The following memorandum has been created to analyse the “Hotel laws of Texas” document, which was designed years ago, and although it may have been understood then, that seems not to be the case now. While going through the document, I encountered some mistakes which made the document unclear to the reader, making it difficult to be understood. Therefore I decided to make some changes which I believe makes total sense to the document and hence making it easier for the reader to understand.
An Analytic Overview Of The Document.
36-401. Hotel And Motel Keepers Definitions;
The term hotel and motel has been described using lengthy and repetitive words in this section. This is clearly seen where the definition of hotel and motel is stated as a “building or group of buildings or other structures or group of structures”,” every cabin camp or tourist cabin” Which is too much repetitiveness that could bore a reader. Instead, the writer should have stated that “a hotel is a building that provides meals and accommodation to tourists and travelers.” The definition of something should be clear and precise. Another form of repetition is seen where the document states “kept, used, maintained or advertised” instead of just saying “kept or used” or “maintained or advertised”. Still in this document, they have not mentioned the definition of ”keepers” but have stated in the title, “Hotel and motel keepers’ definition” This brings about distrust to the reader, since there is an expectation of all definitions in the title but you only get to see two of them which is hotel and motel. A “keeper” is not defined and simply means “someone who runs a hotel or a motel.”
36-402. Same ;Liability For Loss Or Damage To Property Of Guests Limited, When.
In the section 36-402 of the same text, there still is the repetition of words this includes “Baggage, luggage, wearing apparel, personal effects or other like property” and “a guest, lodger or boarder”. This instead should have been stated as, “the loss of, or damaged property belonging to guests or boarders” The writer seems to have broken down the information into so many words which are all similar to each other hence being repetitive. “Baggage and luggage” are synonymous words with the same meaning which is goods, “wearing apparel and personal effects” are also synonymous words which also have the same meaning which is personal property and “a lodger and a boarder” are also synonymous meaning stay in guests.
Audience Intended For The Document.
While analysing this document I realised that the targeted audience was not very clear in terms of age, gender, race or ethnic background, although one thing that was very clear was that this document was meant for the stay in guests, those who had to board or lodge. This I realised through the information in section 36-402 that has a vague and a partially written title which makes it difficult for the reader to understand what it clearly states. “Same; liability for loss or damage to property of guests limited, when.” As it says, should have instead been addressed as, “The legal responsibility of a hotel for lost or damaged property of a guest is limited when;” With a much clearer title like this, anyone can understand what they are being told or required to do.
Grammar, Style And Design.
Due to the time factor in which this document was written, the document portrays poorly used grammar and also use of jargons. This is especially seen in the last part of the document, there is the use of unacceptable words in a day to day contexts, such as the pronominal adverbs used “thereupon and thereof” and idioms such as “in lieu” to mean “instead”. The document is also full of repetitive words which really become boring to the reader. For the style and design of this document, it really is of the old ages and therefore does not excite the reader. I also would not pause to read such a document if I came across one.
Attainable Advancement.
For the revised document, I added a header and a footer with a branded logo of SHSU and corrected its grammar which made it much more understandable to the reader. With this, I realised that the document turned out to be more direct, appealing and captivating for the reader as it should have been.
