Skip to main content
Loading Explore guides…
Descriptive Style · Acedra
Home
Explore
Linguistics
Descriptive Style
Sign in to save
Chat
If YouTube asks you to sign in, open the video on YouTube.
Watch on YouTube
Reload player
Transcript
77 segments
Copy
Hide video
0:10
Welcome to module 2 of TECM 5190! This lecture introduces some more foundational concepts for the course. In this lecture I'll first help you understand the difference between style description and prescription. Second, I'll introduce you to the concept of linguistic variation, also known as descriptive style.
0:39
I'll end by exploring the consequences of linguistic variation, especially for tech writers.
0:46
You're expected to begin applying what you learn in this lecture in your first peer review assignment due by the end of module two. You'll practice it many times throughout the course. Let's get going!
1:00
As I said, I'm going to start by making a critical distinction between DEscription and PREscription.
1:09
I promise not to go too far afield here, but you should know that style has a long intellectual history. Aristotle's rhetoric (written around 350 BC) distinguished the development of a message into three parts: invention -- the development of a persuasive argument; arrangement -- the effective organization of that argument; and finally style -- the way the argument was presented in order to influence the audience. The way style
1:40
has been primarily used since Aristotle is PREscriptive. It's about what people SHOULD do.
1:50
All content guides, for example, whether they focus on style or voice or something else, are prescriptive. They list the standards that writers should follow. Here's a prescription from the Microsoft Writing Style Guide.
2:06
For Microsoft (in their style) the first version is wrong. The second version is right. You're learning there are a multitude of guides for different types of content in different contexts.
2:21
That means there is no single correct style for anything. This is difficult for many to accept. So let me say it one more time: there is no single correct writing style.
2:39
At least from the 20th century, linguists have also talked about style, by which we mean varieties of or variations in language. Unlike in the rhetorical tradition, a linguistics focus is scientific or DEscriptive. It's about observing what people actually do with no interest in choosing one variation as the best. The fact that there's a 40-year-old research journal titled World Englishes -- yes, with a plural -- is a compelling piece of evidence that linguists
3:12
respect all varieties of all languages, including English. Let me try to make the distinction between descriptive and prescriptive style more clear with a personal example. For many english speakers, the word "coke" means only the brand Coca-Cola. That's how I used the word for the first 20-some years of my life. But I found out that for some other english speakers like my in-laws (who all came from the Southern United States) "coke" means any soft drink.
3:47
After a misunderstanding at the grocery store, my husband prescribed that I use "coke" to refer to all soft drinks when communicating with his family. I still use "coke" only for the brand with my own family because they follow a different standard. As a speaker, I'm following a prescription that makes understanding more likely. But as a linguist, I'm just describing a variation in the way English is used by two groups of people, without choosing which one's better.
4:20
In Part 2, I'm going to introduce how linguists talk about language variation. In other words, how we describe different styles of language.
4:31
Let me begin with a question: how long do you think it would take to say all the possible sentences in English that use exactly 20 words? If you read Richard Lederer's article, The Creativity of Human Language, you know that computer models have shown that it would take 10 trillion years. That's 2 thousand times the estimated age of the earth.
4:57
As Lederer wrote, that creativity means that there are many many ways of conveying the same message.
5:06
Many linguists refer to all types of variation in language (like whether "coke" refers to a brand or a category of drinks) as style. And there's an entire sub-discipline within linguistics called stylistics. So this is something linguists have studied carefully for quite a long time. There are several ways linguists talk about variation. I'm going to talk about two of these. The first way linguists talk about it is to categorize the source of the variation or the varieties.
5:40
For instance, linguists recognize that some differences reflect dialects of a single language. There are three types of dialects. A temporal dialect is defined by a time in history. So the language of Shakespeare is different from today's English. A regional dialect is defined by a place. The English of my midwestern family is different from that of my southern in-laws or the English of Australia is different from that of Scotland. As the map shows,
6:12
ancient languages had different dialects, too. A social dialect is defined by social groups. For example, the English of your grandmother is different from that of your teenage cousin.
6:26
Another way to talk about social variation is called register -- how language differs within specific situations or contexts. So your teenage cousin probably uses English differently when talking on the phone compared to texting. Linguists called that style-shifting. Similarly, your own English in an academic paper probably differs from your English in a workplace email. Linguists usually call this type of variation a genre difference.
6:58
It should be obvious that language is an important way to display our social identities. I'll come back to this point a little later.
7:09
The second way linguists talk about variation is to categorize the levels at which language varies.
7:16
Over the next few slides, I'm going to introduce terms for some of these levels that are shown in this graphic here. I'll use some examples to help you get the gist of things. This graphic shows the many levels of language linguists study -- from its physical manifestation (that's phonetics, maybe phonology) to its meaning when used (that's pragmatics). It turns out that language can vary
7:40
at any of these levels. For someone who has never studied linguistics, this can seem complicated. The finer distinctions between these levels are not important for our purposes in TECM 5190. But I do want you to build some expertise in talking about language so that you're more accurate and confident when discussing style in writing. If you're going to be a technical communicator, you should have some scientific knowledge about language. I placed a handout
8:11
in the instructional materials page for module 2 it's on canvas. It captures the examples on the following slides and summarizes my discussion. You may want to download it before you continue.
8:25
In science in general, morphology is the study of forms. As Mark Lieberman, professor of linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania wrote about in his introductory linguistics course (I'm quoting): "words are the most accessible and maybe the most important aspect of human language and so we'll start with morphology, which deals with morphemes -- the minimal units of linguistic form and meaning -- and how they make up words." (That's the end of the quote.) Here I'm displaying
8:56
two variants of the same message. Variant A forms the plural of the second-person pronoun with "all of you," while Variant B uses "y'all." In this example, the source of the morphological variation is the regional dialect of the speaker or writer. I'll delay talking about why someone would choose one variant over another or what the consequences of that choice mean until Part 3 of this lecture.
9:26
Here's another example of two variants of the same message.
9:31
Variant A uses the word "burnt" with just the letter "t" to signal the past participle form, whereas Variant B uses "burned" with an "ed" instead.
9:42
We can say the two messages display morphological variation in the way the past verb "to burn" is formed. If you investigate, you'll find that Variant A was the most common form up until around 1900. In general, there's been a slow historical movement in English toward using regularized verb forms -- that's those with an "ed" suffix to signify past tense.
10:07
The source of the variation in this case is likely the temporal dialect of the speaker or writer. Morphological variation describes differences in word formation. Now let's try another kind of variation. Phonology is the study of sound patterns in language.
10:30
Here are two variants of the same message. One of the ways in which they differ is that Variant B has rhyme: "lettuce" and "upset us" end in similar sounds. We can say the two messages display phonological variation. Here's another set of variants that convey a similar message. Variant B has alliteration: "don',"t "dream," and "drive" all begin with the same sound. Again the two messages display phonological variation.
11:03
The source of difference in both of these examples is likely the genre in which the message appears. Both B variants are more successful advertising messages. It turns out that, in English anyway, phonological variation is tightly connected to creative genres like poetry and maybe advertising. More substantive or technical messages almost always choose the non-creative variant. I'm using
11:30
these here because I think it's fairly easy to understand the level of language we're discussing. Sound variation is the focus. Orthography is the study of writing systems for language. Orthography is roughly parallel to phonology. It's how the language is made physical.
11:50
Here are two variants of the same message. They differ in the spelling of the word modeling. Variant A uses double "l" while Variant B uses a single "l." The two messages display orthographic variation. These two variants show one additional orthographic difference in the placement of the closing quotation marks: before the period in Variant A and after the period in Variant B. The source of their orthographic differences is likely regional dialect. British writers would
12:24
be more likely to choose the double "l" with quotation marks before the period, and American writers the other variant. Here's another example of two variants of the same message. Variant A uses an asterisk before g-e-t "get," while Variant B uses the phrase "meant to type."
12:47
Urban Dictionary uses Variant A to demonstrate how asterisks are used in online interactions or texting when a writer wants to correct a previous mistake. The source of the orthographic difference in this case? I think it's probably that it's social dialect: a younger writer would use A but an older writer might use B. Syntax is the study of patterns of combining words into phrases and sentences. Linguists sometimes use tree diagrams to represent the underlying structure
13:20
of language --- like what you see here. Here's an example of two variants of the same message. Variant B uses active voice, with the agent of the action (that's "we") getting the focus because it appears as the sentence subject. Variant A uses passive voice "be recorded" without naming the agent, with "presentations" getting the focus as the sentence subject. Unlike most of the examples I've presented so far, there's no obvious source for the
13:50
two variants. Both active and passive voice appear in all dialects and registers that I know about.
13:57
Let me take a second to help those who struggle to identify passive voice with a very simple two-part test. 1) ask yourself: does the sentence include a form of the verb "be"? (that could be "is," "are," "was," "were," "been," "being," whatever). So Variant B includes none. That means we know it can't be passive voice. Variant A includes two "be"s, so these are potentially passives.
