roadguy Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 As far as a technical guide, not necessary: the point of Curious Case is that all writing, no matter what the subject, suffers from the same problem. Really. I don't dispute the latter portion of that statement; a cursory glance at the Table of Contents of the book is enough to convince me of that. I do, however, feel there is a need of a technical guide that pertains to this particular profession. Consider the following, please: quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ASTM is an organization that attempts to provide standardized test methods (American Standard Test Methods) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually the ASTM is an acronym for the former American Society for Testing and Materials That deliberate bit of misinformation survived exactly 1h:31m:47s on this forum (BTW, thanks, Bob), and I'm very confident that he wasn't the first/only to catch it. It's not simply a matter of grammar/spelling/punctuation; the inspection report is a document that needs to survive factual, logical, and, at times, even legal scrutiny. The inspector is required to write like a lawyer (without the benefit of using "legalese"), an engineer (without using so much techno-jargon that the client doesn't comprehend), a reporter (who can't simply print a "retraction" in case of a factual error), and, all the while, write in an "interesting" active voice (without resorting to the out-right lies of political pundits). Given the litigious nature of our society, it is no wonder, then, that most choose to employ proven "boilerplate" language delivered in a (very) passive voice, and I sincerely doubt that there will be a great number who will be willing to give up that security for the sake of being more "interesting". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Originally posted by roadguy . . . The inspector is required to write like a lawyer (without the benefit of using "legalese"), an engineer (without using so much techno-jargon that the client doesn't comprehend), a reporter (who can't simply print a "retraction" in case of a factual error), and, all the while, write in an "interesting" active voice (without resorting to the out-right lies of political pundits). . . Hmmm. How shall I put this? How about: NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO. And NO! What you've written above is a perfect formula for inspectorspeak. All we have to do is use plain, everyday, conversational English to: Describe what we see. Explain the consequenses. Recommend a course of action. That's it. As soon as you try to lawyer-up, engineer-up or reporter-up your reports, you'll have fallen into the trap of inspectorspeak. Clear writing isn't unique to any profession. If Bonnie's book is a good guide to clear writing, it's exactly what our profession needs. (I ordered my copy yesterday.) - Jim Katen, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadguy Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Jim, Thanks for making yourself perfectly clear. I wasn't advocating that point of view; I was trying to explain it to a person unfamiliar with the situation. And it's consequences. Clear enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnie Trenga Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Oops, Roadguy, did you use it's instead of its?[:-graduat Originally posted by roadguy Jim, Thanks for making yourself perfectly clear. I wasn't advocating that point of view; I was trying to explain it to a person unfamiliar with the situation. And it's consequences. Clear enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadguy Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Yes. As in "It is spelled consequences, not consequenses". I was attempting to parry a "98 No" response with a gentle admonition to use the (free!!) spell-check function. [:-slaphap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bernhardt Posted February 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 I think I fell into the inspector speak trap because I had came from the corporate engineering world where weekly status meetings took place and I was representing a team which got me in the habit of saying we this and we that and speaking in passive tongue like a master. Later it got worse in response to being beat up by realtors, sellers and contractors when I was new. Now I do the whupping thanks to the support here. I know what Jim advocates is the right approach. I am amazed still at some of the dumbass things I say in reports. At the time I wrote them I thought I was trying to be clear and not misrepresent the issue only to get entangled muddling it all up with an editorial comment that should have never been there. When you are new in the biz you think that the worst thing you can do is miss something. That later changes to a realization and concern of how crappy your communication is. Which one is worse? Chris, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Kibbel Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 When you are new in the biz you think that the worst thing you can do is miss something. That later changes to a realization and concern of how crappy your communication is. Which one is worse? I don't know, but I'm working toward someday being able to find everything, every time, and report it clearly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Originally posted by roadguy Jim, Thanks for making yourself perfectly clear. I wasn't advocating that point of view; I was trying to explain