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.
While he is uncomfortable with this, he does seem to be in the vast
minority... and, significantly worse for his POV, his desire for a
change moves you AWAY from clear communication.
I am reminded of two things: the first is something from an
assertiveness course decades ago, to the effect of "They're your
feelings; you deal with 'em." The second things is this: I once
worked at a company where the owner got all bent out of shape over
precisely this issue. (A lot of things made him very nervous; he was
a rabbity little man.) We heard about his concern for a while and
finally said that this was the industry standard terminology, but if
he wanted to come up with something that was as clear and
unambiguous, we'd be glad to use it. We never heard about this issue again.
I would tell your colleague, with all the kindness you can, that this
is the industry terminology and that it will potentially cost the
company money in increased support costs if you change this.
Yours truly,
John Hedtke
Author/Consultant/Contract Writer
www.hedtke.com <-- website
541-685-5000 (office landline)
541-554-2189 (cell)
john -at- hedtke -dot- com (primary email)
johnhedtke -at- aol -dot- com (secondary email)
At 01:07 PM 4/10/2008, Karen Mulholland wrote:
>Richard, I understand and agree with your point -
>political correctness can stifle meaningful
>communication.
>
>But there's more to it than that. I can't speak for
>the engineer, but my own queasiness doesn't stem from
>either of the causes you suggest - your list of valid
>reasons for discomfort is incomplete.
>
>Partly I'm bothered because the terms "master" and
>"slave" seem unduly anthropomorphic.
>Partly it's that I know people who...um, let's just
>stick with the anthropomorphism issue. ;-)
>
>Leaving aside my own feelings, my coworker the
>engineer is uncomfortable with the term. It does not
>matter *why* he is uncomfortable with it. If he had an
>irrational phobia of the verb "configure", I'd be
>equally concerned with helping him find a synonym that
>didn't bother him.
>
>This is not about political correctness; it's about
>responding to a colleague's stated discomfort, and
>using language that doesn't make people uncomfortable.
>It's not an abstract problem of "somebody somewhere
>may take offense"; it is a case of "this gentleman
>sitting in my office would rather use a different set
>of words in his own writing."
>
>I do this job to help technical people communicate,
>and telling this engineer that his emotional response
>to these words isn't valid or should be disregarded
>doesn't strike me as a good way to do that.
>
>It can be a fine line between respecting people's
>feelings and being politically correct; I think the
>dividing line is where it stops being hypothetical. In
>this case I am striving for courtesy, not correctness.
>
>
>KM
>
>--- "Combs, Richard" <richard -dot- combs -at- Polycom -dot- com>
>wrote:
>
> > Karen Mulholland wrote:
> >
> > > What would you call the unit that controls the
> > other one?
> >
> > Master.
> >
> > > What would you call the one that is under control
> > of the first one?
> >
> > Slave.
> >
> > Why are you and your engineer made queasy by
> > perfectly good English
> > words being used in a way completely consistent with
> > their meanings?
> > Were you, the engineer, or members of your audience
> > ever masters or
> > slaves, and thus feel awkward about the concept? Or
> > is it just that you
> > embrace the concepts of collective guilt and "the
> > sins of the fathers"?
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > ------
> > Richard G. Combs
> > Senior Technical Writer
> > Polycom, Inc.
> > richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
> > 303-223-5111
> > ------
> > rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
> > 303-777-0436
> > ------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
>printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
>True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as john -at- hedtke -dot- com -dot-
>
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/john%40hedtke.com
>
>
>To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