14:27
2) ask yourself: is the form of "be" followed by a past participle (that means a verb ending in "en" or "ed"). In Variant A, the first "be" is followed by "recorded," which ends in "ed." So it's passive. The second "be" in Variant A is followed by "available." That's not a verb. Even if you didn't know that, it doesn't end in "en" or "ed." So that part of the sentence is not passive. Now on to another example. We've seen this one before.
15:02
Variant B uses Simplified Technical English, also known as ASD-STE100.
15:10
I've mentioned that before I believe in module one when discussing standards adopted by organizations for writing their content. I borrowed this from a post on Tom Johnson's I'd Rather Be Writing site. You'll find a link to it in the instructional materials for module two.
15:27
I see three variations at the level of syntax. First, Variant B has three short sentences. In fact one has just four words total, while A has one long sentence of 28 words. So the first syntactic difference is in word length of sentences. The second syntactic difference is that Variant B begins with a sentence in imperative mood: that's "do not get." (You might have called this understood you or something in the past.) Variant A, on the other
16:00
hand, is one single declarative sentence -- not imperative. The third syntactic difference is that Variant B follows a clear cohesion pattern in which "oil" appears as the new information in the predicate of the first sentence and then it's repeated as the given information in the subject of both the second and third sentences. In Variant A there's no such pattern of cohesive arrangement.
16:31
The syntactic variation examples make it clear that variations in word order or their arrangement are another way in which language can vary. The source of the difference can't be described as one of dialect or register or genre even, but it's still a difference in linguistic style. Semantics is the study of patterns of meaning inherent in words or their combinations. That INHERENT is important because, wherever humans use language there's meaning, but some of that
17:02
meaning is highly situational. That's not the type of meaning linguists focus on in semantics. Let me start with the same example used on the previous slide demonstrating syntactic variation. I'm showing only a part of it here. Variant B uses the phrase "the engine oil" as a synonym for the longer phrase in Variant A, "the synthetic lubricating oil used in this engine." There are additional synonyms between the variants not shown on this slide. Variant
17:35
A has "additives which ... can be toxic," which is replaced by "poisonous" in Variant B.
17:43
Also, Variant A uses "come into contact with the skin for prolonged periods," while Variant B uses "go through your skin." The two variants are nearly, if not perfectly, synonymous. But they still differ at two levels: syntactics and semantics.
18:05
Here's another example of semantic variation involving synonyms. The difference in this case is a single word choice. Variant A uses "peril," which is far less often used than the choice in B, which is "risk." gGoogle's Ngram Viewer provides data showing just how rare the word "peril" is. "Peril" appears in blue here, while "risk" appears in red. If you've never used the Ngram Viewer, I
18:32
urge you to test it out. It's free. There's a link in the instructional materials for module two.
18:39
Back to our examples. Here's yet another one of semantic variation. What I want you to notice is that Variant A is ambiguous because the word "bark" is a homonym. Although it's spelled and pronounced the same way, it has two possible meanings: the covering on a tree or the sound a dog makes. Variant B makes clear which of these meanings is intended by adding "tree" as a descriptor or modifier. Sometimes homonyms sound the same
19:09
but are spelled differently (that's a homophone, like "too" and "two"). Sometimes they're spelled the same but sound differently (that's a homograph like l-e-a-d, which can be the noun "lead" or the verb "led"). One final example of semantic variation: this one inspired by a joke attributed to Groucho Marx. Variant B makes clear that Variant A is ambiguous.
19:39
Note that the ambiguity is not because any single word has more than one meaning. Rather it's the underlying structure that's ambiguous. Does "in my pajamas" modify the object noun "elephant" or the subject pronoun "I"? Because it's the structure that's of interest here, we could accurately call this syntactic variation instead of semantic. Semantic variation is the result of word meaning differences that are inherent to the words.
20:13
Let me introduce one more term, and then I'm done. The word lexical is defined as "of or relating to words or the vocabulary of a language as distinguished from its grammar and construction."
20:27
So the people who create dictionaries are called lexicographers.
20:32
Morphological and many types of semantic variation focus on vocabulary. They might also be called lexical variation. If you can't figure out whether the level of difference is morphological or semantic, you can usually fall back on calling it lexical variation.
20:50
At this point, you've heard some examples demonstrating that dialects or registers or genres are the source of some variations in language. You've also heard how language varies at five different levels: morphological, phonological, orthographic, syntactic, and semantic.
