|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 24, 2009 16:10:31 GMT
uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090318/tuk-are-you-cutting-out-coterminosity-dba1618.htmlthis is a list of all the office 'jargon' that we're supposed to laugh at and not use. But, typical BBC, it's not right. It says the 'coterminosity' means 'singing from the same hymn sheet'. It doesn't. 'Coterminosity' is NOT jargon. It is an incredibly useful concept, and I use the word daily to discuss what geographical area my services cover, and what geographical area other peoples services cover. E.g. we have acheived coterminosity with police divisions, but not with the Sheriffdom. What is it with people who don't work in offices that they think it's so hilarious to slag off the words we use? Nobody ever picks on scientists for this, and they DO use a whole lot of daft words that nobody else understands.
|
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 24, 2009 16:12:23 GMT
P.S.
Also 'advocate' and 'support' are not the same thing at all.
'Agencies' and 'groups' are completely different things.
'Best Practice' has a meaning way beyond 'best way',
etc. etc . etc.
The BBC's list is a pile of steamingly smug dung, written by the 17 year old work experience boy who thinks he's so much smarter than everyone else on account of getting an A star on his Sociology A level.
|
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 24, 2009 16:13:29 GMT
FFS.
For 'paradigm' it says "Why use at all?"
ANSWER - BECAUSE IT'S A USEFUL WORD THAT ACCURATELY DESCRIBES A CONCEPT.
|
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 24, 2009 16:24:41 GMT
or sports people or doctors...this is quite a good bloody point!
I saw that councils were being asked to remove their office-speak when corresponding with the public, that's a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 24, 2009 16:28:25 GMT
or sports people or doctors...this is quite a good bloody point! I saw that councils were being asked to remove their office-speak when corresponding with the public, that's a good idea. And how would it simplify life if I was to write to you to explain a problem caused by your health board area not being coterminous with your education area (say) if I wasn't allowed to use the word coterminous? And if you had a housing problem and had to go to the council about it, would you rather I supported you or advocated for you? Or would you think they were the same thing. I AM ANGRY. SERIOUSLY ANGRY. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2009 16:52:38 GMT
I SAY WE SHOULD REMOVE ALL LANGUAGE and do cave paintings n stuff, like a picture of me hunting a wild corn beef.
|
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 24, 2009 17:02:10 GMT
Support isn't jargon... is it?
Couldn't you just speak on behalf of me, Riot?
|
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 24, 2009 17:04:21 GMT
I think caves would be impractical for faxing etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2009 17:07:42 GMT
QWELL yes but you just rip off the bit of designated cave painbting what you wish to send and then frizbee it at the head of the recipiant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flatypus on Mar 24, 2009 17:24:36 GMT
I don't think it's jargon words that are the problem in themselves, it's use of jargon to people who don't understand it (and per deos could legal jargon be a worse example?) and much more sloppy use of jargon terms unnecessarily, for which the police used to be such a good example that an author noted where posh language in most Anglophone countries is that of the Royal Court, in Australia it is that of the Police Court. Police proceed because how they were doing it is irrelevent. At the same time, the public usually walk, ride or drive.
It's striking to compare how readily now that computers are universal, people use computer jargon and extend it in exactly the same way into other areas where when they were rare, we were being cursed for using jargon like databse or operating system and equally being cursed as patronising or [/i]long-winded[/i] for explaining them in all their awkward detail.
