Talk:Backronym/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

References

I don't know how to fix references. After #14, they are all joined. Could someone please correct this?--WPaulB (talk) 20:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

A different kind of reference problem: the reversion of FORD (=Fix or Repair Daily/Found on Road Dead) is said to need an authoritative citation. Not sure what that would be for folk-materials like humorous backronyms, which by definition are unofficial. I would have thought 29000 googlehits would sufficiently document the fact that the backronym is in circulation (which is, as I understand it, what's required). I don't care much about the particular example -- it wasn't mine; however, wthe wikisourcing issue is, I thihnk, significant. Many folk and linguistic articles depend on evidence that a given term is in circulation. DavidOaks (talk) 19:25, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

That's not my understanding of WP:RS. Anyhow, a reliable source was found so I'm not sure what the problem is. This article in the past was littered with lists of non-notable, unreferenced examples, and backronyms which weren't actually backronyms. If enough people have used a term to make it notable, there will surely be a reliable source which documents this. If no such source exists, maybe it's not very notable. --hippo43 (talk) 19:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Never Eat Soggy Wheat-Bix

This is just a suggestion for a bacronym. As a kid I was taught a trick for remembering the compass directions in order. North East South West became Never Eat Soggy Weet-Bix (FYInformation, Weet-Bix is a popular cereal in Australia). I think this bacronym is pretty popular in Australia and there might be similar ones in other countries. If Mr Wikipedia deems it suitable, he can add this to the article.

Also, just because I couldn't be bothered adding a new topic, here's a suggestion for a pneumonic for the planets: My Very Evil Mother Just Shot Uncle Ned's Parrot. That's the one I was taught at school.Raph89 (talk) 01:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Except the NESW is kind of not a backronym, it's a pneumonic. There's a difference. For America, it was "worms" rather than cereal, and...Pluto isn't a planet anymore. TheListUpdater (talk) 01:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

A pneumonic, eh? It doesn't half make you cough! "So Eating Nourishing Weetabix" is a pneumonic? Wait until their merchandising department gets to hear about it. Perhaps we should give it a new name: Mnemonic, may be? Dieter Simon (talk) 22:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Deleted mnemonic example

I deleted the last example under mnemonics. Neither sources support the "popular... among school children" claim. Additionally, this is not a good example of a mnemonic[[1]]. I don't believe that it is at all common to teach a child to memorize long sentences in order to learn to spell words like arithmetic.--Koyarpm (talk) 20:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

True today the computer spell checks everything for us. Once more being phonetically close is good enough for starting a dictionary search. Your disbelief is rooted in your limitation to this current experience. However, I bet you have never been in a spelling competition above the neighborhood school level. Until you have or are close friends with several -- you should probably keep your mouth closed. I suspect the practice still lives on among the competitive in unassisted brain games. As this highly political and unreliable source shows http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelling_test

Verbal mnemonic phrases were once common in the US plains states at least - with length being driven by word length and such. Many examples can be found circa 1930-1960s. But such techniques carried to extremes are a case of people being excessively impressed by their own cleverness. I was fortunate as one born in 1958 and with a fairly sharp mind - not to be forced to memorize many. But if I had been in state spelling bees, I would not have escaped.

Legacy of this can still be seen in the military technical schools, which still carry many sentences for difficult technical details (not as many as they once did when obscenity was allowed).69.23.124.142 (talk) 17:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

AC/DC

"The name caused some confusion among Americans because AC/DC was a common euphemism for bisexuality, i.e. "plug into any available outlet."[33][34][35]"

How is this in any way relevant to the example let alone the article? None of the three references are even related to or contain a reference to the band. References 33 and 35 don't even contain a reference to the term AC/DC. 67.78.145.42 (talk) 22:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

North, east, south and west?

