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.
Subject:Re: Killer Language -Reply From:Amy Brown <AMYB -at- IPRAX -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 11 Nov 1996 13:23:31 -0500
IMNSHO:
Personally, I'm apt to use "hit return" or "'hit enter", but what bugs me
about terms like "abort" and "Kill" is not the violence but the melodrama. I
get visions of reactor core meltdowns and Tom Cruise ejecting himself
from a burning fighter plane. We're documenting software or hardware
(mostly for civilian use), not writing screenplays.
I know, I know, "Abort" and "Kill" have been around for a long time in
computerland. But what really matters is who's using the software.
Really, how many users (other than UNIX or mainframe pros) will prefer
"abort" or "kill" to "cancel" or "stop"? When I first saw the term "abort," I
laughed out loud. I would have been less distracted if the writer had
used "cancel" instead. My job as a tech writer is NOT to distract the
reader with my word choice.
Bottom line: if my users will recognize and feel comfortable with "abort"
and "kill," then I'll use those terms (albeit reluctantly). But my users are
course authors and training managers most of whom don't even know
what UNIX _is._
