Acronyms

"Just go to http..."

"In 1642 AD..."

"OMG!  Brb, the..."

We are surrounded by acronyms.  Some have received the status of words (laser, scuba) due to their history and longevity; others are quickly taking off in this world of text messaging and Internet usage.

While shopping for a KVM switch (Keyboard/Video/Monitor... or is it Mouse?) yesterday, it struck me how often we use acronyms that we have no idea the meaning of.  Especially in fields with heavy jargon, acronyms have become a way of speaking used so commonly we do not think about it anymore.  During my search for a KVM, out of curiosity, I asked a "Digital Sales Expert" what http stood for.  They had no idea.  (By the way - btw! - it's "hypertext transfer protocol".  Now who can tell, without looking it up, what html stands for?)

I have run into college students across the nation that think AD stands for "After Death" and are completely thrown by the whole B.C.E./C.E. change.  (I heartily approve the effort but in honesty it just seems like a new varnish on the same old piece of furniture.)  All while working on their BA or BS.

And shall I even begin the discussion on chatspeak and textspeak?  Most of it has been said before but let's look at things in a new light.

The entire purpose of language is to facilitate communication.  This is why it irritates me so when people do not enunciate or keep their audience in mind when speaking/writing.  There are times when an academic tone is demanded by the subject matter and times when something more conversational and vernacular is needed (say, in a safety video for a hazardous job that requires a through understanding).  So when do all these acronyms cross the line into miscommunication?It all depends on context.

Is a text message filled with jumbles of letters maiming the language?  If it gets the message across so that it is completely understood, I don't think so.  However, the danger comes when the use of such jargon becomes so commonplace as to displace other communication.  I have held several jobs that require me to work with the public and there have been a number of times I have been asked to 'interpret' a text sent to someone or myself been unable to understand an e-mail sent by a boss two levels up (something I really want to understand!) because of unfamiliar acronyms.  You want me to do what with what?  Is that physically possible?

Leaving such things as atrocious punctuation and garbled spelling promoted by such usage alone, one could interpret all these new acronyms as a good thing - they allow, in most cases, people to say more things quickly and still be understood.  Jargon - the breeder of acronyms - has long shown its use in every field.  From diner lingo to programming to the emergency room, acronyms have their place.  (Stat?)

Just please - keep me in mind when you start using that new piece of lingo in e-mails.

Writing, technology, and relevance - Part 1

I write this initially with pen and paper; the greatest technology used being a clipboard. There is something joyous and almost spiritual in writing by hand. The words take on a personality beyond their definition and context; the traits of the markings themselves convey and infer further connotations. Here, the cursive speeds up, becoming less defined and more of a straight line as thought straightens. Here, there is a mixture of styles as thoughts spatter about. Here, a 't' is not crossed, an 'i' left undotted. Misspellings, scribbles, annotations and illegibility. Handwriting can quickly become a chaotic creative cauldron we word-witches brew letters and symbols in to produce a potion of manifested, tangible, thought.

Though I know as I write this that it will be posted on-line, I find myself in a different mindset than occurs while typing and looking at a screen. There is less distraction, less extraneous tools. I feel more free to just write, knowing I'll be able to edit later as I type.

Two nights ago I had a conversation with my software engineer boyfriend about the relevance of technology to certain fields. The obvious field to come into question and under discussion was mine - writing, literature, and so forth. The technology needed for the actual work I do is minimal. Humankind has long been writing in one form or another. What was eventually brought up was less technology's relevance to the actual work and more its impact on the sharing and distribution of the work.