Stylistic Variation in Multilingual Instructions 
C6cile Paris* and Donia Scott 
Information Technology Research Institute 
University of Brighton 
Lewes Road 
Brighton BN2 4AT, UK 
email: { Cecile.Paris,Donia.Scott} @itri.bton.ac.uk 
Abstract 
Instructional tex-ts have been the object of many studies re- 
cently, motivated by the increased need to produce manuals 
(especially multilingual manuals) coupled with the cost of 
translators and technical writers. Because these studies con- 
centrate on aspects other than the linguistic realismion of 
instructions - for example, the integration of text and graph- 
ics- they all generate a sequence of steps required to achieve 
a task, using imperatives. Our research so flu- shows, how- 
ever, that manuals can iu fact have different styles, i.e., not 
all instructions are stated using a sequence of imperatives, 
and that, furthermore, different parts of manuals often use 
different styles. In this paper, we present our preliminary 
results from an analysis of over 30 user guides/manuals for 
consumer appliances and discuss some of the implications. 
Introduction 
Instructional texts have been the object of many studies re- 
cently, with an emphasis on methods for integrating graphics 
and text, as in wIP (Wahlster et al., 1993) and COMET (Feiner 
and McKeown, 1990), for tailoring to the user (Peter and 
R~sner, 1994), for generating purpose expressions in English 
(Vander Linden, 1993), t~r producing multilingual instruc- 
tions, (e.g., ROsner and Stede, 1991), and tot planning the 
appropriate referring expressions, (e.g., Dale, 1992). Most of 
This work is partially supported by the Commission of the Eu- 
ropean Union Grant LRE-62009,the Engineering and Physical Sci- 
ences Research Council (EPSRC) Grant J19221, and by BC/DAAD 
ARC Project 293. Dr. Paris also gratefully acknowledges the sup- 
port of the National Science Foundation Grant IRI-9003087. We 
would like to thank John Bateman, Richard Power and the anony- 
mous reviewers for their useful comlnenLs. 
* Dr. Paris is on leave from USC/Infonnation Sciences Institute, 
4676 A&niralty Way, Marina del Rey, CA 90292 and the Computer 
Science Department of the University of Southern California. 
these systems produce only a sequence of steps necessary to 
accomplish a t,'tsk (e.g., change the engine oil, replace a radio 
battery, cook butter bean soup). 
One of the motivations for generating instructions automat- 
ically is the increased need to produce manuals, especially 
multilingual manuals, coupled with the cost of translators 
and technical writers. This is important not only for Euro- 
pean manufacturers, who are required to produce manuals in 
all the languages of the European Union, but also for multi- 
national companies, whose international sales are reported to 
constitute over half of their total sales. Given this motivation, 
then, producing the sequence of steps required to achieve a 
task is only part of the job: most user guides and manuals 
contain more than a simple sequence of steps to achieve a 
task. In our work, we are attempting to generate a more 
complete user guide, in several languages. 
The emphasis of previous research on instructions has led 
to the almost exclusive use of one type of discourse struc- 
ture (a sequence, reflecting the sequence of steps needed for 
a t,'tsk), and one type of realisation (the imperative). We 
have found, however, that manuals can have different styles: 
not all instructions are stated in a sequence, using the im- 
perative form. This would indeed lead to rather monotonous 
texts, texts with potentially the wrong interpersonal force (too 
many imperatives can be too forceful!), and instructions in 
which the relative importance of various steps might be lost. 
Furthermore, different parts of manuals often use different 
discourse structures and forms of realisation. In our work, 
6¢S~ 1 ,* we are investigating the range of ,'tyros in instructional 
manuals in different languages, and the relationship between 
stylistic variants and the global structure of the manual both 
within and between languages. 
The work reported here is part of the DRAFTER and file GIST 
projects at the University of Brighton (Scott, 1993), which 
aim to generate instructional manuals in several languages 
45 
: 7th International Generation Workshop • Kennebunkport, Maine ° June 21-24, 1994 
and in different domains. We have analysed user guides in 
various languages, attempting to avoid translated manuals. 
This paper presents our preliminary results concerning the 
different styles and global structures that frequently occur 
within English and French manuals for consumer appliances. 
