Writing style is
so important in good communication. One associates "style" with elegant phrasing, sentence structure and the flow and rhythm of the prose - yet for writers and editors it's more basic than that. At its most elemental, style is about keeping consistency in form.
Do you write 10 000, 10,000, 10000 or 10 thousand or ten thousand? Is it Prof. Smith or Prof Smith? Do you standardize with a 'z' or standardise on an 's'? What's the rule on Usage Of Capital Letters? Did that cost you £50, 50 GBP or fifty quid? Do you italicise (or italicize) titles of books, films, plays etc. - or do you put them in inverted commas? Single or double inverted commas? Would you abbreviate addresses from Street to St. (or St), from Road to Rd. (or Rd)? Would you say "The company is working..." or "the company are working..."? When is correct to write "The team are working on..."? When would it be right to use colloquialisms?
Fortunately, over the centuries, a body of works has emerged, generally published by university presses and newspapers, setting out clear guidelines for writers submitting texts for publication.
In UK English, Oxford and Cambridge universities have long published
style guides, and most newspapers have their own too. In US English, the Chicago Guide to Style and the Associated Press Style Guide are the best known.
Over the years, I've used the
Economist's style guide (buying the book version back in the 1990s) and have generally abided by its rules on this blog. The
Economist style guide is available online and the
Johnson blog, linked from my bloglist , often expands on points from the style guide. [Is there a Polish online style guide available anywhere?]
Working for nearly all my life in the world of corporate communication, I notice how few companies have their own style guide for the written word (or even feel the need for a one). Most companies will have clear guidelines about the use of their corporate logos, typography, etc. Yet questions of writing
style are often ignored, resulting in foggy communication cluttered with jargon, inconsistency and lengthy sentences.
For corporations operating on a global scale, using different languages for different markets, this problem is exacerbated. Style guides need 'localisation', so that conventions used in the original language (usually English) are neatly and consistently translated into the local language.
Looking at Polish, I can see this is a problem in both directions. Non-native translators of Polish into English will happily translate "Ponad 935 tys. pracowników..." as "Over 953 thousand employees..." rather than simply write "Over 935,000 employees". On my (tidy) desk I have English-language investment brochures published at great cost by local authorities from across Poland. Beautiful photography, graphic design, print (with spot UV varnish) - sadly let down by poor translation and by evident lack of the translators' reference to any English style guide.
From one I read: "Płock is also the seat of the oldest high school in Poland, established in 1180, known as „Małachowianka” and of the Płock Scientific Society, which collection includes valuable manuscripts..." Taxpayers' money spent on an impressive and well-printed brochure would have been far more effectively spent had a tiny fraction of the cost of this publication been spent on running the text past a native English speaker. He or she would have pointed out that in English, opening inverted commas are ranged with the top of the text and not the bottom (as in Polish) and that usage of the relative pronoun 'which' is wrong (should be 'whose'). Hyphen and dash misuse abounds and unusual words ('monodic', 'humanistic') bring the English reader up short.
Avoiding such errors is easy; native English speakers can be found in any larger Polish city, style guides are available free online. It is harder, however, translating corporate brochures into Polish. Now this requires rare skills, especially when no one has yet created an in-house style guide in Polish.
And finally, one bugbear. The word 'sustainable' has become very much in vogue in business English; 'sustainable growth' means that a business can grow long-term, taking into account its effect on society and the environment, its employees and other stakeholders. In short, a company that focuses on sustainable growth is more likely to be around in 50 years time than one focused on maximising short-term return for shareholders. The usual Polish translation for 'sustainable' is
zrównoważony, which means 'balanced' rather than 'capable of lasting for a long time'. Given that 'to sustain' is
podtrzymywać or
utrzymywać, surely 'sustainable growth' would be more accurately translated into Polish as
podtrzymywalny wzrost?
Answers please! (Plus any links to Polish style guides gratefully received.)