21:08
As i said a little earlier, my goal is for you to build some expertise in talking about language so that you are more accurate and confident when discussing style in writing. Remember that there's a handout summarizing what I've just covered on Canvas.
21:24
In part 3, it's time to talk about why someone chooses one linguistic variant over another and what the consequences of their choice are.
21:34
I'll end by clarifying how these consequences relate to the success of tech writers in industry.
21:42
Let's start with this quote from a couple of linguists who specialize in American English. They hit on one of the most commonly mentioned consequences of language variation: misunderstanding. However, misunderstanding isn't the only consequence.
22:00
Let me show you what I mean with some examples. I suppose most of us in tech comm immediately think about the consequences of linguistic variation for readers or for our audience. In this example from the beginning of the lecture, I misunderstood the message sent by my in-laws because of a semantic difference in our regional dialects. But what's the consequence for readers in this example? Assuming they're native English speakers from the U.S.,
22:30
it's doubtful many will misunderstand the message -- even if it's not part of their own dialect. The consequence that's of more likely impact in this case is for the writer rather than the reader.
22:43
Let me explain. Because "y'all" is specific to the dialect of the Southern United States, that means it's often associated with lower social status. Science makes it clear that people judge others or make attributions about them based on relatively little information, including the use of a single word like "y'all." The writer who chooses "y'all" may be attributed with some negative qualities
23:09
because of that one word. My main point here is that linguistic variation can have negative consequences for both readers and writers. Let's consider one more example. Writers may choose the more descriptive synonym for "engine oil" from the example we've seen before a couple of times. They might choose it because they want to be accurate or perceived as knowledgeable about what is accurate. But the consequence for readers -- even if they don't misunderstand -- is
23:42
less efficient reading. We'll see in module 3 that plain language always prioritizes readers when there's a tension between the consequences of linguistic variation for writers and readers. That means linguistic variations that make up plain language require writers to discount their egos.
24:01
In fact, that's the case for all successful technical communicators. Your own linguistic preferences may not match what's best for readers. It'll be your responsibility to flex. Let me summarize in the next couple of slides some of the consequences of linguistic variation. I'm going to give you a list of ways in which linguistic variation in writing can affect a reader.
24:29
The variants a writer chooses can affect reader comprehension and their reading efficiency. I mentioned these already. Readers also have feelings and attitudes that are influenced by variation. For example, how frustrated do readers feel trying to find what they need because the writer used syntactic structure that makes the information less clear? Or how attracted are readers to the message based on the match between their own and the writer's
24:55
dialect? When readers experience negative feelings and attitudes about a message, research tells us they also lack trust in the writer and that includes the organization the writer represents. Let me say a few more words about consequences for writers and their organizations. I'm going to give you a list of the ways in which linguistic variation in writing can affect both writers and the organizations that they represent.
25:25
Conclusions about the writer or organization based on that variation are called attributions.
25:33
Linguists have described the variant associated with higher status groups as unmarked or standard. Other variants as marked or non-standard. For instance, in the U.S. "all of you" is the unmarked, second-person plural pronoun. It'll go unnoticed by almost all readers. "Y'all," on the other hand, is marked and it is more likely to be noticed. Using marked variants increases the time it takes to process a message. Their use often results in
26:05
negative attributions about the level of let's say professionalism or education level of the writer.
26:12
Even if individual writers don't care about how linguistic outsiders perceive their language, the organizations writers represent usually do. That's one of the reasons organizations give tech writing and editing tests to potential employees -- to manage the impressions others have of the organization based on the content written by their employees. As you're learning, organizations also adopt content guides to maintain consistency across their organization. That means writers who
26:41
choose American spelling at work should consider the consequences of that choice if they work for a British organization. My point is that writers represent their employers at work, and that fact often requires that writers adopt linguistic variants that aren't their own. Negative attributions about a writer affect their ability to get a job, especially as a content creator, and also their advancement after they get hired. Negative attributions about organizations affect
27:12
their bottom line by influencing whether readers of their content want to do business with them.
27:18
Finally, linguistic variation can also create legal risk for the organization that a writer represents. To be a successful tech writer in 2021 requires that you have the skill to create a variety of linguistic styles. Remember the study I reported on in the module one lecture from Lanier which showed the line between tech and marketing content is increasingly less clear.
27:46
Let me end by telling you that the goal of TECM 5190 is to help you flex your writing muscles, expand your language expertise, allow you to create more linguistic variants to make you a stronger writer and editor.
Here to help you learn
Sign in to keep a private conversation with your course tutor.
Ask me anything about the material…
Sign in to chat