Although our analysis so far does not provide conclusive 
results with respect to the relationships between stylistic vari- 
ants, the global structures, and different languages, they sug- 
gest that it is important for a system to provide a range of 
styles of instructions. Our results also indicate directions for 
further analysis. 
Variation in instructions 
Instructions are aimed at conveying directions to perform a 
(set of) task(s). For example, we can have instructions for 
filling out a form, or for operating and repairing a device. We 
include in our definition of instructions activities related to 
the actions to be performed, such as installation (preparatory 
steps), maintenance and trouble-shooting, as well as warn- 
ings concerning the safe execution of the actions. Confining 
instructions solely to central actions to be performed is too 
restrictive as the above-mentioned aspects are also integral 
parts of carrying out a task safely and efficiently. 
The most straightforward way to get a reader to pertorm 
a k'Lsk is, of course, through the use of a sequence of im- 
peratives. However, our analysis of a corpus of over 30 
user manuals for consumer appliances reveals a variety of 
realisations for such directions, from imperatives to simple 
statements. Statements may, by some, be considered to be 
outside the scope of instructions. We do not hold m this: we 
have found numerous examples to support the view that state- 
ments are often implicit instructions. Consider, for example, 
the following instructions from English and French tbr using 
a insulated flask, taken from EMSA Thermos. 
Filter coffee: Simply place the filter on your EMSA vac- 
uum jug to prevent escape of aroma and temperature 
Filtrage du caf6: Le cal'6 peut-&re filtr6 directement dans 
le pichet. Le porte-filtres s'adapte p~trfaitement sur 
l'ouverture du pichet, 6vitant ainsi la perte et la dis- 
persion de l'ar6me du caf6. 
Loose English Translation: Filtering of Coffee: The 
co2~.e can be filtered directly into the jug. Filter holders 
.lit perfectly on the opening of the jug, thus preventing 
loosing the aroma of the coffee 
Here we see that the English instructions to filter coffee is 
given as an imperative, whereas, in the French version, the 
user is provided with a description of the utensil, from which 
the directions can be derived. 
The issue of style is of course not a new one: indeed, there 
are whole subfields of theoretical and computational linguis- 
tics devoted to it. Sometimes it is referred to as stylistics (e.g., 
Crystal and Davy, 1969; Ager, 1970; DiMarco, 1992), special 
languages (e.g., Sager et aL, 1980), sublanguages (e.g., Kit- 
tredge and Lehrberger, 1982), conative function (e.g., Jakob- 
s~na, 1960), registers (e.g., Halliday, 1973; Ghadessy, 1988; 
Bateman and Paris, 1989; Martin, 1992), or pragmatic eftects 
(e.g., Hovy, 1988). It is thus not surprising that this linguistic 
feature also applies to instructions, although it has not been 
explicitly addressed so far. 
The different styles in instructional manuals appear to be 
closely allied to the stance the writer takes towards the reader. 
For example, different stances are usually taken when provid- 
ing a description and a warning. Although, in general, such 
stances can be a decision on the part of the writer (or speaker), 
in which case it can be referred to as a conative intention 
(Sager et al., 1980), in the case of instructional manuals, it 
is usually an institutional decision on the part of the product 
manufacturer or the technical writing company (this is often 
referred to as "house style"). Stances can indeed be exploited 
in manuals to project a specific company image (for example, 
your friendly local nuclear power pianO. These stances are 
factors that professional technical authors and translators are 
taught to pay particular attention to when writing or translat- 
ing instructions, since failure to do so will lead to instructions 
which, although technically and grammatically correct, have 
an unintended pragmatic force. Following Systemic Linguis- 
tic Theory (Halliday, 1978), we wiU refer to these stances as 
semantic meanings to be expressed, at the interpersonal level. 
Semantic meanings lead to the inclusion of different types 
of information, different organisations of a text, and different 
expressions of the actions to be performed. For instance, 
with indirect commands "the addressee is treated as if they 
have the fight to demur"; a choice of a direct command, on 
the other hand, "grants the addressee little or no discretion" 
(Hasan, 1988, p 24). They can even result in different typo- 
graphical devices. This is why not all instructions are written 
as a sequence of steps in the imperative mode. Depending 
on the semantic meanings to be conveyed, the text can be 
quite different at both the discourse and realisation levels. 
