Understanding the Importance of Style Guides

by Peter Zvalo

Style guides describe conventions for virtually every aspect of writing, ranging from such things as spelling, punctuation, and word usage, to structural and formatting issues. With the myriad of style guides in use, the dilemma for many writers is deciding which one to learn and apply in the trade.

The answer to this is easy: learn at least one style guide thoroughly and keep a selected few others for backup. In the course of recruiting technical and generalist writers and editors for nearly a decade, I am sometimes shocked at the low level of familiarity with long-established style guides by people who claim to be seasoned professionals in this business. The reality is that it is plainly obvious to spot writers who "claim" to know a style guide and those who have actually taken the time to study it. The proof is in the pudding, as they say. The quality and consistency of a writer’s or editor’s output is the litmus test to how proficient he or she is in applying a given style guide.

Since the early 1900s, the foundation for many English-language writers and editors in the United States and Canada has been the brightly bound Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press). This behemoth of a style guide, which has grown to nearly 1 000 tightly packed pages, started out as most such reference works start: modestly, by a solitary University of Chicago Press proofreader who began jotting down a few basic style rules. The Chicago Manual of Style, like other similar style guides, aims to establish rules while renouncing an authoritarian position in favour of common sense and flexibility. The Chicago Manual is based on "a respect for the author’s individuality, purpose, and style, tempered…with a deeply felt responsibility to prune from the work whatever stylistic infelicities, inconsistencies, and ambiguities [that] might have gained stealthy entrance."

Of course, even the comprehensive Chicago Manual of Style does not cover everything a professional writer or editor might need to know. That is why, depending on the type of writing or editing you do, you will need more focussed style guides. Canadian writers and editors, for example, should have a copy of The Canadian Style (Department of Public Works and Government Services Canada, Translation Bureau). At 300 pages, it is a more digestible reference source than the Chicago Manual and, more importantly, aims at setting a standard for English language usage in Canada. Having its roots at the federal government, The Canadian Style is particularly useful to Canadian public servants (and those who work for them), as the guide includes such topics as methods for avoiding stereotyping, and how to present French words in English text. Like the Chicago Manual, The Canadian Style does not want to "dictate" rules, but rather "provide solutions…to problems regularly encountered by both professional and occasional writers." The "recommendations" are based on national and international standards, the opinions of authorities on editorial style, and a survey of current policy and practice in government communications.

No discussion of style guides, from a technical writer’s point of view, would be complete without mention of The Microsoft Manual of Style (Microsoft Press). As the world’s largest computer software company, Microsoft also has considerable clout when it comes to technical documentation. Indeed, the Microsoft style is the standard for documentation produced by Microsoft, as well as for many other organizations in the computer industry. The Microsoft style aims primarily to set standards for clarity and consistency that will help ensure that Windows-based product information users receive is both effective and easy to use. Interestingly, the Microsoft style also seeks to be a catalyst for consistency in other areas not directly related to writing, such as product and interface design. In other words, you can love them or hate them, as long as you do it their way.

While style guides generally respect a writer’s freedom of choice, it is a mistake to mix-and-match conventions from multiple style guides. Worse still is to improvise, making up your own rules as you go along during a given project. Think of your chosen style guide as case law; the style guide can serve as the "precedent" and support your point of view in editorial disputes. Choose the appropriate style guide and stick to it. If your "default" style guide does not cover a particular problem, then by all means refer to one of your backup style guides — but apply rules consistently.

>If you (or your client) decide to break with tradition and create your own rule that best solves a given problem or meets a particular goal, then you are basically on your own. It is a good idea for new rules to be adapted from an established style guide otherwise your decisions may be difficult to justify. In such instances, it may be advisable to get a second opinion from another editor before implementing the new rule. If the new rule sticks, write it down. You are now on your way to creating a project- or organization-specific style guide that others can follow in both the short term and the future.

Peter Zvalo is a Contributing Editor for Writer’s Block.

NEXT >>