Master/Slave

[Stuart Burnfield <slb -at- FS -dot- COM -dot- AU>]

Are the words 'master' and 'slave' to be avoided because they are
offensive? Maybe, maybe not. We all have our own opinions and I'm
sure no-one has changed theirs as a result of this thread.

I do suggest that we avoid master/slave terminology in our technical
writing, not because they're offensive but because as a pair they're
such bad metaphors for the things they are meant to represent. There's
nothing about hard drives, or help files, that reminds me of the
relationship between master and slave, so why use the image?

'Master' by itself is quite a useful word. My (modest) dictionary has
21 definitions for the word, 20 of them not relating to slavery.
Several meanings relate to dominance, control, primacy, authority,
superiority, and so on. These all have their uses -- master disk,
master list, master host, master file.

'Slave' pretty much refers to human slavery, except in the case of "a
device that is controlled by or that duplicates the action of another
similar device". I think the use of 'slave' in this sense, and only in
this sense, is fine.

So while 'master' can be a useful and apt term in a technical setting,
the use of 'slave' as its antonym is probably a sign of poor technical
writing, and suggests to me that the writer was too lazy to think of a
better pair of terms.

My humble opinion and all that.

Regards
---
Stuart Burnfield                "Jack of all tech writing trades,
Applied Phlogiston Pty Ltd              master of none"
mailto:slb -at- fs -dot- com -dot- au

 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