General Impressions: “The Technical Editor as Diplomat…”
a general impression of a journal article
by Michelle Corbin
I recently re-read the journal article “The Technical Editor as Diplomat: Linguistic Strategies for Balancing Clarity and Politeness” by Mackiewicz and Riley (Technical Communication, Volume 50, Number 1, February 2003, pp. 83-94). This article discusses 8 different strategies, based on linguistics research, for balancing clarity and politeness when making editing comments, in the hopes of building and enhancing the author-editor relationship. Although I do not agree with all of the strategies and conclusions that the authors make, I did find it a fascinating article – one that made me actually think about and try to articulate my own thoughts on the role that politeness plays when I make my editing comments.
Although this is not a recently published article, I thought it might be nice to use it to kick off this new type of newsletter article in the Technical Editing SIG blog/newsletter. We receive so much information that it is difficult to know what to take the time to read, and the SIG is trying to help you make a decision as to whether to read an article or not – we want to entice and encourage you to read these articles (and who knows, maybe join a conversation about them on the blog or in our discussion list!).
Do you remember reading this article? Did this entice you into reading it (or re-reading it)? Do you have some thoughts about this article? Please consider sharing them on our blog or as part of our discussion list (I decided to cross-post this to both places, in hopes of encouraging cross-reading/cross-participation in our blog and discussion lists. 
).
Danica Rhoades said,
July 11, 2007 at 10:39 am
I am currently working on obtaining a master’s in technical communication. As part of the coursework in the program’s Technical Editing class, my classmates and I were required to read “The Technical Editor as Diplomat.” I found it interesting because in the company where I work, editing is optional. People who seek me out to edit their documents do so because they want to hear what I have to say and want to improve the document. As such, they are much less likely to take offense at my edits or comments. As far as I know, I have never directly offended someone with my comments. This article kind of helped me look at things a little differently, to consider how some of my phrasing might not always be read the way I intended.
Vanessa Wilburn said,
July 18, 2007 at 4:46 pm
It’s taken me a while to dig up this article. Luckily, I had the print version.
I’m glad that Michelle brought this article up. I wonder about editor diplomacy. I have a list of polite phrasings. I forget to use them.
As an editor for full-time technical communicators, I feel that I shouldn’t be required to be polite in my edits. Nevertheless, could we editors increase the amount of incorporated edits if the writer felt like we were less autocratic and instead more cajoling? Or, are we wasting a writer’s time by providing vague editorial advice that is passive, opinion-based, interrogative, or possibly optional?
When I was a writer, I was grateful for editors who provided concise and clear editorial comments. When you have edits, you barely have time to incorporate them in the document. Now as an editor, I must move through a document quickly to meet the ever-shortening turnaround times for fast development cycles. So now, I’m back to the habit of writing brief imperative statements, such as “Include a graphic here” or “Create a link to the previous topic.”
As an intermediate step between the two, some strategies can address the time issues and the writer’s “face:”
* Use direct, imperative edits for non-negotiable items such as legal items, style guide requirements, template use, DITA coding, and so on.
* If you’re in doubt about an edit, use a question or set of options to guide the writer.
* Grammar and punctuation are in the editor’s domain; be direct.
* Flexibility with someone’s writing style is important. Tread diplomatically when you edit text to fit your preferred way to express an idea.
* Back up a big-ticket edit with a “payoff” statement (benefit from incorporating the edit).
Now, I’m wondering how other editors collaborate with their writers to ensure the best quality and best working relationship. Ideas, thoughts, suggestions?
Gabriella private blog said,
August 4, 2007 at 5:25 am
Gabriella…
i like it :)…