abreevs

[Tom Zurinskas]

Seems like "clipping" is a poor term because that word can stand for many things.  Also it doesn't take the form of the word, like eggcorn or mondegreen.  "Abbreev" does and means the same thing, "a foreshortened word".  The term "truncated" is good but needs to be "trunced" to take the form and that doesn't look right (like a ~s for "c").  To trunc or not to trunc.  To abbreev or not to abbreev.  To clip or not to clip.  That is the question.

Common abbreevs:

tech (technical)
delish (delicious)
app  (application)
regs (regulations)
comm (communication)
org (organization)
fab (fabulous)
prep (prepare)
dorm (dormatory)
coed (female co-educational student)

There must be a million.  Perhaps there should be a rule.  A true abbreev should be a foreshortening that creates a unique word in line with the root word in context.  That might make some foreshortenings not qualify, such as "fab which could be "fabulous" or "fabricate".  but in context it could work.



Tom Zurinskas, USA - CT20, TN3, NJ33, FL7+
see truespel.com phonetic spelling










> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 12:51:03 -0500
> From: paul.johnston at WMICH.EDU
> Subject: Re: abreevs
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster: Paul Johnston <paul.johnston at WMICH.EDU>
> Subject: Re: abreevs
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dear Joel,
> With hedges, yes. With words,. not really, although you can have front-clippings (examination > exam) or back-clippings (pizza > za). You can even have clippings that involve suffixation too (British breakfast > brekkie).
>
> Paul Johnston
> On Dec 11, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Joel S. Berson wrote:
>
> > ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> > Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > Poster: "Joel S. Berson" <Berson at ATT.NET>
> > Subject: Re: abreevs
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > At 12/10/2010 01:53 PM, Laurence Horn wrote:
> >> At 1:34 PM -0500 12/10/10, Paul Johnston wrote:
> >>> Dear Tom,
> >>> The technical term for these is "clippings."
> >>
> >> ..or *a* technical term. Another is "truncation(s)". I use
> >> "clipping" and "truncation" interchangeably, and AFAIK others do as
> >> well.
> >
> > And aren't clippings what's cut off, not what remains?
> >
> > Joel
> >
> >
> >> LH
> >>
> >>> Paul Johnston
> >>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 12:23 PM, Tom Zurinskas wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> >>>> -----------------------
> >>>> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> >>>> Poster: Tom Zurinskas <truespel at HOTMAIL.COM>
> >>>> Subject: Re: freshman comp
> >>>>
> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>> What's a "comp" and a "perp?" I'd call them "abbreevs"
> >>>> (abbreviations). I think we should prep ourselves for receiving
> >>>> lots of abbreevs in comps, what with texting and all. A ref listing
> >>>> would be fab.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Tom Zurinskas, USA - CT20, TN3, NJ33, FL7+
> >>>> see truespel.com phonetic spelling
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> >>>>> -----------------------
> >>>>> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> >>>>> Poster: ronbutters at AOL.COM
> >>>>> Subject: freshman comp
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As a former Director of Freshman English at Duke, I'd have
> >>>>> suggested that Barbara rethink her judgment. The interpretation of
> >>>>> the passage is clear, and if indeed the putatively unusual
> >>>>> reference causes a momentary "shock" for some readers, the change
> >>>>> of pace is stylistically refreshing--and functional, in TBat it
> >>>>> draws special attention to the content: the crimes (if that is
> >>>>> what they are) of the perp.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You can of course argue that the editorial history of the passage
> >>>>> indicates that the author did not intend the stylistically effect
> >>>>> that I assert the passage has. But that is irrelevant to how the
> >>>>> reader would be affected. The reader knows nothing about the
> >>>>> history of the passage. Moreover, one can just as well argue that
> >>>>> the opposite is true, ie., the author felt the changes actually
> >>>>> improved the sentences.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Barbara wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As a some-time composition instructor, even with a fuller context, I
> >>>>> would have marked this example as a problem.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Barbara
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Barbara Need
> >>>>> Ithaca
> >>>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org