And On A Different Topic... (Language/Grammar)

[gnomi]

May vs. Might. I know that traditionally there are differences between the intensity of the uncertainty (may is less uncertain than might, if I recall correctly). However, technical writers tend to avoid using "may" in documentation because of the possible confusion between "may" (possibly) and "may" (allowed) in (for example) the construct "you may [whatever the possible choice is]." In many cases, I replace "may" with "can." However, when I am writing about a possibility, I often replace "may" with "might" (as in, "You might need to open the window before throwing your computer out of it") if the sentence is not cleanly recastable (recasting the sentence above results in "Open any closed windows before throwing your computer through them"). But when I do find myself substituting "might," I wonder if I'm overstating the uncertainty.

Comments

[autotruezone.livejournal.com]

As someone who frequently reads technical documents, I vote for "don't worry about it". I know I couldn't tell you which of "may" or "might" is more uncertain.

[violetcheetah.livejournal.com]

I don't see it so much as overstating the uncertainty, but rather as making sure that the 10% of people who might (see?) be confused by "may" do not have to wonder in which way you mean it. There's a place for ambiguity in literary writing, but with technical or business stuff, I tend to figure that the reader doesn't want to have to puzzle out the intent. In fact, they probably don't want to think about the fact that they are reading at all. If I am editing something and have to go back to reread a sentence to figure out what the author meant, I figure I'm not the only one, and I change it.

[chaos-wrangler.livejournal.com]

The place where may vs might gets to me is in the counter-factual:
"If I hadn't lost the book I might have read it" feels grammatical to me but
"If I hadn't lost the book I may have read it" doesn't.