1. a word formed from the initial letters or groups of letters of words in a set phrase or series of words, as Wac from Women's Army Core. 2. An acrostic. 3. to make an acronym of.
eilerjc wrote:
Nah, RAID is always better than JBOD
Somebody read Wikipedia and thought it was accurate
An acronym does not have to be pronounceable, that misconception stems from the similarities with an acrostic. Acrostic poems have been around since the 16th century.
Gong, you are wrong. Webster's is your friend but thanks for playing.
1. a word formed from the initial letters or groups of letters of words in a set phrase or series of words, as Wac from Women's Army Core. 2. An acrostic. 3. to make an acronym of.
Education is a wonderful thing!
You seem to be a bit out of your depth on this question. Why is admitting that you're wrong such a big deal to you?
Your particular fallacy with the post above is the implicit assertion that the presence of "2. An acrostic" in the definition supports your position. You couldn't be more wrong. Any one of the sub-definitions is acceptable with reference to a specific acronym.
Hence, by that definition you posted, any "word formed from the initial letters or groups of letters of words in a set phrase or series of words" is an acronym. (In addition, any acrostic is an acronym.) End of story.
Except that #2 is the misuse of the term. Look up what the prefix and suffix of the word means...
What's an Acronym?
An acronym is a pronounceable word formed from each of the first letters of a descriptive phrase or by combining the initial letters or parts of words from the phrase. Here are some examples of acronyms:
North Atlantic Treaty Organization = NATO
MODulator/DEModulator = MODEM
An acronym is actually a type of abbreviation. Our database contains abbreviations, acronyms, and initialisms and we make no distinction between them in our database or on our site. We are more interested in defining "acronyms" for you than we are in trying to properly distinguish between abbreviations, acronyms, and initialisms.
saturnkk wrote:
Except that #2 is the misuse of the term.
No, it's part of the dictionary definition.
saturnkk wrote:
Look up what the prefix and suffix of the word means...
A word's etymology does not determine its meaning in actual use, nor do its prefixes or suffixes.
saturnkk wrote:
North Atlantic Treaty Organization = NATO
MODulator/DEModulator = MODEM
Showing two examples that fit your private definition does not mean that there are no valid acronyms that don't fit your private definition. Another fallacy.
saturnkk wrote:
If I were wrong I would certainly admit it
That's obviously not true. By the dictionary definition you already posted, you are obviously wrong. It's not really all that technical-- I think my three-year-old would have no trouble understanding the definition.
I find that m-w is so progressive that it'll list your wrong use if you misuse a word three times in a blog. The idea that language is an evolving entity may be attractive, but right now English seems to be degenerating into something far less articulate, and forming barriers between its users rather than breaking down those barriers. Mix in political correctness, television and DVD's, the death of rigour, discipline, and Latin and ancient Greek in schools, and you see English becoming something like Orwell's new speak. It is becoming increasingly difficult to express anything subtle in few words, and yet be understood.
I don't think anyone has posted a dictionary definition yet that points to an acrostic-only definition of "acronym".
brainiac wrote:
I find that m-w is so progressive that it'll list your wrong use if you misuse a word three times in a blog. The idea that language is an evolving entity may be attractive, but right now English seems to be degenerating into something far less articulate, and forming barriers between its users rather than breaking down those barriers.
I agree with you, mostly, but "attractive" should probably be "undeniable". The rate of change in the English language is probably at the highest in history, including such sad effects as awful corruptions becoming part of standard use due merely to ignorance. In the end, though, there are authorities on language use, and if they agree that a word is acceptable, it's neither polite nor correct to point it out as unacceptable. Personally, I sometimes settle for being incorrect or an ass, depending on the situation, but always strive not to be an incorrect ass.
(It should probably be noted here that the debated use of the word "acronym" is both fairly well settled and doesn't seem to be due to the corruptive effect of the web. It seems to be both legitimate and harmless.)
In the end, though, we also gain from the changes. Would life be as colorful without "roflcopter", I ask you?
a series of lines or verses in which the first, last or other particular letters when taken in order spell out a word, phrase, etc...
The definition I posted straight from Webster's Unabridged does not refute in any way what I posted.
Common use (or more accurately misuse) has resulted in acronym being used as a synonym with abbreviation.
From Britannica:
acronym-
forms of abbreviation ( in abbreviation )
The combination of the first syllables or letters of component words within phrases or within names having more than one word is common and often produces acronyms, which are pronounced as words and which often cease to be considered abbreviations. An example of this type of abbreviation is the word flak (from German Fliegerabwehrkanone, “antiaircraft...
From American Heritage Dictionary:
acronym. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
...A word formed from the initial letters of a name, such as WAC for Women's Army Corps, or by combining initial letters or parts of a series of words, such as radar...
From Oxford English Dictionary:
acronym
/akrnim/
• noun a word formed from the initial letters of other words (e.g. laser, Aids).
— ORIGIN from Greek akron ‘end, tip’ + onoma ‘name’.
From alt-English-usage:
Strictly, an acronym is a string of initial letters pronounceable
as a word, such as "NATO". Abbreviations like "NBC" have been
variously designated "alphabetisms" and "initialisms", although some
people do call them acronyms.
Lord Fluff wrote:
While we are on such things, here are the ones that drive me nutty...
Aperature - no such word people! It is "Aperture"
Your = Belonging to you, You're = You are.
Ect - the correct abbreviation of Etcetera is Etc
not to mention people who see no need in capitals. annoying. isn't it?
All of those annoy me as well. Another that's pretty common on photography forums:
"Lense" - nope, it's "lens." When I was a moderator on another popular photography forum we had custom code in the forum software that rejected posts with "lense" in them. It was a little wonky at first, incorrectly rejecting "lenses," for example, but we got that worked out before long. For some reason I think they abandoned the rejection list a few years later... but it was nice when it was in place.
Incidentally, I also put a rule in place to reject "aperature."
I find that m-w is so progressive that it'll list your wrong use if you misuse a word three times in a blog. The idea that language is an evolving entity may be attractive, but right now English seems to be degenerating into something far less articulate, and forming barriers between its users rather than breaking down those barriers. Mix in political correctness, television and DVD's, the death of rigour, discipline, and Latin and ancient Greek in schools, and you see English becoming something like Orwell's new speak. It is becoming increasingly difficult to express anything subtle in few words, and yet be understood....Show more →
OMG GTFO.
