Our Clients | Shufrans TechDocs Home // Our Clients | Shufrans TechDocs

I find that STE rule 2.1 extremely useful in technical documentation to avoid ambiguity. Rule 3.6 is one of my favorites because you need to master well syntax and language to always avoid passive voice. It was a good excercise, thanks Shumin for this interesting and challenging topic!

The introduction was a good and concise way to familiarize yourself with STE basics. I’ve a background in plain language, so for example the rule on noun clusters makes perfect sense. I’m all about simplification, so substituting verbs like “eliminate” for verbs like “remove” or “stop” will be my new quest. The STE exercises were helpful in getting to grasp with STE during the training workshop. I'd very likely recommend this course to anyone planning to introduce STE as it’s got a great practical angle.

Clear presentation style and a very knowledgeable introduction to STE by Shumin! Great practical exercises where certainly the lessons are clear 🙂 The STE rule presentation was also a 10/10 for me and my favourite is rule 2.1: Do not make noun clusters of more than three nouns which is one of the best ways to eliminate ambiguity! If I could fix one thing that would have the biggest impact on our manuals, it would be this!

Frans gave our group of three teams training in Simplified Technical English. He was engaging as a speaker and really made the 2-day training enjoyable and worthwhile. I didn't think we all could use the new ways of writing and thinking that he was teaching, but everyone got on board right away. We continue to use the skills that Frans taught us, with the same type of enthusiasm he brought to the group during training. This was probably the best training I've had at Check Point, in either technical or professional subjects. Top Qualities: Personable, Expert, Creative

Frans Wijma has done excellent work for The Boeing Company in providing translation, translation system design, custom translation processing software, translation tool training, and translation system troubleshooting and tuning. He is familiar with the data structures of technical publications and has the ability to create solutions for interfacing the customers data with translation aid systems. Top qualities: Great Results, Personable, Expert.

The course intro was helpful. Shumin used examples, videos, and asked us questions to introduce the material. Knowing that the subject matter could be dry, she tried to counteract that by varying the presentation. The information itself was useful for what we did later in the course. My favourite rules are the word count rules. That sounds lame, but I tend to write too long of sentences that don’t get to the point. The exercises were really helpful in demonstrating the rules that we had talked about / gone over. I got the most out of doing the exercises and working on the examples that we submitted. I would definitely recommend the course to someone considering or currently using STE. Shumin catered the course to our needs and familiarity level. She was very knowledgeable and was happy to help us through trouble spots and answer our questions.

Shumin is a reference in the STE field. As a neophyte, I can hardly give you an advice. I regularly check your post on YouTube and I learn a lot from the videos and articles you post on the Internet. One word–continue. The best lesson I learnt is: Never use a long word where a short one will do. This rule forces the writer to be simple, yet concise. It is the golden rule of STE.

This course shares a good overview of structure, purpose, history, and contextual information about STE. The limited vocabulary and restricted list of words, short sentence constructions, active voice, and imperative verb usage are valuable takeaways messages to act upon in Simplified English. The examples used in this training are quite realistic and it is very likely that I will recommend this STE training to someone else.

Good explanation with history and background of STE to illustrate the importance of using STE in the aircraft industry. Rule 6.1: To give information gradually is my favourite. My favourite verbs are DO, PREPARE, REPLACE, REMOVE and STOP. I am now conscious of writing in shorter sentences for better clarity and getting the point across. Before STE100, I tend to include too much information for fear that the message was misinterpreted. These verbs are commonly used and I agree that the intrinsic meaning of these are sufficient to get the message across efficiently. There were good practice sessions to reinforce the essence of the respective rules. I would most certainly recommend Simplified Technical English as a standard to maintenance related fields since I personally do not like to read instructions in a disorganized manner. 

My favorite STE writing rules: * Rule 1.9 and Rule 1.10 When you must select a technical name, use one which is short and easy to understand. Both rules ensure a better understanding of technical contents. * Rule 3.6 Do not use a past participle with a helping verb to make a complex verb. Past tenses may be adequate for marketing texts due to stylistic reasons, but not for technical contents, where precision and clarity play a major role. * Rule 5.1 Keep procedural sentences as short as possible. The description of procedures in technical manuals has to be as simple as possible to avoid confusing the reader.