SAS GI NST 

 

Nick Thompson

[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Steve Smith
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2021 5:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Acronyms

 

Nick -

I think it *can* be the thing you call out, but I encounter it in so many 
contexts where that explanation doesn't really fit.   Sometimes I think it is 
entirely unconscious shortcutting.   On this list, for example, I use LANL (Los 
Alamos National Laboratory) because I believe that *all* Santa Fe/NM folks know 
what it is an acronym for and *many* non SFe (Santa Fe) NM (New Mexico) folks 
know it *by now*.   Similarly I find SFI an acceptable contraction in this 
context. 

On the technical side, the shortcut/contraction/acronym is often the 
primary/preferred reference.   Even if you might not *know* that DNA is 
deoxyribonucleic acid or ATP is adenosine triphosphate... or that the YMCA is 
the young men's christian association, for example, you know the signified by 
that signifier, and in fact you *won't* know what those contractions are *for* 
unless you are in fact using them in some insider/technical sense.

I know people who work within a large  but somewhat insular community whose 
acronyms are myriad and they are truly NOT trying to be exclusionary.   I have 
a number of friends who are either social workers or have studied in the field 
or have friends/families with mental illness so I hear the acronym DSM and I 
can tell it is being used in a very "insider" way.   I know little of the 
details, but I've gathered that "DSM II" somehow connotes both "modern" and 
"not-really-modern" psychiatric models, but I think even if I do the GoogleFu 
to learn the first level of details, I would not be much less puzzled by 
knowing, for example:


DSM-I and DSM-II


In 1952, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) published the DSM-I, an 
adaptation of a classification system developed by the armed forces during WW2. 
It was designed for use by doctors and other treatment providers.

The DSM-I was the first of its kind, but experts agreed that it still needed 
work. The DSM-II, released in 1968, attempted to incorporate the psychiatric 
knowledge of the day. It was heavily influenced by psychoanalytic concepts that 
were prominent at that time.

I think that both Glen and maybe Frank have tossed DSM or even DSM II into the 
conversation here without any more explication than I get at cocktail parties 
and it lands just as dead for me, but not offensive here as there (until I get 
my GoogleGoggles flashing Wikipedia/Wiktionary in my peripheral vision with 
automatic explication).  It even seems like a good feature for 
Alexa/Siri/HeyGoogle to listen continuously and recognize acronyms and offer 
ordered-by-likelihood-from-context explications in your ear (or in the room if 
you want to shame the acronymster acrimoniously).

I understand that many are "lazy typists" who find it patently painful 
(emotionally if not physically) to type anything out.   And *too many people* 
(IMO ... in my opinion) do too much of their correspondence on a TS (tiny 
screen) which requires them to hunt-peck with one finger (maybe two thumbs) 
without touch feedback and without the benefit of QWERTY knowledge built into 
their Neural Net neurons.

I'm assuming Frank's OP (original post) was in response to both some specific 
TLA (three letter acronym) used recently or the accrued irritation of having to 
look up jargon ( especially TLAs and MLAs (multi letter acronyms)) just to 
figure out a conversation he is *otherwise* informed enough on to follow.   Or 
both.  Or maybe he's just taking out his frustration with his daughter here 
where it's "safe" <grin>.

BTW (by the way) and FWIW (for what it's worth) I think I'd be game for one of 
Glen's experiments, even if the constraints offered somehow cramped *my* style 
(e.g. 20 line limit on posts, no markup-like formatting like *bold* or EMPHASIS 
or _underscore_ HTML (even formatting like bold or italics).   or even his 
extremal suggestion of requiring "peer review" by 3 others before submitting 
(I'd probably become rather mute over that one) WTFOMFGROFLMAOGMWAS!

- Steve

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

Reply via email to