William R. Luellen wrote an essay in the recent Phytopathology News (Vol.33, No.3) in which he championed use of the active voice in scientific literature.
I wish to do the same for technical reports written by ASCA members.
I know that the ASCA Guide to Report Writing For Consulting Arborists declares that we are to use the passive voice. I strongly disagree.
I agree with Luellen, that we should increase our use of the active voice, with a great reduction in the use of the passive voice in our reports.
While doing so, Luellen warns that we must guard against excessive use of the pronoun "we", and I will add that about the pronoun "I".
The solution is to make some sentences passive.
And combine short sentences to eliminate excessive use of pronouns.
Write On. Peter

Reply to post by Peter Torres, on March 14, 1999 at 19:22:07:

While thI use of active voice is desired in most writing, use of passive voice is not necessarily wrong.

The Little Brown Handbook, seventh edition, 1998, page 728:
"When writing..., try to observe as well the special conventions of language in the sciences. The main convention is the use of objective language that removes the writer as a character in the situation and events being explained, except as the impersonal agent of change, the experimenter. Although usage is changing, scientists still rarely use 'I' in their reports and evaluations, and they often resort to the passive voice of verbs, as in 'The mixture was then subjected to centrifugal force.' This concious objectivity focuses attention (including the writer's) on the empirical data and what they show. It discourages the writer from, say, ascribing motives and will to animals and plants."

That is not to say that active voice is not to be used. Direct observations can be active, as can descriptions of opinions and conclusions formulated by the writer. But it is still quite acceptable to use passive voice in technical writing of this sort.

Russ

Reply to post by Peter Torres, on March 14, 1999 at 19:22:07:

Peter, take another look at the text, p.14. It says that some disciplines require use of the third person and that in turn requires passive voice. It goes on to say that first person active voice is less formal, more positive and more interesting. I would suggest that these are most often style issues that don't impact substance.

The bottom line is that the report should be "clear, unambiguous and usable." (SPP Sec.4.2)

Reply to post by Scott Cullen, on March 14, 1999 at 19:22:07:

Scott, thank-you for pointing out page 14. Active voice is encouraged there. This makes me feel much better. Again, gracias. Peter

Reply to post by Peter Torres, on March 15, 1999 at 11:23:39:

Peter... I agree with Scott's point! Clear, concise communication should be the goal... regardless of method.

Sometimes it is critical to differentiate betweeen citation of fact versus personal conclusions and opinions. What way is more clear than stating "In my opinion..."

Torrey

Reply to post by Torrey Young, on March 15, 1999 at 21:07:49:

Just for the record...I have strongly encouraged use of active voice in report writing ever since I finally realized (about my first year of graduate school) why all those Journal articles were sooooooo boring.

Reply to post by Dorothy, on April 03, 1999 at 17:17:20:

This is great. I wonder if the Academy brought up this subject this year?

Reply to post by Peter Torres, on April 05, 1999 at 13:22:20:

Well, yes, briefly. My comments were to the effect:

Active voice is desireable whenever you can use it. After researching this a few years ago, I decided it should really come under the heading of personal style.

But I, for one, refuse to lose any sleep over it [g]. I try to use it when I can, don't worry about rewriting it, if it doesn't seem to fit.

Reply to post by Dorothy, on April 03, 1999 at 17:17:20:

So in active voice, how many "o's" would be knocked off "soooooooooooo boring" in describing those journal articles?

Where have you and Toto been hiding? Good to hear from you.

Reply to post by Scott, on April 05, 1999 at 13:22:20:

Scott,

The answer is found in #86 2/18/99 by Russ of this section.

"Ohhh" It takes two extra h's for active.

Sincerly, Steve