From our text analysis, we have began to identify different 
meanings that can be conveyed in user manuals and their 
preferred realisations. We have noted that these meanings 
are not constant throughout an entire manual, but vary across 
sections. It is thus necessary to identify the different parts 
that make up manuals, the semantic meanings that can be 
expressed in the different sections, and the linguistic means 
available to express them. Furthermore, given our multi- 
lingual framework, we are also investigating whether the 
preferred linguistic means of realising these meanings differ 
across languages, and whether the preferred stance is likely 
to change across various languages, as suggested by Hervey 
and Higgins (1992), and for different target audiences. The 
work on DRAFTER and GIST is directly related to these issues. 
Semantic Meanings 
We have so t~ analysed over 30 manuals given to users when 
they buy consumer-ofiented goods, such ms coffee machines 
and camping stoves, in both French and English when avail- 
able. These manuals are at least one page long and can be 
up to 10 to 20 pages. In conducting our analysis, we tried 
to identify the different attitudes expressed in the texts, their 
potential realisations, and the global structure of the texts. 
We have identified four different stances that a manual can 
adopt and give examples of them in Figure 1: 
46 
7th International Generation Workshop • Kennebunkport, Maine • June 21-24, 1994 
(1) Information Provision - from Dietrich self-cleaning enamel oven: 
L'~mail auto-nettoyant est de couleur brun fonc6 mouchet~ de blanc pour certaines pitces. 
Loose English Translation: The self-cleaning enamel is dark brown, speckled with white on some parts. 
(2) Information Provision- from HP Laser Jet 4 Printer Installation Guide: 
The optional 500-sheet paper tray assembly comes equipped with a tray housing and either a legal, letter, A4, and executive 
multi-size paper tray or a letter, A4, and executive multi-size paper tray. You may purchase replacement trays from your 
authorized HP dealer. The part number of the letter, A4 and executive multi-size paper tray is C2084B... 
(3) Eulogy - from Sennheisser Headphones: 
To wish to convince you of the superior quality of the dynamic open air headphone HI) 40 would be something of a paradox as 
you are by now akeady in possession of this product. However, the arguments for the HD 40 are in fact very convincing: 
Hw • "oh quahty reproduction. 
• Exa'emely corafortable thanks to very low weight. 
• Problem-free connection by means of universal connector. 
• Very flat storage space thanks to turntable driver elements. 
(4) Directive - from Krupp Expresso Coffee Machine: 
Do not use or put down the appliance on any hot surlhce (such as a stove hot-plate) or in the vicinity of an open gas time. 
(5) Directive - from Camping Stove: Camping Gaz International: 
Utilisez toujours votre rtchaud dans un endroit suffisamment a~r~, sans l'envelopper dans un objet quelconque et pas trop prrts 
de mati~res inflammables. 
Loose English Translation: Always use ),our stove in a well ventilated place, without wrapping it in any object and not too 
close to flanululble substances. 
(6) Explanation - from Dietrich Oven: 
To avoid heavy spitfings on the sole plate, it is advisable to cover it with an aluminium foil. 
(7) Explanation - from EMSA Thermos 
Attention: Pour ~viter d'abimer le recipient en verre, ne remuez pas les boissons avec des cuill~res mEtalliques. 
Loose English Translation: Warning: To avoM damage to the glass jug, do not stir drinks with metallic spoons. 
Figure 1: Stances a manual can adopt 
47 
7th International Generation Workshop • Kennebunkport, Maine • June 21-24, 1994 
• information provision: the text concentrates on the fac- 
tual knowledge to be conveyed. This can be seen as aug- 
menting the reader's knowledge about the artifact and/or 
the task. 
• eulogy: the text emphasises the positive aspects of the 
product or "congratulates" the readers on their good choice 
of purchase. 
• directive on how to perform a task: the reader is to 
achieve a task exactly as prescribed. Here, the rationale 
behind the prescriptions is not considered necessary 
• explanation on the preferred means of achieving the 
task: the reader is given advice as to how to achieve a 
task, and an explanation as to why it should be done in the 
prescribed way. This provides opportunities for the reader 
to construct a mental model of the task or of the artifact. 
We note that the choice of stance seems to be influenced by 
several factors, including safety, requirements for memora- 
bility (for example, there is no point going to great length to 
have the reader build up a mental model of the task if it is 
to be accomplished only occasionally and there are no dam- 
at, me,,," ,, consequences involved), and the expected expertise of 
the readership. 
