atw: Re: Pronounseeashun [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
- From: Peter.Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 14:07:10 +1100
Geoffrey said:
>And texters create acronyms and initialisms, just as we have done for
centuries. Just as ?bus?, ?pram? and ?phone? have become accepted >usage,
there is no logical reason why ?U? could not come to be conventional usage
in, say, 2112.
... except that then we'd have the plural form as "U's" and half of this
list would drop off the twig in apoplexies.... :-)
Peter M
From: "Geoffrey" <geoffrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 06/01/2012 11:41 AM
Subject: atw: Re: Pronounseeashun
Sent by: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Christine, we?ve been truncating English words since time immemorial.
There?s not much new in texters writing ?U? instead of ?you?. We travel in
a bus these days, not an omnibus. We take kids out for a spin in a pram,
not a perambulator. We use ?phone? more often than ?telephone?. And
texters create acronyms and initialisms, just as we have done for
centuries. Just as ?bus?, ?pram? and ?phone? have become accepted usage,
there is no logical reason why ?U? could not come to be conventional usage
in, say, 2112.
Geoffrey Marnell
Principal Consultant
Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd
P: 03 9596 3456
M: 0419 574 668
F: 03 9596 3625
W: www.abelard.com.au
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christine Kent
Sent: Friday, 6 January 2012 11:00 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: Pronounseeashun
So Geoff, if your audience is almost completely people who text, can
written language also be reduced to texted language?
I must confess that I tend to ignore twitter feeds which use texting
language, but it is becoming more and more the norm in order to say more
in less space. Why would we not abbreviate you to U, given there is no
competing word in English so its meaning is abundantly clear? Similarly,
as it?s and its are quite different in context, why not miss the
apostrophe given the meaning is abundantly clear. I haven?t worked it
through with there and their, but I would also guess that context is all
we need to know which is which, so let?s simplify life and make them both
?there?. At the same time let?s make let?s lets as its meaning is also
abundantly clear in context.
--
This message contains privileged and confidential information only
for use by the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
recipient of this message, you must not disseminate, copy or use
it in any manner. If you have received this message in error,
please advise the sender by reply e-mail. Please ensure all
e-mail attachments are scanned for viruses prior to opening or
using.
Other related posts: