|
Post by Pete on Jun 9, 2008 15:01:49 GMT
Yes, but FYI is in general use outside forums -- it's an accepted office or business abbreviation, I reckon, like ASAP or BCC. Or AOB
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 9, 2008 15:04:25 GMT
> TLA is a TLA < Quick, Pete, before the deluge: do define what you mean by "acronym"! Let me guess: this is the TLA / TLI discussion, isn't it? You are right, though, in that I was using "acronym" when "initialism" might have been the better word. Actually, that leads to a question: are all acronyms also initialisms or are they mutually exclusive?
|
|
|
Post by Dave M on Jun 9, 2008 15:54:25 GMT
Ah!! Some careful Googling got me there: "in other words"!
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 9, 2008 16:05:39 GMT
Ah!! Some careful Googling got me there: "in other words"! I must admit that I didn't even try to decipher most of them (although I did manage to work out AFAIK).
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel-Ernest on Jun 9, 2008 17:43:04 GMT
> What is wrong with Lower Case and Upper Case? < Nothing, but they are not the same as sentence case and title case.
Whoops! Apologies. Displaying the depths of my ignorance; again. As the saying nowadays is: Google before you leap. SQTM
But if they are causing confusion or controversy (as Trevor points out) what useful purpose are they providing? (As the discussion has moved on, feel free to ignore question.)
G-E.
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Jun 9, 2008 18:09:41 GMT
Perhaps I could start a new thread titled: "Who else is annoyed by esoteric, smartarse initialisms?".
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jun 9, 2008 18:14:16 GMT
Ah!! Some careful Googling got me there: "in other words"! I must admit that I didn't even try to decipher most of them (although I did manage to work out AFAIK). In order to continue to sleep well at night, I would prefer not to know what A FAIK is, thank you very much. TfS
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 9, 2008 18:49:52 GMT
Perhaps I could start a new thread titled: "Who else is annoyed by esoteric, smartarse initialisms?". It would be a very well read thread! ;D
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jun 9, 2008 18:50:46 GMT
If there any you don't know, this might help! TfS
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jun 9, 2008 18:56:15 GMT
In earlier discussion in this thread, I mentioned CinC. I have also seen this written as C-in-C with a plural form as Cs-in-C. The singular form gives me no problem but the plural, although probably correct, just looks odd. Don't ask me how I would write it. I suppose my original version of CinC could be pluralized as CinCs but this is getting confusing. Any comments? TfS
|
|
|
Post by Alan Palmer on Jun 9, 2008 19:00:33 GMT
I'd use Cs-in-C.
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 9, 2008 19:14:28 GMT
In earlier discussion in this thread, I mentioned CinC. I have also seen this written as C-in-C with a plural form as Cs-in-C. The singular form gives me no problem but the plural, although probably correct, just looks odd. Don't ask me how I would write it. I suppose my original version of CinC could be pluralized as CinCs but this is getting confusing. Any comments? TfS In full you would certainly refer to Commanders-in-Chief. But if we say that CinC has become a sort of quasi-noun, CinCs would be consistent with that.
|
|
|
Post by Barry on Jun 9, 2008 20:53:02 GMT
The trouble is, it would defeat its own definition if reduced, as it's a potential acronym (rather than just an initialism):
WEIABESI (weigh a Bessy).
Quite catchy, actually.
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 9, 2008 21:19:45 GMT
I was once in a pub and there was a sign behind the bar that said, "IITYWYBMAD". I asked what it meant and the answer was, "If I tell you will you buy me a drink?" So I did.
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jun 10, 2008 7:04:29 GMT
In earlier discussion in this thread, I mentioned CinC. I have also seen this written as C-in-C with a plural form as Cs-in-C. The singular form gives me no problem but the plural, although probably correct, just looks odd. Don't ask me how I would write it. I suppose my original version of CinC could be pluralized as CinCs but this is getting confusing. Any comments? TfS In full you would certainly refer to Commanders-in-Chief. But if we say that CinC has become a sort of quasi-noun, CinCs would be consistent with that. Yes, Pete, but what about the form C-in-C and plural Cs-in-C?
|
|