Information provision and eulogy 
On taking these two stances, writers show a strong preference 
for the use of simple acdve declaratives. However, while 
their expressions tend to coincide in many aspects, there are 
also clear differences in linguistic expression of these two 
attitudes. (The similarities may well arise because it is use- 
ful to the manufacturer for eulogies about the product to be 
interpreted as factual information.) 
When a eulogy is given, many attributes (qualifiers) tend 
to be included. They are realised as very positive adjectives 
and as superlatives. For further emphasis, consequences of a 
specific attribute are often provided, or examples are given. 
The type of language used to express this semantic meaning 
is similar to that used in advertising (Toolan, 1988). 
Examples of texts in these categories are shown in (1, 2, 3) 
of Figure 1. The texts in (1) and (2) are purely informative: 
the first provides information about the colour of the enamel 
inside the stove, the second about the printer paper tray. (3) 
is more of a eulogy, explicitly employing very tavoumble 
qualifiers, to convey the superior attributes of the product: 
high-quality reproduction, extreme comfort, etc. 
Directive 
The core function of instructions is to get users to perform 
(or avoid) specific actions. The most straightforward way of 
conveying this meaning is to provide directives: the reader is 
told to (or not to) do some action(s). The concern is not that 
the reader knows necessarily why this action should or should 
not be performed, but simply to have him or her follow the 
directive. The text asserts the authority of the writer (or the 
company) over the reader and leaves no choice to the reader 
to demur. ,Strongly dilective .speech acts (Sager et al., 1980) 
such as order or prohibit are used. An explanation of 
the order (or prohibition) is rarely given (in that the reader has 
no way of knowing the rationale behind the need to perform 
or avoid the prescribed action). This is illustrated in (4, 5) of 
Figure 1. In these instructions, the reason for performing (or 
avoiding) the action is not provided: i.e., no reason is given 
for why the appliance should not be put on a hot surface, or 
why the stove should be used in a well ventilated area. The 
reader is expected simply to follow the "directive. A setting 
or a condition for the action (e.g., when X happens, do Y), is 
provided as well if necessary. 
These strong directive speech acts can be realised in a 
number of ways, depending on the distance to be put between 
the reader and the writer (or the company) - this might also 
be seen as a matter of how personal/impersonal the author 
wishes to be: 
• little distance- the writer directly addresses the reader: 
use of imperatives (or infinitives, in French), as in (1) in 
Figure 2. 
• some distance - the writer addresses the reader but 
there is no strong involvement: use of the modal "must" 
("devoir", possibly accompanied with an adverb, capi- 
talised or embolded to carry extra force. This is illustrated 
in (2) of Figure 2. 
• great distance,- the order is given without addressing 
the reader: use of the passive (the device must not... ), or 
employing verbs which require the object to become the 
syntactic subject, together with an adverb for emphasis. 
Examples are given in (3) of Figure 2. 
In all cases, stronger emphasis on the directive can be given by 
including terms such as "never" or "under no circumstance", 
as part of the sentence or even as a separate sentence, as illus- 
trated in (4) of Figure 2. Although these forms are available 
in both languages, our data so far show a predominance of 
• the first category (the straight imperative) for English, and a 
much more equal distribution among the categories in French. 
Explanation 
Instructions sometimes have a tutorial aspect: it is then not 
enough simply to get the user to perform an action; there is 
also an attempt to get the user to understand why the action 
should be performed in the prescribed way, and why a specific 
action contributes to an overall goal. In this case, the rationale 
behind the directive is provided, explaining why the action is 
necessary or relating it to goals the reader is expected to have. 
More information related to the step to be performed/avoided 
is included, as shown in (6, 7) of Figure 1. Like the directive 
meaning, the text asserts the authority of the writer (or the 
company) over the reader. This time, however, the text now 
leaves some choice to the reader as to whether to proceed 
and/or provides a justification to the reader of why the action 
is requested, so that it is not interpreted as an order. This 
meaning is often expressed through the use ofweaklydirective 
speech acts (Sager et al., 1980), such as recommend or 
instruct. 
As with the strong directives speech acts, a variety of 
syntactic forms can occur here in both French and English 
through the use of (1) an imperative accompanied with the 
48 
7th International Generation Workshop * Kennebunkport, Maine * June 21-24, 1994 
(1) Little distance is put between writer and reader: 
... grind the expresso coffee beans in a coffee mill set to grind "fine". (From Krupp Expresso Coffee Machine) 
Lire tr~s attentivement le mode d'emploi. (From DUROTHERM PLUS) 
Loose English Translation: Read very carefully the numual. 
(2) Some distance is put between writer and reader: 
Pour une bonne s6curit~, vous devez irnp~mtivement brancher votre appareil sur une prise de courant avec terre correspondant 
aux normes ~lectriques. (From: Four Moulinex) 
Loose English Translation: For safety, you must absolutely plug your device in an earthed socket. 
After recording your OGM, you must leave the cassette tape in place. (From Dialatron Answering Machine). 
To this end, the brewing sieve MUST first be unscrewed from the brewing head. (From Krupp Expresso Coffee Machine) 
(3) Great distance is put between writer and reader : 
The gas flame must heat only the bottom of the pan. (From DUROTHERM PLUS) 
La flamme ne doit pas pas 16cher les bords de l'ustensil. (From DUROTHERM PLUS): 
Loose English Translation: The flame must not lick the sides of the device. 
(4) Employing an adverb for stronger emphasis: 
Never dip the appliance into water. (From Krupp Expresso Coffee Machine). 
Utilisez une brosse ,~ poils souples pour ~liminer les miettes carbonis6es. JAMAIS UN CHIFFON HUMIDE. (From: Four 
Moulinex) 
Loose English Translation: Use a soft brush to get rid of burnt crumbs. NEVER A WET CLOTH. 
Figure 2: Expressing strong directives 
reason for the directive, or prefaced by some factual infor- 
mation which explaius the directive; (2) an impersonal direc- 
tive, such as "it is (not) advisable to..." (il est dd/conseilld 
de ... "), with the justification for the action, and sometimes 
with an emphatic adverb (e.g., "strongly"); (3) formulae such 
as "it is appropriate to" (il convient de, il y a lieu de), "it 
is recommended that" (il est recommendd), "act is/will be 
recommended" or the passive voice mid the modal "should" 
(devoir). This choice once again depends on how strong, 
polite and indirect the writer wishes to be with respect to the 
reader. We give examples of the two extremes in Figure 3. 
Summary 
We have just outlined the difl~rent semantic meauings that 
seem to be conveyed in French and English instructional texts. 
The categorisation given above is still crude and requires fur- 
ther distinctions to account tbr the apparent overlap between 
some of the categories. For example, the tollowing text is 
right now categofised as both an intbrmation provision and a 
eulogy: 
Le four ~t 6mail auto-nettoyant se diff6rencie du four h 
&nail normal par le thit que pendant la cuisson, les pro- 
jections de corps gras sont d6truites dis qu'elles arrivent 
au contact des patois chaudes. Le nettoyage du tbur est 
ainsi supprim6 dans la plupart des cas. (From Dietrich 
self-cleaning enamel oven) 
Loose English Translation: The self-cleaning enamel 
oven is different from normal enamel ovens, because fat 
splashes during cooking are eliminated on contact with 
the hot walls. Cleaning the oven is thus unnecessary in 
most cases. 
Finer distinctions have already been made for other genres 
(e.g., Hasan, 1988; Martin, 1992). We are currently inves- 
tigating the appropriate mappings between their results and 
our data in order to derive the necessary refinement. 
Having identified the different meanings that can be ex- 
pressed in instructional texts, we now turn to the text as a 
whole, identifying its global structure and the relationship 
between parts of the global structure of the manual and their 
preferred skqnce. 
A Global Structure 
Given our desire to generate user manuals automatically, we 
analysed the texts to see if they followed some global dis- 
course structure as to what information was presented to the 
user, and what stance was taken at each point. We have found 
that the manuals were organised around several main parts: 
• general information about file product 
49 
7th International Generation Workshop • Kennebunkport, Maine • June 21-24, 1994 
Direct: 
To prevent unnecessary damage to the container avoid using abr&,dve materials or sharp utensils when cleaning. (From Stewart 
Food Storage Containers) 
Lisez attentivement cette notice: elle vous permettra d'en obtenir le meilleur service pour votre plus grande satisfaction. (From 
Camping Stove: Camping Gaz International) 
Loose English Translation: Carefully read this notice: it will allow you to obtain the best results to your greatest satisfaction. 
Indirect: 
The milk should be well chilled. (From Krupp Expresso Coffee Machine), 
... on ne devrait ajouter les 6pices qu'ap~s le processus de cuisson ~ l'~touff~.e. (From DUROTHERM PLUS) 
Loose English Translation: ... one should add the spices only after the dish is cooked 
Figure 3: Expressing weak directives 
• general safety advice, warnings concerning specific ac- 
tions 
• installation of the device, or preparatory steps 
• use 
• maintenance, directions for care 
• trouble-shooting and potential problems 
Some manuals-contain all these parts, each clearly indi- 
cated. This is not always the case, however, and the in- 
formation corresponding to these parts might be interleaved, 
especially when space is a problem and the writers do not 
want to explicitly have a section for each information-type. 
For example, potential problems and warnings related to a 
specific step in a procedure might occur immediately after 
the step is given. 1 
The writer can potentially take a dil~rent stance towards 
the reader in each part of the manual. For lack of space, we 
will present only our results for parts pertaining to general 
information and safety. We will summarise the results for 
the other sections. We will not provide further examples 
here. Instead, we will refer to examples already given when 
possible. 
General Information 
This part of the manual tends to contain the lbllowing type of 
information: 
• thanks for buying the product; 
• description of the product, its advantages, and list of 
parts (often with accompanying diagrams). 
• conditions for the warranty (or lack or) 
Here, a general description of the artifact is given, often 
after a short paragraph thanking the buyer. Two stances 
appear to be appropriate for this description: information 
provision and eulogy. When information provision is chosen, 
the text either presents mainly attributes or is structured along 
the lines of one of the schemas defined in McKeown (1985). 
It can also contain a list of parts accompanied with diagrams. 
INote, however, that information from these major parts of a 
manual cannot be mixed randomly. This will not be discussed here. 
When eulogy is chosen, although the text appears to be 
mainly informative, with the use of declarative sentences 
which describe the object, a large number of attributes (qual- 
ifiers) - especially attributes judged to be important to the 
reader - and superlatives are employed, and the product is 
described as being unique. While a description might be pro- 
vided, it is equally common to find a list of the product's major 
attributes/advantages, one at a time, sometimes together with 
the consequence of a specific attribute (in terms of a user's 
goal) or with explicit examples. 
In English manuals, this part is mostly for information 
provision. In French manuals, however, both forms appear 
frequently. 
Information about safety 
This part includes warnings, general safety advice, and crucial 
steps to be performed (either to accomplish the ~sk or to 
obtain better results). It sometimes also contains a paragraph 
about reading the instructions. Our data show that the stance 
taken in this part can be a dkective, as illustrated in (4) of 
Figure 1, or an explanation, as in (6) of Figure 1. 
Taking the explanation stance here appears more prevalent 
in French than in English. Furthermore, in French, it is 
also possible to write this part of the manual as information 
provision (from which the reader can infer what must be 
done). For example, a specification of the conditions under 
which a product will be operational are given, and the reader 
is expected to make sure these conditions are achieved. 
Explicit headings, explicit examples, lay-out (e.g., a 
framed box) and typography can be employed to signal further 
the importance of an advice or a warning. When warnings are 
not stated in an explicit section, but appear instead after the 
relevant action/step, they are most often inlroduced with the 
header Important, Warning, or Note, or are given in bold 
face. 
Summary of results for the remaining sections 
Preparatory step or installation: Information on how to 
install the device, or about various steps which have to be 
performed before the first use is provided. 
50 
7th International Generation Workshop • Kennebunkport, Maine • June 21-24, 1994 
CLEANING INSTRUCTIONS FOR YOUR STEAKMAKER "LA COTTA" 
The main value of the Steakmakers "La Cotta", whatever the type and size, is to absorb all the noxious fats of meats, which in 
this way, becomes tasty, healthy, easily digestible. 
The Stealanakers have a highly absorbing power, since they are made of a special volcanic refractory material, and after a lot 
of times you have cooked with them they will fill up with fats and acids (it goes without saying that the saturation time depends 
also on meat, which may be more or less fat). 
At this point fat starts seeping outside, drawn and eliminated by the heat of the stove, allowing this natural filter to keep on 
absorbing and filtering. 
