P3D Re: What is the abbreviation for abbreviation?

[michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Michael Kersenbrock)]

> There is a certain charm and satisfaction in knowing what the word is
> coming from and what it really means, like telephone (voice from a
> distance),  photography (writing with light), automobile (moving by
> itself), synchronize (occur at the same time), microscope (an instrument to
> look at small things).  This charm and knowledge is lost when we say TV to
> save ourselves a few sounds.

Personally, I like to create things new and better than existed
before (why I'm a design engineer).  Progress being held back by
having to maintain backward compatibility is one of the major
hurdles to be overcome (a good and valid hurdle, btw).

Language, IMO, should be evolutionary not revolutionary nor static.

That's one of the great aspects of the "English" language, its
ability to improve over time.

I don't think that "TV" imparts any less knowledge of what it is
than "television".  Everyone knows exactly what it is.  Completely
and equally.

IMO.

Mike K.

P.S. - There probably has been many great opportunities for wonderful
       3D ice photos here in the Portland, OR area.  I've been stuck in
       my house for the past day or two though.  Just staring to melt
       now.  :-)


------------------------------