Modern technical writing often suffers from its tendency toward jargon. Technical writing courses should include units on grammar as it relates to stylistics in technical writing. Transformational-generative grammar offers an effective and useful approach to train technical writers to communicate more effectively and to avoid the problems inherent in an impersonal style. One way of organizing a discussion of transformational-generative grammar is to consider its application to sentences and clauses, phrases, and individual words.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SawyerT. M., Rhetoric in an Age of Science and Technology, College Composition and Communication, 23, pp. 390–398, December 1972.
2.
WoodfordF. P., Sounder Thinking Through Clearer Writing, Science, 156, pp. 743–745, May 12, 1967.
3.
MarshallM. S., Unglued English, Midwest Quarterly, 13, pp. 91–100, October 1971.
4.
ReelW. D., Project Literacy, IEEE—Transactions on Engineering Writing and Speech, EWS-7: 3, pp. 3–8, December 1964.
5.
SpanglerE. R., Modern Grammar and Its Application to Technical Writing, Journal of Chemical Education, 33, pp. 61–64, February 1956.
6.
AllenJ. P. B. and WiddowsonH. G., Teaching the Communicative Use of English, IRAL, 12, pp. 1–21, February 1974.
7.
JordanM. P., “Besides Moreover However And But” Conjunctions—Order Out of Confusion, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 4: 2, pp. 133–146, 1974.
8.
JordanM. P., Next Then Although More Too—Conjunctions in Action, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 4: 3, pp. 171–183, 1974.
9.
JordanM. P., If Not And Or But Conjunctions in Sentential and Deductive Logic, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 5: 1, pp. 23–38, 1975.
10.
ChomskyN., Syntactic Structures, Mouton & Company, 'S-Gravenhage, The Hague, 1957.
11.
ChomskyN., Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1965.
12.
ChomskyN., Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist Thought, Studies in Language series, Harper & Row, New York, 1966.
13.
WeismanH. A., Basic Technical Writing, 2nd ed., Charles E. Merrill, Columbus, Ohio, 1968.
14.
CochranW.FennerP., and HillM., Geowriting: A Guide to Writing, Editing, and Printing in Earth Science, American Geological Institute, Falls Church, Virginia, 1974.
15.
LevenstonE. A., Teaching Indirect Object Structures in English: A Case Study in Applied Linguistics, English Language Teaching Journal, 28, pp. 299–305, July 1974.
16.
JacobsonRudolfo, The Role of Deep Structures in Language Teaching, Language Learning, 16: 3–4, pp. 153–160, 1966.
17.
SussexR., Deep Structure of Adjectives in Noun Phrases, Journal of Linguistics, 10, pp. 111–131, February 1974.
18.
BrewerC. W.Jr., Logic and Sentence Structure (essay), Texas Tech University Technical and Professional Writing Program, Lubbock, mimeographed, 1975.
19.
Committed on Style and Form of the Council of Biology Editors, CBE Style Manual, 3rd ed., American Institute of Biological Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1972.
