Re: Masters without slaves - A Mixed Metaphor!

Subject: Re: Masters without slaves - A Mixed Metaphor!
From: Pete Kloppenburg <pkloppen -at- CERTICOM -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 11:50:51 -0400

Chris Hamilton writes:
> The product I'm currently documenting has something called profiles,
> of which there are three flavors: master, server, and thread.

I think we've properly buried the m*****/s**** controversy, but I've
seen a couple of posts which raise an interesting topic: mixing
metaphors. For instance, somebody wrote earlier that a product he was
documenting had a hierarchy that went something like root/parent/sibling.
Now I see master/server/thread.

Of course it's impossible from these tech-whirl postings to determine
what relationship these various entities are supposed to have to each
other, but I question these groupings. What seems to be happening is
that we are getting some sort of semantic drift happening in software
terminology.

"Parent/child" is a perfectly good metaphor for certain relationships,
especially in OOP and multithreading operating systems. "Master/slave"
works well in other contexts, such as hardware. When we use or discuss
these constructions, we should be aware of a couple of points:

1) The argument that we should avoid these words because of offensive
connotations is ludicrous. We use them precisely because of these
connotations: they are what give the metaphor power. It's a very quick
way to call on a shared bit of knowledge to describe a relationship
between two things. If we've lost the ability to distinguish between a
metaphor and real life, we're in pretty sad shape.

2) Mixing and matching these terms destroys the metaphor. "Root/branch"
makes sense; "root/parent" makes no sense. "Parent/sibling" is at best
ambiguous - is the sibling the parent's sibling, or the parent's child?
"Master/server/thread" is a construction completely devoid of any
internal logic.

So when Chris asks:
> So, is the use of the word "master" without the context of slaves
offensive?

perhaps he (she?) might more productively ask "is the use of the word
master
without slave sensible?" I say no, of course not.



Pete Kloppenburg - pkloppen -at- certicom -dot- com
Technical Writer
Certicom Corp
Mississauga, Ontario,
Canada
http://www.certicom.com

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html


Previous by Author: Re: Language use and hypersensitivity
Next by Author: Re: Political Correctness and the Writer
Previous by Thread: Re: Mastered the Master Issue
Next by Thread: STC Region 7 Conference


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads