Memorandum

To:
From:
Date:
Subject:

Professor Aaron Schab

Jeff Horgan
14 September 2014
Project 1 Writing to Achieve a Readable Prose Style

This memorandum describes the outcome of analyzing prior writing to determine the readability
of my writing style. I analyzed a research paper on the Use of Terrain in Warfare. Excerpts
are from material covering Ancient Greece to the Vietnam War. The sections below present my
analysis of the following technical writing concepts: Jargon, Being Concise, Stress Emphasis,
Tone, Using Pronouns Clearly, and Being Correct.
Jargon
Jargon is terminology used by workers in similar occupations to talk about and convey specific
meaning. When Jargon is used in writing it can do two things: Convey expertise of a subject, or
alienate and confuse a casual reader. In my writing I found multiple instances of Jargon:

Misdrops
Hill 875
N.V.A
Shield Wall
Seniac
Bocage
Meat Grinder
Pincer Movement
Hit & Run Tactics

These words serve to confuse an audience with no military background. I never explain these
terms and miss an opportunity to show depth of knowledge in my paper. I should avoid these
terms or explain in them in more detail.
Being Concise
Being Concise is cutting out redundant, unnecessary words to bring clarity to sentences and
paragraphs. Writing in a passive voice adds wordiness to writing. The example I found was:
The Spartan tactic was ingenious. They had chosen a battlefield only a few meters wide, right
on the coast of the Aegean Sea. Because of the Spartan position, the Persian Army would not be
able to envelope the Greek Defenders, but would rather have to come to at the Greek's in smaller
file and fewer numbers.

I switch proper nouns, use a vague verb, use passive voice, and add needless words to these
sentences, making them unclear and unreadable. If I use active voice, fewer words, and use clear
nouns and verbs the sentences become easier to read:
The Spartans chose a narrow battlefield on the Aegean Coastline. The Persian Army was forced
into small ranks and Persian Soldiers could not surround the Spartans. This ingenious tactic
Stress Emphasis
Stress emphasis includes unpacking sentences with too much information. I found two sentences
that are over-packed with information:
One of their favorite tactics was to divide their forces for pincer movements and feint a retreat
to set up a counterattack.
In the European Theater of Operations, Operation Overlord, also known as D-Day, was an allout assault on a region in France called Normandy.
These sentences are difficult to follow and readers might focus on information that isn't relevant.
Spreading this information into multiple sentences or cutting information would let the audience
focus on what is important.
Tone
Tone is choosing the appropriate inflection that is heard while reading. In my paper I found areas
that sound too casual and too excited for the material:
Soldiers slogged up the beachhead into blazing machine gun fire
Not only did they have to claw their way through sand but all the while avoiding raging
machine gun fire.
They could Pop Up in front of an American platoon...
Here my writing sounds unprofessional. This is not acceptable for a research paper. I should
write formally, maintaining a constant tone of professionalism and expertise.
Using Pronouns Clearly
I found a section of writing that used unclear pronouns. Using unclear pronouns can make the
sentence hard to follow and to understand.
This tipped the advantage in Genghis's favor as he could then lead his enemies into a trap. He
would retreat to the highest ground available and draw his enemies into it.

By eliminating It and His I avoid unclear pronoun use. This makes the subject and action of
the sentence clear, making the sentence readable.
Genghis retreated to the highest ground available to lead his enemies into a trap.
Being Correct
I found my writing to conform to most Real and Invented rules of grammar. I use the To form
of verbs often but this doesnt affect readability or cause confusion. My punctuation is correct
and I found only one run-on sentence:
Situated between the River Douve estuary, and the vertical stone cliff some two hundred feet
high at Pointe Du Hoc, both to the west and the rocky coastline on either side of the Port En
Bessin to the East it is a little over six miles wide
This is an error readers will notice immediately. This will make me look bad as a writer. By
reviewing my work carefully I can catch these errors and be correct in my writing.
Conclusion
This technical memorandum analyzed a previous work to determine how well I use various
aspects of technical writing. Overall, my research paper is fairly good; it is structured,
informative, and has fair readability. My prior writing does have problems with Being Concise,
Tone, and Jargon. Having limited instruction on technical writing my shortcomings are
understandable. However, performing the analysis presented in this memorandum has helped
my identify areas in which I can improve. I will focus on these problem areas in future works.