Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

As a concept of rhetoric in technical writing, relevance involves an awareness of time. The report deals with the past; the manual, with the present; the proposal, with the future. To be considered relevant, however, all the modes of technical writing must relate to the present reality of the audience. Writers must recognize this need not only as it influences grammar and style but also as it affects larger concerns of organization and tone. Realizing that the temporal classification of modem reports, manuals, and proposals correlates with Aristotle's designation of forensic, epideictic, and deliberative discourse, technical writers can discover a body of rhetorical theory on which to base choices about selection, arrangement, and presentation of subject matter.

Two parallels between scientific and literary discourse are the aesthetic appeal they both make and their shared use of metaphor. Essays by Stephen Jay Gould on the science of form demonstrate these parallels. In one, Gould acts as a reader of scientific discourse, in the other as a writer. In both essays, Gould demonstrates the imaginative qualities science and literature share.

In contrast to the literary artist we expect the scientist-writer to transmit information to the intended audience as accurately and clearly as possible. Nevertheless, a few scientists have managed to slip into their prose such rhetorical devices as anagram, acrostic, pun, metaphor, litotes, and neologism.

The format of the business letter reflects the necessary adjustments that writers must make to communicate successfully in the written medium. The heading, inside address, salutation, complimentary close, and signature block establish contextual anchoring for the reader to understand the many deictic references within the body of the letter. By seeing the practical nature of the components of the business letter, students no longer view the format as arbitrary and ad hoc.

A study was undertaken both to evaluate how medical students are taught to write patient records and to examine the writing done by doctors. Typical medical records, written by medical doctors, were also evaluated. A single questionnaire was sent to eighty-four medical school professors, twenty law school faculty, and five practicing attorneys. The questionnaire asked how medical records were used and what the legal implications were in authoring a patient record. The medical professionals were also asked how their schools taught medical writing. The questionnaire pointed out that most medical schools teach less than ten hours of medical writing in their curricula and that patient records are not written with an understanding of the various audiences, purposes, and uses for medical documents. Two radiology reports are discussed in terms of their clarity and usefulness for medical and extra-medical readers. The study concludes that medical students should be taught a composing process so that they will understand the audience, purpose, and use for the patient records they write.

This article examines the effects of headings, previews, and logical connectives on readers and their comprehension of technical expository prose. Results from two related experiments suggest that previews produce significant effects on literal and inferential comprehension while the other two signal types do not. Results are discussed in light of previous research and suggestions for future research are given.

American business is now responsible for training an entire generation of poorly skilled writers. While brief writing seminars may help, the real cure begins with training managers on how to manage the writing process. They need to see the link between good writing and good leadership. Simply sending reports back to employees with a sarcastic note to “get it right” does little to build writing skill and confidence. Managers also need strategies for working with employees. These strategies extend from simple revising techniques to the use of sophisticated computer programs.

Whether they know it or not, software engineers have a great deal of power over the language we use. They may create new words, such as byte or debug, which in a remarkably short time can become commonly used far beyond their original context. The new words are accepted quickly and even eagerly as the proliferation of microcomputers and the software to run them advance so rapidly. Yet there is still a great deal of confusion and frustration among readers of software manuals about just what those manuals are trying to say. Part of the problem is that each technical field has its own jargon that any novice must learn. But in the case of software manuals, there is the additional problem of familiar words being used in unfamiliar ways. This article describes the ambiguity created for the reader when familiar words, such as function or folding, are used in the context of the software manual with new, specialized meanings.