other related posts:
