Talk:Acronym/Archive 4

Merge suggestion
I believe this article plus syllabic abbreviation should be merged into subsections of abbreviation. Acronyms, initialisms, and syllabic abbreviations are all types of abbreviations that don't really need their own pages, but they should have their own subsections within the abbreviation article. This will organize things a bit. Subversive 07:21, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I believe that the articles on acronym and initialism should be merged - they entail the reduction of each component word in a set array to one letter each. However, they are not forms of abbreviation. Abbreviation truncates a word to the point where it is as short as it can be without detracting from ease of ascribing a meaning to that word. See 'Radar' for an example - RAdio Detecting And Ranging. The word 'Detecting' can be reasonably abbreviated to 'Detec', however reducing it to simply one letter, 'D', is not an abbreviation but rather a representation. -- Jason, 20:02 CST, 01-03-06.

Is there any method of reasoning for using the acronym in its native language or translating and making an acronym out of that? I'm not entirely sure where one would find this information. I thought I would ask here, as you fellows seem to know a bit about the subject--Gigaleon 21:22, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Rationale for my edits:

 * Change from
 * However, there is a distinction between acronyms and initialisms
 * to
 * However, some have argued that there is a distinction between acronyms and initialisms

Obviously more NPOV because it ascribes an opinion to those who hold it, rather than asserting the opinion.


 * Change from
 * This distinction between the two types of abbreviations is supported by dictionary definitions, but is not universally agreed upon.
 * to
 * This distinction is supported by some dictionary definitions, but not by others

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary clearly does not support the distinction if you consult its definitions for acronym and initialism.


 * Change from
 * the word acronym actually refers only to those cases where the letters form a pronounceable word, like "NATO" or "AIDS", and the term initialism is used for abbreviations which are pronounced instead by sounding out the name of each constituent letter.
 * to
 * some usage writers make a distinction between acronyms and initialisms. They reserve the word acronym only for those cases where the letters form a pronounceable word, like "NATO" or "AIDS", and the term initialism is used for abbreviations which are pronounced instead by sounding out the name of each constituent letter.

Better to ascribe the opinion about the distinction to those who hold it, rather than to baldly assert it.


 * Change from
 *  Initialism originally referred to abbreviations formed from initials, without reference to pronunciation, but during the middle portion of the twentieth century, when acronyms and initialisms saw more use than ever before, the word acronym was coined for abbreviations which are pronounced as a word (e.g. NATO), and the term initialism was restricted in meaning to those abbreviations which are pronounced as the names of letters (e.g. HTML).
 * to
 * During the middle portion of the twentieth century, when acronyms and initialisms saw more use than ever before, there was some effort made to codify the nomenclature. While some people extended the meaning of acronym to include abbreviations which were pronounced as the names of letters, others restricted initialism to only those abbreviations which were pronounced as the names of letters. Previously initialism referred to abbreviations formed from initials, without reference to pronunciation.

Parallelize the development of the nomenclature, rather than describe only the conservative development.


 * Removal of the words acronyms, abbreviations, and initialisms from the examples.

Better not to make a claim about how to categorize each type of definition when there isn't agreement about how to categorize them. Let the readers make their own decisions about what they are.

Nohat 17:32, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I've done some further NPOVing along that line, but reintroduced the historic note on the meaning of the words, as it is central to understanding how some could have come to call initialisms acronyms. {&Alpha;&nu;&#940;&rho;&iota;&omicron;&nu;} 18:16, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I removed the claim:


 *  leaving no way to describe acronyms under the dictionary definition.

because it's not only POV but patently false. "Acronyms pronounced as words" would be a way to describe the more restrictive definition. Nohat 22:33, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * It's interesting that everything that you disagree with is malevolently POV, Nohat. Accept good faith, remember? I guessed not. {&Alpha;&nu;&#940;&rho;&iota;&omicron;&nu;} 15:44, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Written usage
I removed the "curiously enough" clause from the paragraph talking about acronyms with no meaning. It seemed out of place in an encyclopedia. --Whursey 21:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)