RE: "parallelize"

["Locke, David" <dlocke -at- bindview -dot- com>]

The problem was with a respondent's post that contained the following text
not the original poster:

>What I am saying is that I cannot imagine a clear use of the word
>"parallelize". Even if there is a correct usage, I am willing to bet
>that if you quote me the passage, I can rewrite it to sound better, and
>convey a more clear meaning than the original using the verb
>"parallelize". 

I didn't go into the lack of imagination. Or the lack of technical
knowledge, which I know is a great list divide which we will never settle.

This is the offending statement:

>I am willing to make this assertion without knowing the
>context, based entirely on my experience with composition in English.
>But please, I invite the original poster to prove me wrong...

Now with his knowledge of English linguistics can he disqualify "prallelize"
as something that is obviously not an English word. NO!

Even the police don't assume that because you went down the street the wrong
way that you necessarily deserve a traffic ticket. It is a question of do
you show good judgement. 

If you have ever changed a writers intent when you rewrote it for clarity,
you rewrote it wrong. It got fixed in review. But, you were probably pissed
at the SME for making you put it back the way they intended it.  

It is all about attitude. If you assume you know everything, then you are in
the wrong field. I've heard from TWs in English-based degrees describe how a
professor taught them not to assume. So it's not a great divide issue. And,
I spent three years rewriting SME content, so I know what the problems are,
but technical terms were not the problem. In all those years, my work like
yours resulted in improved clarity on the order of 80%. I know exactly what
you mean. But, you don't get there by assuming you know better than the
author. And, if we were being help to journalistic and book publishing
standards, we would be expected not only to preserve meaning, but style as
well, while we pursued improvements in clarity.

The original poster did come back and provide a context. And, given the
context "parallelize" was used correctly and clearly. If this same word had
come up two weeks ago, I wouldn't have had an answer, and I wouldn't have
posted. But, just this last weekend, I learned about the technology and the
term doesn't seem so strange. 

English is not enough. And, that to is a dividing line here on the list.
Fine. The people that work with me all stand on the same side of the line.
They understand the technology they work with. They respect the technologist
they work for. They earn the respect of their peers. They experiment before
they ask. But, if something isn't clear they pick up the phone, or email, or
wander the halls. Even a legacy guy who writes in an academic style knows
his technology backwards and forwards. Nobody assumes. Nobody thinks they
know better than the SMES. The SMEs run this place, and it would be
detrimental to your career to take them on. Or think small of them. You are
welcome to stand on the other side of that line. And, if you wouldn't work
for me, it's in your own best interest, because you wouldn't last long here.
And, it would be people over my head coming for yours.

By all means post terminology questions. But, please don't demo a superior
attitude, a willingness to assume, disrespect for SMEs, disrespect for
technical language, or disrespect for technical cultures that you don't
belong to.

David Locke