TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
RE: Old thread, hopefully new spin on "allow" v. "enable."
Subject:RE: Old thread, hopefully new spin on "allow" v. "enable." From:"Brierley, Sean" <Sean -at- Quodata -dot- Com> To:"'Scudder, Beth'" <beth_scudder -at- retek -dot- com>, TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Tue, 7 Mar 2000 15:37:59 -0500
Yup.
And, is anthropomorphism so evil? I submit that particularly Microsoft
Windows, and especially Microsoft Word, often act in a way that is
independent of the operator . . . as though capable of independent mischief?
Besides, don't eighth-graders anthropomorphise a lot so, thusly, does not
our audience better understand our attempt at communicating?
Sean
sean -at- quodata -dot- com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scudder, Beth [SMTP:beth_scudder -at- retek -dot- com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 10:21 AM
> To: TECHWR-L
> Subject: RE: Old thread, hopefully new spin on "allow" v. "enable."
>
> I use "allow" or "let", mostly because I have negative psychology-dervied
> connotations with "enable"... not a very authoritative reason, just a
> vote.
>
> --Beth