|
|
|
|
Post by motorist on Mar 24, 2009 18:01:54 GMT
QWELL yes but you just rip off the bit of designated cave painbting what you wish to send and then frizbee it at the head of the recipiant. Not bad. You could put pictures saying "have you got a headache" on it |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 24, 2009 18:03:45 GMT
Support isn't jargon... is it? Couldn't you just speak on behalf of me, Riot? If I was advocating for you I could, but not if I was supporting you as that would not be best practice. |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Mar 24, 2009 18:23:32 GMT
But, typical BBC, it's not right. It says the 'coterminosity' means 'singing from the same hymn sheet'. It doesn't. 'Coterminosity' is NOT jargon. It is an incredibly useful concept, and I use the word daily to discuss what geographical area my services cover, and what geographical area other peoples services cover. But to be fair, this is nothing to do with the BBC - the list was compiled by the Local Government Association: www.localgov.co.uk/index.cfm?method=news.detail&id=76554While there's a case for explaining jargon in ordinary language to the layperson, what's scary here is that the people who are supposed to understand the jargon in its proper technical context clearly don't understand it at all. |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 24, 2009 18:31:50 GMT
But, typical BBC, it's not right. It says the 'coterminosity' means 'singing from the same hymn sheet'. It doesn't. 'Coterminosity' is NOT jargon. It is an incredibly useful concept, and I use the word daily to discuss what geographical area my services cover, and what geographical area other peoples services cover. But to be fair, this is nothing to do with the BBC - the list was compiled by the Local Government Association: www.localgov.co.uk/index.cfm?method=news.detail&id=76554While there's a case for explaining jargon in ordinary language to the layperson, what's scary here is that the people who are supposed to understand the jargon in its proper technical context clearly don't understand it at all. Apologies to the BBC then. I assumed it was their YTS Trainee who had compiled the list & its alternatives, so utterly stupid was it. |
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 24, 2009 18:37:20 GMT
Support isn't jargon... is it? Couldn't you just speak on behalf of me, Riot? If I was advocating for you I could, but not if I was supporting you as that would not be best practice. I really was hoping for someone qualified, not a trainee.  |
|
|
|
Post by Patrick on Mar 25, 2009 0:53:27 GMT
'paradigm' Didn't she sing "Joe le Taxi"?  |
|
|
|
Post by everso on Mar 25, 2009 1:19:13 GMT
uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090318/tuk-are-you-cutting-out-coterminosity-dba1618.htmlthis is a list of all the office 'jargon' that we're supposed to laugh at and not use. But, typical BBC, it's not right. It says the 'coterminosity' means 'singing from the same hymn sheet'. It doesn't. 'Coterminosity' is NOT jargon. It is an incredibly useful concept, and I use the word daily to discuss what geographical area my services cover, and what geographical area other peoples services cover. E.g. we have acheived coterminosity with police divisions, but not with the Sheriffdom. What is it with people who don't work in offices that they think it's so hilarious to slag off the words we use? Nobody ever picks on scientists for this, and they DO use a whole lot of daft words that nobody else understands. Thing is, Riot, there are certain words used today ("paradigm" for instance), that until very recently I'd never come across. Now I hear it all the time - ALL the time. In that respect, I'd hazard a guess that there are other words that could be used and that the majority of people would easily understand, but paradigm has become the fashionable word and so its trotted out again and again. Similarly, coterminosity. Again, I've never heard of the word so why is it suddenly being used such a lot? Also, there's a difference between office jargon and scientific jargon. Office jargon could always be simplified, scientific jargon is used because it correctly describes something that could be misinterpreted by using local colloquialisms. |
|
|
|
Post by Flatypus on Mar 25, 2009 1:33:27 GMT
And then there is administrative jargon used even to obfuscate administrators. It's an interesting thought that that is probably why we think of Latin as so difficult, because a very late version of Latin was used in just this way for centuries. Managers use terms they don't entirely understand because it makes them sound grander and they hope to impress subordinates that even though they seem to have seen the obvious, because it has a Latinesque name, it must be a deeper principle. A few words are exceptions where the Latinate has become common and a touch of monosyllabic sounds exotic: so Goals not Objectives. It suggests the same idea of something so new that familiar terms won't do, so old ones must be brought out as a kind of metaphor. It can be folksy implying that the real concept is so far from folksy that to describe it in folksy terms implies its sophistication.
The real problem is when jargon is extended inappropriately to what could be described perfectly well without it, in order to make it appear far more portentious than it really is.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Mar 25, 2009 8:52:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by swl on Mar 25, 2009 9:52:11 GMT
Language like this is deliberately exclusionary, designed to create ingroups and outgroups. It's about power. Someone walking into an environment where buzzwords and acronyms are used extensively is made to feel inferior, a bit thick and unwelcome.
Kids use it all the time to exclude not just adults but others not of their peer group.
To see government agencies supposedly working to help the wider public acting like a bunch of kids in the playground is pretty pathetic really.
|
|
A.P.P.S
S C 
)
