[comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc] Wordprocessists not typists?

glratt@rice.edu (Glenn Forbes Larrett) (08/10/90)

>If a person who types is called a typist,
>what is the official designation for a person
>who does word processing?

Well...
	"word processor" : technically accurate, but connotes the program
		rather than the person word processing
	"word processor operator/user" : again, technically accurate, but
		connotes someone with perhaps more of a computer bent than
		would probably be the case
	"secretary" : connotes a possibly inaccurate servile/subordinate
		status
	"typist" : 
		>Some folks are taking offense, etc.

		(flame on)

	"typist with an attitude" : perhaps more accurate, though belligerent

	"typist with an attitude problem" : ditto

	"#@*&^% typist with a @#)*($& attitude problem" : double ditto
		
	"word processing professional" : professionalism, IMHO, ought to
		transcend quibbling about titles/official designations.

Hell, call 'em word processors: they'll get tired of being regarded as
	machines soon enough.
		(flame off)

Disclaimer: I opine for myself, my whole self, and no one but myself.

	Glenn Larratt
	glratt@uncle-bens.rice.edu

		
	Glenn Larratt			glratt@uncle-bens.rice.edu
	Computing Resource Center	OCIS, Rice University, Houston, Texas

bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) (08/10/90)

<1990Aug09.224407.29847@csuchico.edu>, franz@csuchico.edu (Fran Holtsberry) :
| If a person who types is called a typist,
| what is the official designation for a person
| who does word processing?
| 
| This is a serious request, Some university documents
| are on hold until we work this out.

	Word Processor Operator
	Word-Processing Specialist
	Document Preparer (or, Document Preparation Specialist)
	Text Entry Clerk

Less seriously,

	End User
	Keypunch Operator
	Obstructionist

These people are engaged in a work stoppage because they don't like
being called typists?  Either your area is real mean to typists, or 
these people have found a good scam for taking long coffee breaks.
(Could well be the former.  Are there a lot of sexists around?)

swsh@ellis.uchicago.edu (Janet M. Swisher) (08/10/90)

In article <53989@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu 
(RAMontante) writes:
><1990Aug09.224407.29847@csuchico.edu>, franz@csuchico.edu (Fran Holtsberry) :
>| If a person who types is called a typist, what is the official 
>| designation for a person who does word processing?

>| This is a serious request, Some university documents
>| are on hold until we work this out.

>These people are engaged in a work stoppage because they don't like
>being called typists?  Either your area is real mean to typists, or 
>these people have found a good scam for taking long coffee breaks.

I understood the original post to mean not that the typists were refusing
to type, but that the university documents refer to these people, and the
documents can't be finished until it is decided what to call them.

As for what to call them, I would say you only need a distinction if you
actually still have people who only type on typewriters, in addtion to the
people who use wordprocessing programs.  Personally, I dislike title
inflation, but it's true that wordprocessing requires broader skills than
straight typing.  Call some local vocational schools and ask them what job
positions they claim to be training people for.


--
Janet Swisher			Internet: swsh@midway.uchicago.edu	
University of Chicago		Phone: (312) 702-7608
Academic and Public Computing	P-mail: 1155 E. 60th St. Chicago IL 60637, USA
"It's all just stuff, but some stuff is better than other stuff." R. McClamrock

isr@rodan.acs.syr.edu ( ISR group account) (08/10/90)

Well, assumably since "Typist" comes from what they do, typing.
and those who use word processors or processing, then 
conceivably you could call them "procists" or "procs".
Personally i would ask them how the think they are going to
do any word proccessign without typing...
Or, call them by what the are typing.. (ow, that word again)
To really be accurate, assuming they are not writing this but
are typing in from something.
you could have three job titles:

"Letter-clerk"
"manuscript-entry clerk"
"data-entry clerk"

Note the last one is already in common use.
But I would refrain from buckling in and call them
typists. Really. Tell 'em to join reality.-- 
Mike Schechter, Computer Engineer,Institute Sensory Research, Syracuse Univ.
InterNet: Mike_Schechter@isr.syr.edu isr@rodan.syr.edu Bitnet: SENSORY@SUNRISE 

cy5@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Conway Yee) (08/10/90)

In article <1990Aug09.224407.29847@csuchico.edu> franz@csuchico.edu (Fran Holtsberry) writes:
>Some folks are taking offense at being called typists
>in this day and age of word processing.
>If a person who types is called a typist,
>what is the official designation for a person
>who does word processing?
>This is a serious request, Some university documents
>are on hold until we work this out.

