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.
As for a double edged sword being "the most powerful weapon"--I would
have a hard time believing it was "more powerful" than a bow and
arrows or a spear--just different in use.
I wonder, though, if the Biblical reference might have been to swords
fabricated perhaps in Assyria or elsewhere, which may have been double
edged and of metal somewhat more advanced than might have been typical
in other cultures at the time. Although I am speculating here, perhaps
to their audience a "double edged sword" may simply have been
recognized as being sharper than they could get with an inferior
blade--which, being of lesser material, may have had to have been
single edged simply to have enough mass to resist breaking.
Some of those in this thread have said the "double edged sword is
dangerous to you and to the foe"--but that is not quite correct. If
that were all there was to it, it would never have been made and used
for hundreds of years--people were no more foolish then than we are
today, after all. Instead, the two edges were dangerous to a foe on
both fore and back strokes, reducing the vulnerability of the
swordsman during combat.
*Any* sword is dangerous if improperly handled, although I suppose the
rapier as a purely stabbing weapon would be the least dangerous type.
By the way--regarding the size and weight of two-handed swords such as
the Scottish examples. My remark of immense weight was based upon a
book of weapons I read when I was perhaps 12 years old. At the time, I
found it fascinating--but obviously it was wrong in some significant
details.
Yesterday, I did some reading about swords, and it appears most
two-handed swords were considerably less than ten pounds--seven or
eight pounds seemed to be considered quite heavy for an actual combat
two-hander--and even that would have been extremely tiring in extended
combat. They were, however, often as long or longer than the swordsmen
were tall.
I was also fascinated to learn that many of the Scottish swords used
blades made in Germany or Italy, with the grip and hand guards
fabricated locally.
David
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Tony Chung <tonyc -at- tonychung -dot- ca>
> To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:25:50 -0800
> Subject: Re: Mixing metaphors?
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 4:32 AM, voxwoman <voxwoman -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:
>
>> But would we use these phrases in technical documentation that is likely to
>> be translated and/or used by people who are not native English speakers? I
>> know I would not.
>>
>> -Wendy
>>
>>
> It does sound a lot like the language is intended for marketing rather than
> technical purposes. In this instance I would defer to the client's
> understanding of their target market.
>
> I'm amazed at how Deborah's initial question opened up such a rich
> discussion of the use of idiomatic phrases in language. I am especially
> intrigued by the history of the phrases.
>
> Until now I've only been familiar with the biblical usage of the
> "double/two-edged sword". Aside from the passage in revelation, the writer
> of Hebrews says, "For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any
> double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints
> and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." (Heb 4:12)
>
> In this case it works, because the intent of the language is poetic, to
> create an image the audience was used to. I would venture that at the time
> of writing, the double-edged sword was the most powerful weapon known to
> man. Had the passage been written today, they may have compared the word of
> God to a more advanced technological weapon that offered both the power and
> precision of a sword. (Somehow "nunchucks" doesn't immediately register).
>
> Regarding the issue of translation, even the phrase itself was translated
> from Greek to Latin, and all known languages. I'm not sure the strength of
> the image translates equally between cultures.
>
>
> --
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you looking for one documentation tool that does it all? Author,
build, test, and publish your Help files with just one easy-to-use tool.
Try the latest Doc-To-Help 2009 v3 risk-free for 30-days at: http://www.doctohelp.com/
Explore CAREER options and paths related to Technical Writing,
learn to create SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS documents, and
get tips on FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION best practices. Free at: http://www.ModernAnalyst.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