Figure 4: Wrong choice of conative force - Steakmaker "La Cotta" 
Use: The steps (actions) that must be performed for the reader 
to use the artifact and achieve various tasks are given. De- 
pending on the object under consideration, it is organised 
around the task to be achieved, or around specific elements 
of the object (which can be used to achieve a specific task). 
Clean, Care and Maintenance: This is where the author 
tells the reader how to clean and care for the artifact. 
In the three parts above, dkective and explanation are appro- 
priate. In our corpus, English manuals tend to be written more 
with the directive stance, while in French manuals, these two 
stances are almost equally likely. Finally, as in the case of 
the section about safety, the information provision stance is 
sometimes found in these sections of French manuals: 
Trouble shooting: The point of this part is to help the reader 
identify the source of a problem and provide information 
about what might go wrong ff a step is not properly per- 
formed. Actions to be performed are provided, together with 
the conditions under which they are appropriate, and solu- 
tions to problems. The stance is usually directive (actions 
allowing the reader to identify the source of the problems are 
given). In French, the stance can also be an explanation or 
information provision; this is however rare in English. 
Discussion 
In our work on generating multilingual instructions, we have 
found that there are often multiple ways to provide instruc- 
tions, each taking a different stance towards the reader. Al- 
ways adopting one realisation form leads to monotonous text. 
Clearly, computational systems should be able to generate the 
variations found in texts. 
It has been suggested in sociolinguistics that there is a 
strong correlation between language and behaviour. One 
aspect of this is the relationship between "ways of talking 
and ways of learning" (Hasan, 1988). This is relevant to 
instructions, where the aim is to get the reader to learn how to 
perform a task. Learning and memory are not disconnected 
cognitive processes, and we suspect that memorability has a 
ff~le to play in the chosen stance for a specific part of a manual. 
For example, the instructions for installation are likely to be 
followed only once whereas those for general use could be 
executed dally. The former need not be remembered, whereas 
the latter must be learnt. This may well be a motivating factor 
in the choice of stance l~r the various parts of the manual. 
If this is the case, then, the need to produce the range of 
instructions found in text is no longer a matter of stylistics 
only, but becomes critical to avoid generating instructions in 
which the relative importance of various steps might be lost 
because all steps are expressed in the same way. 
Clearly, instructions generated with the wrong stance can 
lead readers to misinterpret the importance of the steps pre- 
sented in various parts of the text. Consider for example the 
text shown in Figure 4, translated from Italian. Because eu- 
logies cannot be used for giving directives, on reading this, 
most readers (or at least ourselves!) are likely to understand 
that the pan does not need any cleaning, thanks to its prop- 
erties. Lo and behold, in the text that follows - which is 
laid out in a way that suggests that its content is secondary 
to that which precedes it - we learn that cleaning the pan 
is critical for avoiding toxification, and steps to achieve this 
• are given. Because of the eulogy stance taken here, we are 
not expecting to be told that the pan actually needs cleaning 
(even though the header provides a strong clue). As a re- 
suit, the instructions for cleaning the pan may be overlooked. 
We will be investigating issues pertaining to usability in a 
separate phase of our projects, related to the development of 
evaluation criteria for instructions. 
Our data further suggest that the mappings from stance 
to realisation is not language independent. This observation 
reinforces our belief that multilingual generation will lead to 
better texts thafi machine translation will, because a straight- 
lbrward translation from one language to another might re- 
suit in text that is awkward or which has the wrong pragmatic 
force. In addition, the choice of stance itself could also be cul- 
turally motivated. If this is indeed the case, then only through 
multilingual generation can a text with the appropriate skance 
be produced automatically. 
In this paper, we raise the issue of the importance of stylis- 
tic variation in instructions, and pose a number of questions 
that must be addressed. Our analysis has provided guidelines 
for proceeding with a comprehensive study of this feature 
of naturally-occuring instructions. Our first step is to refine 
our analysis to provide further distinctions in the semantic 
meanings and to identify more clearly their associated re- 
alisation. This analysis will apply to instructions such as 
the ones discussed here as well as to those for other domains 
(e.g., software documentation, instructions for administrative 
procedures). 
