Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 09:16:41 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: bob wallace Subject: author-invented terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Well I must be working on another philosophy index, because I have another question for y'all. What do ya do when the author invents a term to use in place of an alternative, commonly used term, and the invented term is one NO ONE would think of looking under? In this book, the author prefers the term "nonjustice obligations" to "benevolence" (let's assume he has his reasons). The whole book is about obligations, so I'd really have to list this under nonjustice. Ugh! But to list it under benevolence with a cross reference from nonjustice obligations would go against the author's wish to use this term. I sure wish he hadn't picked a "non" word. Do y'all agree that I'll have to do it this way: benevolence. _See_ nonjustice obligations nonjustice obligations I would love to hear about others' experiences with author-invented terms. Carol Roberts Ithaca, NY rw16@cornell.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 09:36:28 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: K.Lyle@sheffield.ac.uk Subject: Re: author-invented terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I agree, you have no alternative: I feel for you, working on a text by an author with such taste in terminology. Nonjustice obligations, indeed. But might there also be other appropriate cross-references, e.g. Altruism _see_ njo Good will _see_ njo or other near synonyms which might come to a reader's mind? ====================================================================== Kathleen M. Lyle Technical Editor, Applied Probability Trust, Hicks Building, The University, Sheffield S3 7RH, UK Phone +742 824269 Fax +742 729782 ====================================================================== ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 10:07:23 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Chet_Cady@oclc.org Subject: Nonjustice obligations ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Don't want a "non" word in your index, eh? Howzabout: justice obligations, non- obligations, nonjustice obligations, justice, non- ations, oblig-, justice, non- ations, lig-, ob-, -ice, just-, non- From the sounds of your clients, it might be a hit! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 10:08:26 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Chuck Banks Subject: Re: author-invented terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Carol, Don't forget: obligations nonjustice Our engineers (both hardware and software) are constantly "doing an Al Haig" and creating terms out of nothing. Perhaps it makes them feel godlike. So long as the new terms aren't patently offensive or ridiculus (we had Badness Threshold on one product), we live with them as best we can. We provide cross references like yours using industry-accepted terms and wait for the irate customer comment forms. Sometimes, a term at which we turned up our noses becomes a successful marketing tool. "You win some, you loose some, and the rest are rained out." Yogi Beara Good luck! Chuck Banks -- __ ________ ______ |\\ | || // Chuck Banks | \\ | ||_______ || Senior Technical Writer | \\ | || || NEC America, Inc. | \\| \\______ \\______ E-Mail: chuck@asl.dl.nec.com America, Incorporated CompuServe: 72520,411 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 10:21:38 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Chuck Banks Subject: Indexing Technical Manuals ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Last week, with Nancy Mulvany's gracious permission, I posted her letter responding to an article in the STC INTERCOM newsletter. Lori Lathrop was kind enough to respond and to grant permission to post her response here. ------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1993 13:48:55 EDT From: Lori Lathrop <76620.456@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Indexing Technical Manuals Comments: To: All Thanks to Chuck Banks for posting info on the Intercom article, "Indexing from the Desktop--One Writer's Method" along with Nancy Mulvany's well-written response. I'm a member of STC and ASI (American Society of Indexers), and I've developed and taught an Indexing Skills Workshop for technical writers. As Nancy said, the industry simply assumes that all writers are capable of producing a professional index. Unfortunately, many writers have not been trained in the art of indexing and, consequently, the indexes in many manuals are not as usable as they should be. In the ideal world, of course, the writer is the best person to create the index. However, in the practical world, if the writer does not possess professional indexing skills, a professional indexer should be contracted to develop the index. There are several professional indexers (myself included) who have software development and technical writing backgrounds. We are listed in The Register, an annual publication available from ASI. By the way, if any of you are planning to attend the STC Region 7 conference in Seattle on November 12-13, I will be presenting a workshop on Indexing Skills for technical writers. Lori Lathrop Lathrop Media Services P.O. Box 808 Georgetown, CO 80444 INTERNET:76620.456@compuserve.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 13:32:00 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "H-AMSTDY MODERATOR (AND FRIENDLY FACTOTUM)" Organization: St. Peter's College, US Subject: Re: author-invented terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- How about a compromise? You have some the majority of your stuff under 'njo' with a _see also_ to other headings of your choice. Then, when putting in the headings of your choice you put in the same page span as appears for the general page numbers for 'njo.' I agree with you that this situation sucks for indexers. The only comparable one I can think of (seems to happen in Vietnam books a lot!) is the introduction of multiple different terms which all mean the same thing (e.g. counterterrorism, black ops, psyops, psychological warfare, Green Berets, special forces, etc). Jeff -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Jeff Finlay | finlay_j@spcvxa.spc.edu (NOT a dash) | | American Studies Program | finlayj@acfcluster.nyu.edu | | New York University | telephone: (718) 545-9013 | | | | moderator: H-AMSTDY@UICVM | | An American Studies List | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 13:02:30 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Janice Woo Subject: Re: author-invented terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- your benevolence/nonjustice obligations solution looks good to me. I have been assuming that the indexer should supply _any_ cross-refs that would be useful to the reader. Is this a general practice among most indexers? Janice Woo, novice philosophy indexer P.S. I would also put a cross-ref from obligations to nonjustice... ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 13:02:54 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Steve Subject: Re: author-invented terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Carol Roberts writes: >What do ya do when the author invents a term to use in place of an >alternative, commonly used term, and the invented term is one NO ONE would >think of looking under? In this book, the author prefers the term >"nonjustice obligations" to "benevolence" (let's assume he has his >reasons)..... > >I would love to hear about others' experiences with author-invented terms. I'm kind of surprised this is an issue. Technical/jargon terms are _always_ invented by authors--that's where they come from, and why our language is always growing in variety and richness. Buy and examine any technical dictionary. All of these terms were invented by scholars and researchers in the field to represent new concepts, or concepts looked at in a different way. That's in large measure what research is all about--the discovery or creation of new variables, variable combinations, products, processes, theories, etc., etc., many of which require new names, in the view of the inventor. That's to distinguish them from the names that were around before her/his discovery was made, and is perfectly understandable to me. I've done it myself! Many, perhaps most [now there's a research project!], terms coined by authors aren't picked up by the research community at large and die. "Nonjustice obligations" may be one of these. Or it may not; only time will tell. In the meantime, it seems to me that indexers _must_ use the term as coined, with appropriate cross references. HARTER@INDIANA.EDU Steve Harter / SLIS / Indiana University / Bloomington, IN 47405 (812) 855-5113 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 09:03:14 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: bob wallace Subject: author-inv. terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Thanks to all who responded to my question about benevolence/nonjustice terms. The concensus was that I should have a "see" reference from benevolence (and any other suitable synonyms) to "nonjutice obligations" on the grounds that that's the term the author wants to use/stress and users will look that term up because they'll see it in the text. Several people suggested listing it under "obligations" as well. I have not done that because in an ethics book that would be akin to listing "birds" in the index to an ornithology book. So this is what I settled on: benevolence. _See_ nonjustice obligations justice _See also_ nonjustice obligations nonjustice obligations Cheers, Carol Roberts Ithaca, NY rw16@cornell.edu =========================================================================