Innovation in IT

Surpassing expectations, accelerating success

 Home  |  Company |  Services |  Products |  Downloads |  Support |  Contact |   Search
 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Acronym Resources

What is your view in the Great Acronym Debate?

Click here to post your view

There is a great debate brewing about what is and isn't an acronym.  The etymology of acronym is: 'Acr-' which is from Greek, meaning tip, and -onym that is from English meaning 'name'.   American Notes & Queries (Feb 1943): 167/1, records the first use of acronym writing that it is a: "Word, made up of the initial letters or syllables of other words I have seen ... called by the name acronym." 

On one side of the debate, some refer to the use of 'word' in the definition of acronym means that a group of initials can only be considered an acronym if they are pronounceable, just as RADAR (Radio Detection and Ranging).  Any other groupings of initials should be considered abbreviations, or initialisms. They often base their conclusion on various dictionary entries considering this to be the end of the story.  The strength of the argument to replace the use of 'acronym' with 'initialism' based on the fact that some dictionaries say that an acronym has to be pronounceable, appears to be only slightly hampered by the fact that very few dictionaries recognize that 'initialism' is a word at all.

Others believe that sticking to the etymology of the word implies "word taken from the beginning of words" and that ability to pronounce the word is entirely secondary.  Indeed, why should people have to use multiple words to describe what is fundamentally the same thing?  They can cite the fact that the definition of 'word' found at Dictionary.com is: "A sound or a combination of sounds, or its representation in writing or printing, that symbolizes and communicates a meaning and may consist of a single morpheme or of a combination of morphemes." (Morphemes being: "A meaningful linguistic unit consisting of a word, such as man, or a word element, such as -ed in walked, that cannot be divided into smaller meaningful parts.").  Doesn't IBM communicate a meaning the exact way that NASA does? Therefore, shouldn't IBM be considered an acronym based on the original definition of the word? 

Click here to post your view