Jump to content

Commonly misspelled names


Mantis

Recommended Posts

a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also :  an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters :  initialism

It's the term 'acronym' that is misunderstood, not the term 'initialism'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if the initialisation makes an existing word (e.g. World Health Organisation = WHO), it's an acronym, but if it doesn't (e.g. NATO), it's merely an initialisation?

NATO is both. It is a pronouncable word (acronym) and it is an initialism because it is made up of the first letters of it's component parts. Benelux is an acronym but not an initialism because it is a word but is not made up of the first initial of its component parts. CSKA is an initialism but not an acronym because it is not a pronouncable word but is made of the initials of its component parts.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also :  an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters :  initialism

 

It's the term 'acronym' that is misunderstood, not the term 'initialism'.

 

 

Er no, that's the definition for acronym ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also :  an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters :  initialism

It's the term 'acronym' that is misunderstood, not the term 'initialism'.

 

Er no, that's the definition for acronym ;)

I still don't know what you're on about tbh. I just said above that "NATO" is an acronym and an initialism. FBI is not an acronym and I think your definition alludes to that by pointing FBI towards initialism.

EDIT : I think what is probably happening here (if it hasn't happened already) is that the term acronym has become so abused and twisted as to become wrong in common parlance and now completely interchangeable, a bit like how we can now say "I was literally dead after my run yesterday" and be technically correct according to the OED. I know Simon has the same pet peeve as myself over this. If you do something wrong enough times, it becomes right.

EDIT 2 : Thankfully it looks like it hasn't happened yet. Oxford still says that an acronym must be a 'word' (1|2)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's down to  whether or not it's pronounceable? 

 

Very dubious. Who's to say that CSKA isn't pronounced Cess-kah?

Well it's only dubious in VT-logic :) Ffdhgfggs is pronouncable if you really want it to be.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also :  an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters :  initialism

 

It's the term 'acronym' that is misunderstood, not the term 'initialism'.

 

 

Er no, that's the definition for acronym ;)

 

I still don't know what you're on about tbh. I just said above that "NATO" is an acronym and an initialism. FBI is not an acronym and I think your definition alludes to that by pointing FBI towards initialism.

EDIT : I think what is probably happening here (if it hasn't happened already) is that the term acronym has become so abused and twisted as to become wrong in common parlance and now completely interchangeable, a bit like how we can now say "I was literally dead after my run yesterday" and be technically correct according to the OED. I know Simon has the same pet peeve as myself over this. If you do something wrong enough times, it becomes right.

EDIT 2 : Thankfully it looks like it hasn't happened yet. Oxford still says that an acronym must be a 'word' (1|2)

 

 

In which case, NATO is not an acroynym, as there's no such thing as a "nato". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See also

"Atletico Bilbao"

no!

To be honest I can't recall seeing/hearing that. Athletico Madrid is a common one too.

Yeah I think some people are unsure so they hedge their bets, which guarantees they'll be wrong :)

Both Bilbao & Madrid used Athletic & Atlético at some point in both their pasts. Bilbao is actually a good argument against Rev's point above about using 2 different languages in a club name. They've chosen an English word that has an obvious Spanish equivalent to use with their Spanish city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I give up :) The first time I don't include the term 'pronouncable' and you interpret it to mean it must be in the dictionary.

 

Merely quoting your post: 

 

 

 

Oxford still says that an acronym must be a 'word' 

 

ANYTHING is pronounceable. 

 

Lllanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch is, and as you say: 

 

 

 

Ffdhgfggs is pronouncable if you really want it to be

 

But it's not a "word" - whereas Lllanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch IS. 

 

Therefore LLLANFAIRPWLLGWYNGYLLGOGERYCHWYRNDROBWLLLLANTYSILIOGOGOGOCH would be a valid acronym, but FFDHGFGGS wouldn't (it would merely be an initialisation). 

 

All of which leads me to the point that by your definition, NATO is not an acronym. 

Edited by mjmooney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gençlerbirliği.

I used to think was Jen-kler-behr-ligee (i.e. phoenetic).

avfc_hitz can correct me here but I've now learned it is Gen-shler-bir-lihee (that's a hard 'G' as in 'Goal').

 

 

Anyhoo, carry on... (football pronunciations interest me :))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I give up :) The first time I don't include the term 'pronouncable' and you interpret it to mean it must be in the dictionary.

 

Merely quoting your post: 

 

Oxford still says that an acronym must be a 'word' 

 

ANYTHING is pronounceable. 

 

Lllanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch is, and as you say: 

 

Ffdhgfggs is pronouncable if you really want it to be

 

But it's not a "word" - whereas Lllanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch IS. 

 

Therefore LLLANFAIRPWLLGWYNGYLLGOGERYCHWYRNDROBWLLLLANTYSILIOGOGOGOCH would be a valid acronym, but FFDHGFGGS wouldn't (it would merely be an initialisation). 

 

All of which leads me to the point that by your definition, NATO is not an acronym. 

Yeah you're misinterpreting the word 'word' in the context I'm using it. That's probably what I'm not making clear. It doesn't have to be in the dictionary so it's not a word in that sense. 'Laser' wasn't in the dictionary when they coined the acronym. It was only until it became so common as to be put there that it became a dictionary word.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that but it's hard to know where to draw the line.

I'm fine with people calling Cazorla "cah - zore - lah" as opposed to "cathorla" because we're english. And that's how we say it.

But then nobody called Thierry Henry "Hen - ree", and it would have seemed silly if we did.

I think you should pronounce people's names as they themselves pronounce them. That's a basic courtesy in my book.

For place names though, you should typically go with your own language rather than translating them into the local language i.e. 'Sweden' not 'Sverige' or 'Barcelona' not 'Barthelona'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â