Acronym WTF



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    [citation needed] 

    90% of the articles on Bad Science do it for you?



  • @fatdog said:

    Ordenador comes from ordinateur because they prefered to translate from french than english.. usually a lot of tech related words, they preffer to translate from french than from english.

    Oh, so that's where it came from. I didn't find the relation between "sorting machine" and "computer", maybe it comes from something like "order giver" which is another interpretation I can get from that.@fatdog said:

    Fichero comes from FICHA, which is a word also used to define tab files or whatever you call those old rectangle thingies where people took notes (A.K.A = FILE).  So it's a perfect valid translation , although too literal.  I do prefer "archivos" instead.

    Yep, I know what a ficha is, I usually relate the concept ficha with the small cards we used to have in public libraries, when searching books. Also, the same small cards used to write book summaries. Anyway, I relate the term with those small cards, and can't just see a small card as a "file". (Ok, maybe a small file? ;)@fatdog said:

    Spanish is a phonetic language, were you usually spell it just like it sounds.. No one in Spain pronounces Mexico with the X sound.. they will alway pronouce it with an J sound. 

    That is why the write "beicon" instead of "bacon".. and shit like that on some anglicisims. 

    Heh. The fun thing is that X in fact has three phonetic equivalences: the regular x, the "sh" sound, and "j" sound. It was this last one that left "Mexico" like that, but it isn't the only case: Xalapa, Xoco, and the Quixote's original spelling. Granted, some of these words usually exchange j for x; but the general rule is that prehispanic-based words usually preserve the x. In fact, some of this "x/j" words were actually pronounced "sh", so in fact "Mexico" should be pronounced as "Meshico".

    This is also the reason Spaniards have a lot of trouble with x-words over here: X can be /x/, /j/, /sh/ or /s/ depending on the word. Its interesting how the same language has these kind of differences depedning on the country, but then again, Mexican Spanish kind of acquired some Nahuatl and Maya loanwords ("chabacano" and "tlapaleria" as an example.)



  • @Monkios said:

    I never quite understood why in all langange, AIDS is called AIDS but in french
    it is called SIDA ...

    It's called СПИД in my language. Learn to deal.



  • @Jake Grey said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    [citation needed] 

    90% of the articles on Bad Science do it for you?

    What the hell does that prove?  I'm not even sure of the veracity of those stories, but at most it signifies that a lot of bad science comes from the US.  The most rational explanation for this would be that so much science comes from the US that even the small portion that is bad is quite large. 



  • If you go to the wikipedia article for AIDS, you can look at how it's written in the other languages, and notice that AIDS is not universal. For instance, in Portuguese, Spanish, French and Romanian, it's SIDA. This means that AIDS is not universal. Therefore, you're an idiot.

    As for we French feeling more important than they actually are, that's not the issue. The issue is, if you big people listen to us whining, then we're winning. And fighting with the big people at least pulls us in that direction. For instance, Germany has stronger industry, because they try to be the best of the second grade, whereas the French have a stronger research, because they try to keep up with world class research. For instance, Germans and Italians produce the best cars, French produce spacecraft.

    So, next time you decide to scoff on someone else, try not to be an idiot.

    Ok, I admit that we French have a too good opinion of ourselves.

     



  • @ruijoel said:

    Gibberish nationalistic nonsense

    Is that sarcasm? I didn't get it.



  • @DrJokepu said:

    @ruijoel said:
    Gibberish nationalistic nonsense

    Is that sarcasm? I didn't get it.

    He was responding to a nationalist flamebait, ironically written in the very thread where certain members claimed that sort of thing was completely unnacceptable and something they never would do:

    @bstorer said:

     @Monkios said:

    I never quite understood why in all langange, AIDS is called AIDS but in french it is called SIDA ...

    The
    French are extremely protective of their language because they've got
    an outdated view of their importance at the global level.

    ruijoel -- I apologize for missing that flamebait post earlier on ... please ignore his ignorance or his "joke", or whatever it is supposed to be, and let's get back to more acronym talk!

     



  • @Jeff S said:

    ruijoel -- I apologize for missing that flamebait post earlier on ... please ignore his ignorance or his "joke", or whatever it is supposed to be, and let's get back to more acronym talk!

    It's not flamebait, it's fact. The French are extremely protective of their language and dislike loanwords, especially those from English. Perhaps you recall the French Culture Ministry, for example, famously banning the use of "e-mail" within the government, favoring "courriel" instead? And that's to say nothing of the Toubon Law. There's a reason so many words are coming into French from other places; you tend to need a lot fewer loanwords when you're the one inventing the new stuff (and subsequently the associated terms).

    In the future, try doing some research before you assume something is flamebait. Just because you're ignorant on an issue doesn't mean we all are.



  • @bstorer said:

    @Jeff S said:

    ruijoel -- I apologize for missing that flamebait post earlier on ... please ignore his ignorance or his "joke", or whatever it is supposed to be, and let's get back to more acronym talk!

    It's not flamebait, it's fact. The French are extremely protective of their language and dislike loanwords, especially those from English. Perhaps you recall the French Culture Ministry, for example, famously banning the use of "e-mail" within the government, favoring "courriel" instead? And that's to say nothing of the Toubon Law. There's a reason so many words are coming into French from other places; you tend to need a lot fewer loanwords when you're the one inventing the new stuff (and subsequently the associated terms).

    In the future, try doing some research before you assume something is flamebait. Just because you're ignorant on an issue doesn't mean we all are.

     

    Nice try, bstorer.  All of what you just wrote here is all fine and well, but you didn't quite write that in your other post, did you? Or, is this the new tact for you guys -- flamebait as per usual, but now innocently claim "it was misinterpreted!" and you meant something else, and once again you are being singled out and picked on?  Great, more fun for everyone .... Anyway, feel free to discuss further with me via PM...




  • @Jeff S said:

    All of what you just wrote here is all fine and well, but you didn't quite write that in your other post, did you? Or, is this the new tact for you guys -- flamebait as per usual, but now innocently claim "it was misinterpreted!" and you meant something else, and once again you are being singled out and picked on? 
    Jesus Christ, man. Why don't you chill the fuck out? It wasn't intended as flamebait. You tried to call me on it, I provided backup. There are probably 20 completely unsubstantiated claims thrown out on this site every day without you saying word one, but for some reason I have to provide a bibliography for every goddamn statement I make? Do you want it in APA format, or will Chicago do?



  • @bstorer said:

    @Jeff S said:
    All of what you just wrote here is all fine and well, but you didn't quite write that in your other post, did you? Or, is this the new tact for you guys -- flamebait as per usual, but now innocently claim "it was misinterpreted!" and you meant something else, and once again you are being singled out and picked on? 
    Jesus Christ, man. Why don't you chill the fuck out? It wasn't intended as flamebait. You tried to call me on it, I provided backup. There are probably 20 completely unsubstantiated claims thrown on this site every day without you saying word one, but for some reason I have to provide a bibliography for every goddamn statement I make? Do you want it in APA format, or will Chicago do?
     

    I don't recall asking for backup or references or using morbius's favorite [citation needed] line ... wow, you are really backtracking quickly here. calm down, it's ok.  we'll let it slide and move on....

    Clearly, I am not the one who initially took that post for flamebait -- you saw the response it got.  And, if it wasn't intended as flamebait, if it was just poorly worded -- then great! Just say that intially, don't start posting facts and arguments and citations to try to justify your choice of words! Just initially write "sorry, that was poorly worded, here's what I meant..." and we all move on, I aplogize to you for accusing you of purposefully flaming, the other guy apologizes for calling you an idiot, etc.  So, if you simply didn't mean to start a flamewar, then that's great, I believe you, let's all learn from this, and understand that we sometimes need to be careful what we write so our intentions are clear. 

    UPDATE:  edited the post a bit to clean it up. probably too much. If you already responded to the question I posed in my original post, I apologize and will still address your answer if you like.



  •  @morbiuswilters said:

    It's not irrational and nobody ever claimed it was.

    No, it is irrational, and I did claim it to be. Maybe instead of a mathematical term, I should have used a grammatical one? Such as "irregular"? Ah well, let's try again, shall we?

    It's irregular because, unlike AIDS/SIDA, EU/UE, etc., the English equivalent of "CERN" is indeed "CERN". Yet in English, the letters "CERN" don't stand for the French name, but the English name. If it were regular, then the English acronym would be "EONR".

    With "TOTEM", its current definition does not match the letters used, which is irregular. So similarly, given its new definition of "Total Cross Section, Elastic Scattering and Diffraction Dissociation", the acronym "TOTEM" should actually be updated to something like "TOCSESDID"; or more likely "TOCSED". As it stands, it can hardly be called "regular".

    And given that neither "EONR" nor "TOCSED" are as snappy as "CERN" and "TOTEM", it's plain to see why those acronyms were imported (from French, and from a previous definition) into current English usage. They're both examples of irregular usage, but (and this is why I posted originally) it's not something you can call "WTF" on, because language is irregular. Yeah, okay, you see a list of acronyms and one doesn't match its definition, it's going to make you stop and think.

    Or on the OP's case, stop and post-immediately-to-tdwtf.com! No time to think about it... sheesh.

    And hey:

    • About that "American" jab -- I'm genuinely sorry about that, I thought I was on /. where people have learnt (mostly) to ignore crap like that, or at least, laugh at it and not take it personally. (Kinda like the real world -- and yes, I live in the US, and I make cracks like that all the time, and my nose is distinctly unbroken.)
    • bstorer may not be completely correct about the French having a distorted view of the importance of their language, but he's damned close. It's actually part of the protectionist policies of France, wherein everything French is vigourously defended.

    Pleased to see a huge flamefest between mods and frequent posters. Nice work, TDWTF!

     



  • @Jeff S said:

    Clearly, I am not the one who initially took that post for flamebait -- you saw the response it got. And, if it wasn't intended as flamebait, if it was just poorly worded -- then great! Just say that intially, don't start posting facts and arguments and citations to try to justify your choice of words!
    Combine the facts that he didn't quote anyone, that I didn't think it applied to me because the first part was about something I never said (AIDS being a universal term), and that I couldn't parse the middle section (something about whining and winning?), and the end result is that I didn't even realize his post was in response to me. Otherwise, I would have told him what I told you.  So, yes, I'm sorry I couldn't understand what he was getting at, or I would have handled it myself.

    @Jeff S said:

    So, if you simply didn't mean to start a flamewar, then that's great, I believe you, let's all learn from this, and understand that we sometimes need to be careful what we write so our intentions are clear. 
    Here is where I disagree with you: by this line of reasoning, I have to provide qualifications and citations for everything I write, lest someone misunderstand me or take offense.  I don't think this is practical.  Better to make your statement and provide factual support for any part someone challenges you on.

    I tried a few different phrasings of my initial post before settling on
    that one because I was trying not to make or even imply any subjective
    judgements.  It was still misunderstood.  Oh, well.  That's why there's
    a reply button.



  • @bstorer said:

    Combine the facts that he didn't quote anyone, that I didn't think it applied to me because the first part was about something I never said (AIDS being a universal term), and that I couldn't parse the middle section (something about whining and winning?), and the end result is that I didn't even realize his post was in response to me. Otherwise, I would have told him what I told you.  So, yes, I'm sorry I couldn't understand what he was getting at, or I would have handled it myself.
     

     FYI -- the "reply to" link tells you the post he replied to.




  • @Jeff S said:

    FYI -- the "reply to" link tells you the post he replied to.
    I know, I just didn't care enough to use it.  But while we're on the subject, I still miss the old CS style where it actually said something like "#802342 in reply to #389243" and had a link.  I dunno why, it just seemed better.



  • @Jeff S said:

    @bstorer said:

    @Jeff S said:
    All of what you just wrote here is all fine and well, but you didn't quite write that in your other post, did you? Or, is this the new tact for you guys -- flamebait as per usual, but now innocently claim "it was misinterpreted!" and you meant something else, and once again you are being singled out and picked on? 
    Jesus Christ, man. Why don't you chill the fuck out? It wasn't intended as flamebait. You tried to call me on it, I provided backup. There are probably 20 completely unsubstantiated claims thrown on this site every day without you saying word one, but for some reason I have to provide a bibliography for every goddamn statement I make? Do you want it in APA format, or will Chicago do?
     

    I don't recall asking for backup or references or using morbius's favorite [citation needed] line ... wow, you are really backtracking quickly here. calm down, it's ok.  we'll let it slide and move on....

    Clearly, I am not the one who initially took that post for flamebait -- you saw the response it got.  And, if it wasn't intended as flamebait, if it was just poorly worded -- then great! Just say that intially, don't start posting facts and arguments and citations to try to justify your choice of words! Just initially write "sorry, that was poorly worded, here's what I meant..." and we all move on, I aplogize to you for accusing you of purposefully flaming, the other guy apologizes for calling you an idiot, etc.  So, if you simply didn't mean to start a flamewar, then that's great, I believe you, let's all learn from this, and understand that we sometimes need to be careful what we write so our intentions are clear. 

    UPDATE:  edited the post a bit to clean it up. probably too much. If you already responded to the question I posed in my original post, I apologize and will still address your answer if you like.

    Hey Jeff, as a moderator do you get a special badge, or maybe a hat with a flashing blue light?

     



  • @upsidedowncreature said:

    Hey Jeff, as a moderator do you get a special badge, or maybe a hat with a flashing blue light?
     

    Each year for the holidays, Alex sends each moderator a delicious fruit cake.  It makes all this well worth it!



  • @bstorer said:

    @Jeff S said:
    FYI -- the "reply to" link tells you the post he replied to.
    I know, I just didn't care enough to use it.  But while we're on the subject, I still miss the old CS style where it actually said something like "#802342 in reply to #389243" and had a link.  I dunno why, it just seemed better.
    There's a good reason you feel that way.  It was better before.



  • @Jeff S said:

    @bstorer said:
    The French are extremely protective of their language because they've got an outdated view of their importance at the global level.

    ruijoel -- I apologize for missing that flamebait post earlier on ... please ignore his ignorance or his "joke", or whatever it is supposed to be, and let's get back to more acronym talk!


    That's not a flamebait actually in my opinion. I had the chance to live in France for quite a while and I think they indeed have an outdated view of their global importance. I think the best way to measure how globally important a nation's citizens think they are is the weather report in major national TV networks. Most European countries only report the weather in the country itself and possibly the regions of neighbouring countries close to the border. Now the French usually report the weather of the whole world with an accent on their former colonies. There is no way anybody in Australia or New Zealand or Mongolia is ever watching TF1 for weather updates.



  • Best post ever!


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.