This appears to be another attempt to propagate Newspeak.  The word typist
adequately describes the function of someone who uses a word processor to
type documents.  The only difference is the tool used: a word processor vs.
a typewriter.  The important thing is the function of the person, not the
tool used.  Thus, the invention of a new word serves merely to confuse
not clarify the situation.

New words should be invented when a clear need arises.  For instance, the
word "astronaut" was invented when the need for a descriptor was needed
for someone who travels in space.  The name of the tool used to achieve
space travel was not changed.  Both the toys that have been used for centuries
and the machine built to carry the astronauts were called "rockets."  The
fact that the size and the capacity of the rocket increased by many orders
of magnitude did not change nature of the rocket.  Thus, a new descriptor
was not required.

					Conway Yee, N2JWQ

slbg6790@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mephisto) (08/11/90)

bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) writes:

><1990Aug09.224407.29847@csuchico.edu>, franz@csuchico.edu (Fran Holtsberry) :
>| If a person who types is called a typist,
>| what is the official designation for a person
>| who does word processing?
>| 

>Less seriously,

>	End User
>	Keypunch Operator
>	Obstructionist

Even less seriously,

	Word Processor
	Text Editor
	Document Entry Specialist
	ASCII Encryption Specialist

roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (08/11/90)

franz@csuchico.edu (Fran Holtsberry) writes:
> If a person who types is called a typist, what is the official
> designation for a person who does word processing?

	I would vote for "word processor".  I believe that, in the deep dark
past, "computer" referred to a person who did computations, not the machine
he or she used to do them.  This probably explains why the ACM uses the
somewhat odd (to modern ears) phrase "computing machinery" in their name; I
think at the time the ACM was formed, a "computer" was still a person.
--
Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy
"Arcane?  Did you say arcane?  It wouldn't be Unix if it wasn't arcane!"

jgarland@kean.ucs.mun.ca (08/11/90)

In article <1990Aug10.152143.3026@midway.uchicago.edu>, swsh@ellis.uchicago.edu (Janet M. Swisher) writes:
> In article <53989@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu 
> (RAMontante) writes:
>><1990Aug09.224407.29847@csuchico.edu>, franz@csuchico.edu (Fran Holtsberry) :
>>| If a person who types is called a typist, what is the official 
>>| designation for a person who does word processing?
> 
>>| This is a serious request, Some university documents
>>| are on hold until we work this out.
> 

This may be rather simple-minded, but has it occurred to you to *ask* 
the affected people to come up with a designation of what *they* think 
they should be called?  You know, have them strike a committee to 
report back to you within X days.  Of course that would demand that 
you as a university administrator enter the 20th century and use 
modern management skills/techniques.  Are you up to it?



John Garland

jgarland@mun   (Bitnet)
jgarland@kean.ucsmun.ca  (Usenet)

derek@sun4dts.dts.ine.philips.nl (derek) (08/13/90)

You could differentiate by calling them word processers. This is sometimes
done (so that -or means the machine and -er means the person(s)). Just a
thought.

Best Regards, Derek Carr
DEREK@DTS.INE.PHILIPS.NL           Philips I&E TQV-5 Eindhoven, The Netherlands 
Standard Disclaimers apply.

casey@well.sf.ca.us (Kathleen Creighton) (08/13/90)

Since this is what I've done for a living for the last ten years, I can
speak with some authority here--we are called word processing operators.
-- 
Kathleen Creighton                     {pacbell,hplabs,apple,ucbvax}!well!casey
San Francisco

akcs.dgy@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Donald Yuniskis) (08/14/90)

let's call a spade a spade....
call 'em "grunts"
;-)

akcs.gregc@ddsw1.MCS.COM (*Greg*) (08/14/90)

Donald Yuniskis blurts:

>let's call a spade a spade....
>call 'em "grunts"

Don, I hear you do this in the morning.  (grin)