We will be using our results in a text generation system to 
51 
7th International Generation Workshop • Kennebunkport, Maine ° June 21-24, 1994 
guide text planning and realisation in several languages. We 
intend to make use of these semantic meanings both by adding 
further constraints on the discourse strategies employed dur- 
ing text planning, and by constraining the deployment of 
the available linguistic resources during generation, using 
notions such as register-controlled generation (Bateman and 
Paris, 1991). 

References 
Ager, D. (1970). Styles and registers in contemporary French. 
University of London Press, London. 
Bateman, J. A. and Paris, C. L. (1989). Phrasing a Text 
in Terms the User Can Understand. In Proceedings of 
the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial 
Intelligence, pages 1511-1517, Detroit, Michigan. 
Bateman, J. A. and Paris, C. L. (1991). Constraining the 
deployment of lexicogrammatical resources dunng text 
generation: towards a computational instantiation of 
register theory. In Ventola, E., editor, Functional and 
Systemic Linguistics: Approaches and Uses, chapter 5, 
pages 81-106. Mouton de Gruyter. 
Crystal, D. and Davy, D. (1969). Investigating English Style. 
Longmans, London. 
Dale, R. (1992).- Generating Referring Explessions: Con- 
structing Descriptions in a Domain of Objects and Pro- 
cesses. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. 
DiMarco, C. and Hirst, G. (1993). A Computational The- 
ory of Goal-Directed Style in Syntax. Computational 
Linguistics, 19(3):451-499. 
Feiner, S. K. and McKeown, K. R. (1990). Coordinating text 
and graphics in explanation generation. In Proceedings 
of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 
pages 442 A.A.9, Boston, MA. 
Ghadessy, M., editor (1988). Registers of Written English: 
situational factors and linguistic features. Frances Pin- 
ter, London. 
HaUiday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of 
Language. Edward Arnold, London. 
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic. 
Edward Arnold, London. 
Hasan, R. (1988). Meaning ifi Sociolinguistic Theory. Pre- 
sented at the First Hong Kong Conlerence on Language 
and Society. 
Hervey, S. and Higgins, I. (1992). Thinking Translation. 
Routledge, London, UK. 
Hovy, E. H. (1988). Generating Natural Language Under 
Pragmatic Constraints. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 
New Jersey. 
Jakobson, R. (1960). Linguistics and poetics. In Sebeok, 
T. A., editor, Style in Language, pages 350--377. MIT 
Press, Cambridge, MA. 
Kittredge, R. and Lehrberger, J., editors (1982). Sublan- 
guage: Studies of language in restricted semantic do- 
nutins, de Gruyter, Berlin and New York. 
Martin, J. R. (1992). English text: systems and structure. 
Benjamins, Amsterdam. 
McKeown, K. R. (1985). Text Generation: Using Dis- 
course Strategies and Focus Constraints to Generate 
Natural Language Text. Cambridge University Press, 
Cambridge, England. 
Peter, G. and ROsner, D. (1994). User-Model-Driven Gener- 
ation of Instructions. User Modeling and User Adapted 
Interaction. 
Rtsner, D. and Stede, M. (1991). Towards the Automatic Pro- 
duction of Multilingual Technical Documents. Technical 
Report FAW-R-91022, Research Institute for Applied 
Knowledge Processing (FAW), Ulm, Germany. 
Sager, J. C., Dungworth, D., and McDonald, P. F. (1980). 
English SpecialLanguages. Brandstetter Verlag, Wies- 
baden, Germany. 
Scott, D. R. (1993). Generating Multilingual Instructions. 
Contribution to the panel on "Instructions: Language 
and Behavior". In Proceedings of the International Joint 
Conference on ArtificiaI InteUigence (IJCAI-93), Cham- 
bery, France. 
Toolan, M. (1988). The Language of Press Advertising. In 
Ghadessy, M., editor, Registers of Written English: sit- 
uational factors and linguistic features, pages 52--64. 
Frances Pinter, London. 
Vander Linden, K. (1993). Speaking of Actions: Choosing 
Rhetorical Status and Grammatical Form in Instruc- 
tional Text Generation. PhD thesis, University of Col- 
orado. Available as Technical Report CU-CS-654-93. 
Wahlster, W., Andrt, E., Finkler, W., Profitlich, H.-J., and 
Rist, T. (1993). Plan-Based Integration of Natural Lan- 
guage and Graphics Generation. Artificial Intelligence 
Journal, (63):387-427. Also a DFKI Research Report 
RR-93-02. 
