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.
Subject:Re: Words for People - Summary From:Dick Miller <DICK_MILLER -at- HP-VANCOUVER-OM10 -dot- OM -dot- HP -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:37:49 -0800
I'd like to offer a different point of view on your comment on great list
netiquette. I benefit greatly from public discussions of these issues, and
feel comfortable choosing which responses I read. As long as the flurry of
activity doesn't overwhelm the server, my preference is for public
responses, so I can learn, too. Not everyone does as good a job as you have
at summarizing the reponses and posting the summary.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Words for People - Summary
Author: Non-HP-ParksB (ParksB -at- EMH1 -dot- hqisec -dot- army -dot- mil) at HP-Vancouver,mimegw10
Date: 1/31/97 6:06 AM
Hi! You folks are great. Answers to my question started pouring in
within five minutes of me posting it yesterday! I started sending
thank-yous individually, but when the replies were coming in faster than
I could respond, I decided that wasn't going to work (and still get any
So, this message is a mass Thank You and a summary of your responses. I
received 22 replies.
- Almost half (10) said to go with "employee".
- Three said that "person" works okay in the example I gave.
- One said to stick with "individual", with good justification: If I am
dealing with civilian *and* military personnel, individual would apply
to both. Employee doesn't really apply to military personnel.
- Two people suggested "worker", and one of those had several other
suggestions, as well.
- Four people agreed that I may have been looking at it too long.
- Two people thought I was just plain crazy.
I'm tempted to go with employee in those places where person doesn't
sound right; but, the military/civilian point is hard to argue. The
example I gave applied to only civilians, so employee would work. But
for consistency throughout the help file for all areas of the software,
I should probably stick with individual (or person).
Something else I noticed in all these replies: All but one was sent
directly to me, not to the list. Kudos to everybody for great list
netiquette. Eric should be proud! 8-)
==== original post =====
I'm writing online help for a system that has a labor accounting
portion. The word "personnel" is used a lot to refer to all employees as
a whole, so when possible I use "person" to refer to a single
individual. However, sometimes "person" doesn't quite fit. I've been
using "individual", but all of a sudden it doesn't look right and I'm
thinking "employee" may be better. I think I've just been looking at it
too long! Here's a sample sentence:
"The Summary tab displays a breakdown of an individual's total hours by
labor category, project, and deliverable."
Would you use "individual" or "employee" here?
parksb -at- emh1 -dot- hqisec -dot- army -dot- mil