The following section presents excerpts from a proposal on Edocs, an online environment for collaborating, created by a research team in Qatar. One of the team members believes Edocs facilitates collaboration among professional groups working from different countries. However, their clients (Qatar Foundation researchers) found the proposal arrogant and quick to point blame on colleagues. In the challenges that follow, try to consider the options presented so that the developers can make the most effective case for their audience.

Directions:
Identify and improve text that can make the report more effective, in terms of its metadiscourse, nominalizations, and concision.

Challenge 4: Combining Nominalizations, Metadiscourse and Concision

Your Goals

1. reducing the clarity of a situation or softening the negativity!

2. using hedgers and/or removing intensifiers to soften the tone

3. cutting out unnecessary (already known, implied or repeated) information

Comments on Response Options

Problem Text

Teams often had issues with their colleagues cancelling Skype meetings, and they were becoming confused from keeping track of every single email outside of meetings.

Option A

"cancellations of Skype meetings and the confusion from communicating mostly through email."

This option is concise and uses nominalizations to soften the tone and place less emphasis on the team’s issues. It is appropriate if your purpose is to describe the problem politely without pointing blame.

Option B

"frequent cancellations of Skype meetings and the constant confusion from tracking every email."

This option is also concise and also uses nominalizations, but some of its metadiscourse (“frequent, constant, every,”) also adds a more intense tone than the first option. It would be more appropriate if you are trying to remain polite, but still make your point.

Option C

“complaints of colleagues’ frequent cancellations of Skype meetings and the constant confusion from tracking every single email.”

This option is also concise and uses nominalizations, but makes the smallest effort to soften the tone and avoid blame. It uses an intensifier (“complaint”) which immediately identifies the problem as a “complaint.” It also adds more intensifiers than the second option which intensifies the tone most. This would only work well in a context where you had to make your point quickly and felt no reason to avoid blame.