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.
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.
> 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 archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-