it to a person unfamiliar with the situation. And it's consequences. Clear enough? Duh-oh! Touché! - Jim Katen, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnie Trenga Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 Hello. How are those inspection reports going? Quiz time. Does anyone know what's wrong in these sentences from The Curious Case of the Misplaced Modifier? „h The recommendation of Internal Affairs was that the department suspend the cop because she ran out of gas during the high-speed chase. „h Questioning the witness led to information that the crime occurred while preparing some chocolate-filled delights. „h Lovingly baked by her husband, the officer brought some delicious cookies to the party. „h Its nice to finally meet a police dog that does not chase it's own tail. „h The officer found herself waste deep in a quagmire; luckily the suspect was stuck in the mud too. Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 "Was" is past tense. Should be "is" Sounds like the crime was preparing the delights. The officer lovingly baked her husband!?!?!? "Its", and "It's" are reversed, i.e., It is nice to finally meet a police dog that does not chase its own tail. Misspelled "waste"; should be waist. That was fun. Can we make Bonnie an honorary home inspector? BTW; I'm learning a bunch about how the NYT works online; I've had it switch around stuff while I was reading, w/changes dependent on what I was reading. Seems there's an engine in there that brings articles in and out to reflect the content of what I'm reading, or so it seems lately. That may be why I found your review one time, and then couldn't find it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Kienitz Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Kurt - you are good! I was almost completed with my input and was scratching my head on one, but you nailed them all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Think so? I'm still not sure about the crime baking the delights, but it's all I could come up with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnie Trenga Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Pretty good guys, but "was" vs. "is" isn't the issue on that one. Try again! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Hi, I don't even know what a modifier is. Here's what I'd say. Don't ask me why, I really wouldn't have a clue. Guess I need to buy the book. "The recommendation of Internal Affairs was that the department suspend the cop because she ran out of gas during the high-speed chase." Internal affairs recommended that, because she ran out of gas during the high-speed chase, the department suspend the cop. "Questioning the witness led to information that the crime occurred while preparing some chocolate-filled delights." During questioning, the witness revealed that the crime occurred while _____?____was preparing some chocolate-filled delights. (If you're trying to say that the "witness" was preparing them when the crime occurred, I'd say:) During questining, the witness revealed that the crime occurred while he was preparing some chocolate-filled delights. "Lovingly baked by her husband, the officer brought some delicious cookies to the party." The officer brought some delicious cookies, lovingly baked by her husband, to the party. "Its nice to finally meet a police dog that does not chase it's own tail." It's nice to finally see a police dog that doesn't chase its tail. "The officer found herself waste deep in a quagmire; luckily the suspect was stuck in the mud too." The officer found herself stuck waist deep in a quagmire. Luckily, the suspect was stuck too. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Bonnie, This is some good stuff. I'm sure you can teach us old farts a thing or two about how to improve our writing. Want your own forum topic area? I can throw it up in about 10 minutes and make you the moderator. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnie Trenga Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 I have to say very good on those rewrites. "The recommendation of" is what's called a nominalization, and it sets you up for a weak, vague and wordy sentence. These problems are some of the ones my book addresses. I bet inspector reports are full of nominalizations! Keep an eye out and then rewrite each sentence so it has a specific subject (who is doing the action) and a verb that is not blah (a verb like "to be" is dull). When you have a clear subject and a strong verb, you'll impart more information, and you'll have a less wordy, more readable sentence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnie Trenga Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Thanks for the info on NYT. I'm disappointed I can't locate it. Oh well... Originally posted by kurt "Was" is past tense. Should be "is" Sounds like the crime was preparing the delights. The officer lovingly baked her husband!?!?!? "Its", and "It's" are reversed, i.e., It is nice to finally meet a police dog that does not chase its own tail. Misspelled "waste"; should be waist. That was fun. Can we make Bonnie an honorary home inspector? BTW; I'm learning a bunch about how the NYT works online; I've had it switch around stuff while I was reading, w/changes dependent on what I was reading. Seems there's an engine in there that brings articles in and out to reflect the content of what I'm reading, or so it seems lately. That may be why I found your review one time, and then couldn't find it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnie Trenga Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Perhaps, but I'm kind of enjoying commiserating with you young-uns here. By the way, a modifier is something that modifies something else such as an adjective ("young") or a more complicated phrase like "Tripping over a banana" (which could modify "the home inspector" in this sentence: Tripping over a banana, the home inspector found a terrible leak). I agree that it's not necessary to know the specific meaning of a grammar term. It's more important to recognize something isn't right and then to fix it. Originally posted by hausdok Bonnie, This is some good stuff. I'm sure you can teach us old farts a thing or two about how to improve our writing. Want your own forum topic area? I can throw it up in about 10 minutes and make you the moderator. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Originally posted by Bonnie Trenga I have to say very good on those rewrites. "The recommendation of" is what's called a nominalization, and it sets you up for a weak, vague and wordy sentence. These problems are some of the ones my book addresses. I bet inspector reports are full of nominalizations! Keep an eye out and then rewrite each sentence so it has a specific subject (who is doing the action) and a verb that is not blah (a verb like "to be" is dull). When you have a clear subject and a strong verb, you'll impart more information, and you'll have a less wordy, more readable sentence. You bet right. "It is a recommendation of this inspector that you blah, blah, blah....." Is that what you mean about nominalization? You should teach a report writing class @ one of the home inspection conferences. ASHI's is next January in New Orleans. Interested? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnie Trenga Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 ASHI sounds intriguing. Tell me more about it and I'll definitely think about it. Do non-inspectors come and speak/participate? Now, I need some home inspection help, if you don't mind. Two questions: 1) A plumber told us our water pressure is 80psi. Is it baloney that we need a pressure regulator? 2) Our water bill has been extremely high for two months, the last month being 61K gallons (2000 gallons a day). Is it possible for a water meter to be wrong? Since the meter read on 2/27, we've used 4000 gallons total. We had both sprinkler guys and a plumber out here looking for a leak to explain the huge water amount. Just one small leak in the sprinkler and no leaks in the house. No huge puddles anywhere visible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Hi, Around here, water pressure is often higher and the the plumbers set it to no more than 80psi. It sounds like you have a busted main line between the meter and the house. Get a leak detection expert out to find it. They have specialized audio equipment that will help them pinpoint the place where the line is broken below grade. Then you can excavate to it and repair it. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottpat Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 80psi is on the line of being high, I don't think I would worry about it. If you want to see if you have a leak; turn everything off that uses water in your house, ice maker, etc. Then go out to the meter and see what it is doing. It should have a little "diamond" or "triangle" shaped device that will move at the slightest use of water. If it is moving you have a leak. Another thought is that the water pressure might be too high and you are loosing water down a drain or some other location by an pressure valve on your water heater. I doubt that this is the case, as it would be making a good deal of noise and you would most likely hear it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Thanks Scott, Meant to mention the meter triangle thingie (technical term) but I'd forgotten it. Seem to be forgetting a lot of stuff lately. Must be catching CRS. OT - OF!!! M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnie Trenga Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Thanks for your input. My husband's take: The water meter stops when we shut off the valve at the house. So I don't think there is a leak is in the main line. The meter starts when we turn the valve on to our front sprinkers. So there is probably a leak there. But here's what we can't explain: There is no way we leaked 2000 gallons a day for 30 days out of our front sprinklers and couldn't see water. The sprinkler lines are not deep enough to hide the water. Also, our water usage rate has dropped to 600 gallons per day. We did fix a small drip in the front sprinklers, but that can't account for the 1400 gallons we are now saving. That leaked dripped 5 gallons per day maximum. So there is large water usage we didn't see and it stopped without us making any real changes. Very strange. Help! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Bonnie, I hope we see you in New Orleans at ASHI IW. You seem to be a knowledgeable writer with a good attitude. We could learn much from you! I have learned over the past several years that calculating volumes of water from leaks is more art than science. I received a monthly water bill for $8,000 on a house that was vacant. The leak was in the main from the street, pointing directly down on the bottom of a steel 3/4" pipe. We never had any dampness above the leak, just a giant hole in the dirt under the pipe! Good luck and blame it on your husband - that's what my wife would do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.