Keith Willoughby
[email protected] opined the following...
> Jon Senior wrote:
>
> > Keith Willoughby
[email protected] opined the
> > following... And "pin" means?
> >
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pin&db=* will
> > provide some answers. The page contains two definitions
> > which are abbreviations. If you treat "pin" as a word in
> > its own right, then a "pin number" makes no sense
>
> Sure it does. Everyone knows what a PIN number is. All the
> sense in the world.
And the same people also understand PIN, since it is
contextual. When the case machine asks you to type in your
pin, you don't start looking for a sewing accessory. It is
shorter, and retains a sensible meaning, in that expansion
will reveal what it is asking for. Again... PIN Number
contains redundancy.
> > (Except possibly when referring to a large numbered
> > collection of sharp metallic objects!). If it is an
> > abbreviation, then the sentence should make sense with
> > the abbreviation expanded.
>
> Why?
Because otherwise its meaning is lost. You don't request a
passwordword. Why request a numbernumber?
> >> No, hang on. The subject is the use of neologisms, not
> >> what's on TV. How does the creation of the word
> >> 'lasing' indicate 'dumbing down'? Who on Earth is using
> >> 'lasing' in a 'dumb' manner? How does the 50-year usage
> >> of "Phonetic Alphabet" lead to dumbing down?
> >
> > "Lasing" is indicative of dumbing down because it
> > provides a continuous tense for a non-existant verb.
>
> The verb exists. Deal with it.
So I gather... I stand corrected (If horrified!).
> > The usage of "Phonetic Alphabet" does not necessarily
> > lead to dumbing down (Although in some cases it does
> > lead to misunderstanding). It does however shown up a
> > lack of understanding.
>
> No. *****ing about it shows a lack of understanding of how
> language is used.
Badly you mean? I have offered my experience of how the use
of the phrase "Phonetic Alphabet" has produced people who do
not know what phonetic means. Since we don't yet have
another word for that, but have a perfectly servicable
phrase in the form of "Spelling Alphabet", I see good cause
to encourage its use.
> We've been calling a lizard a "slow worm" for hundreds of
> years, for exampe, and English has survived.
Funny. In my life time I've only come across "slow worm"
about two or three times (including this one). It took a
while before I found out that the thing that is called a
lizard might actually be known as a slow worm.
> >> You said yourself that you correct people whenever it
> >> comes up. It appears to be a crusade.
> >
> > The key point here is "whenever it comes up". It has
> > come up now about 3 times in my life. You implied that I
> > go out of my way to bring the topic up.
>
> No, I didn't. I said whenever you get the opportunity. Ie,
> whenever it comes up. The other interpretation of that is
> "every single waking hour", which would be . . . a
> perverse interpretation.
"Crusade". The crusades were not about occasional
corrections of opinion, they involved invasion and mass-
slaughter. To liken my three corrections to a crusade
implies (Whether you intended it to or not) that I go out of
my way to bring this topic up.
> > I do not.
> > I never suggested it was (Although it may be indicative
> > of such a tendency). Having abusive language as a
> > considered response to a stranger offering a correction
> > would suggest sociopathic behaviour.
>
> Maybe where you come from. Where I come from - Earth -
> correcting strangers on their use of correct words is
> considered rude behaviour.
Funny. We expect teachers to do it all day. Who said
education had to stop when you leave school? I enjoy using
my brain, and welcome new information. It would appear that
you don't. Any chance of posting JPGs in case there is ever
any danger of us meeting?
Jon
