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.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Hart" <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:09 AM
Subject: "Type" vs. "Enter" (take III)
> There may indeed be a problem with the metaphorical use, which is
> another issue entirely. If comprehension depends on a metaphor, then
I think that most of the latitude taken in modern usage of 'via' is due to
analogy. For example, the streets of Cappadocia and the fiber optic
backbone in the US are analogous in function, so the pre-existing
specialized (geographical) language of the one fits with the other as well,
giving me the freedom to say (correctly):
"I have trunk access via the OC38 Fiber Optic ring around my city."
The unspoken analogy to the streets of Cappadocia is lost on most speakers
of English, so the analogy is not problematic.
But in any case, it doesn't seem likely that other languages are missing the
vocabulary or concepts to translate 'via'. The human activities and concepts
surrounding "mobility" seem pretty darned basic anywhere you can go. That's
where 'via' is at and has always been, hard to believe it is an impediment
for translators. Maybe the issue is that translators are employed who are
not native speakers of English? Still, I don't know why one English
preposition isn't good for translation. Personally, if I had to pick a
preposition I could do without, I think it would be 'of'.
Ed Wordsmith Technical Communications
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.