How utterly ridiculous, you need a mnemonics aid to remember the four points of the compass? What I would have a job to remember is the mnemonics itself: "Never eat shredded wheat". Come on, let's have a bit of common sense here. Surely it is one of the easiest concepts. Just remember where the sun rises and sets, that takes care of two of the four heavenly points. Dieter Simon (talk) 22:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Right, it's silly. This one needs to be filed with the false etymologies and urban legends. Actually, it wasn't the claim that people needed to remember this, it was just that the news was printed in columns headed by initials signalling compass directions, which fortuitously spelled a pronounceable word. It's nonsense, but widely believed. I happen not to have a cite (and don't feel like searching for one), but if it (the claim, not the fact) can be verified, it's worth including as an example of a backronym. DavidOaks (talk) 02:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Your lucky kids under 13 don't read wikipedia talk pages or you'd sound like a real as mean person. From first hand knowledge I can say this is very popular among young children in Australia. humbug88 (talk) 06:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Obviously you have never been in the military. Basic training quickly uncovers how many people (at least 30%-40%) have to stop and think about which is left and right. I am one of those people. My person mnemonic is that my heartbeat is on the left. It is just a common fact that different people find different info easy to remember. The central point of the movie "Rain Man" made a big deal about a guy that could remember and calculate stuff that 99.9% of people cannot come close to remembering -- yet he could not remember or act on other stuff. But really that is just an exaggerated case of what is true of most people -- you remember some stuff well and other stuff not at all...especially stuff that for you is not used in a practical manner every day.

And it is not North and south that people tend to mislabel on a map, at least in the Northern hemisphere. The most frequent mix up is East for West...because on a quick map problem there is no sun to watch as it sets. If they could only go outside align the map N-S and wait for sunset. Seems sort of lengthy to solve east and west. Besides you usually use sunrise and sunset to figure out N-S in th absence of a compass. What if you have a homemade compass (magnetic needle) and it is noon or you cannot see the sun? 69.23.124.142 (talk) 17:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I take you point, of course, but I was talking from the point of view of a gardener, as in my case. One of the first things you learn is which side your garden is facing. You jolly soon would know whether it faces north, because especially in a moderate climate half the things wouldn't grow, and if it faces south you'd be watering it more often than any other gardeners would. Apart from that, I have a touch of dyslexia when it comes to learning by heart words which have to be remembered in order to achieve an ulterior aim. Things such as poems, songs and mnemonics would be lost on me, I just don't remember them. Oh, I can put together an essay and such, but ask me to remember an old song I'd be mouthing it while others are singing it. Dieter Simon (talk) 23:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Many of the examples aren't acronyms

The article begins by saying "an 'acronym' is a pronounceable word derived from the initial letters of a phrase." That's a good definition. But then many of the examples cited are initialisms and not acronyms at all. Don't make such a point of what a proper acronym is if you are going to break the rule throughout the rest of the article. -- Llarq (talk) 00:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I think that they meant "a series of letters, or phonetically, the pronounceable word often derived from those letters, which are generally derived from the first letter or syllable of each word in a title or full name and preferentially used in place of that longer term". To tell the truth, alteration into a pronounceable word is often not standardized and usually increasingly reflects an increasingly long and difficult series of letters to say and understand. Thus "FBI" is usually repeated as the letters and not a phonetic word - yet I have heard a few derogeratory phonetics as well. Yet a 13 letter acronym is almost certain to have a phonetic replacement for verbal conservations. Also acronyms especially federal and most especially DOD often include substitutes where more that one letter is used from some words and other minor words may be skipped in entirely (or not)...thus CINCSOUCOM (Commander IN Chief SOUthern COMmand)pronounced (Sink-Sow-Com).

I might get a bit more retentive if acronyms were restricted to verbal language. But in fact acronyms are even more common in written language where details are given that might be skipped in speech or handled by pointing at a presentation slide.

69.23.124.142 (talk) 17:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup

In line with some of the comments above, and tags in the article, I've tried to clean this up. I've tried to be bold in streamlining the article and keeping it consistent with citations. hippo43 (talk) 04:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

This is what I've done -

Clarified the definition, according to sources used, then tried to keep the article consistent with it. Cleaned up the 'types', moved some examples. Removed a load of non-backronyms. This meant a number of 'types' disappeared, to the point that types became meaningless so I binned them, probably not a bad thing. Added some CN tags. hippo43 (talk) 06:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure theres more

What about People Eating Tasty Animals? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.112.230.192 (talk) 01:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

A Mistake and maybe something to add to

" In Spanish, a popular and sarcastic backronym for Adidas is "Asociación De Idiotas Dispuestos A Superarse" ("Association Of Idiots Willing To Improve").[15] "

The translation in English should translate to ("Association Od Idiots Willing to Improve Themselves). Superarse means to improve himself.

Also KISS could also mean "Keep It Simple, Stupid".

--Xeon3D (talk) 13:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

First sentence description of backronym

In the first sentence "A backronym (or bacronym) is a reverse acronym, a phrase constructed after the fact to make an existing word or words into an acronym.", it is incorrect to define a backronym to be an acronym which is modified by the adjective "reverse". A backronym is not an acronym. It would be better to reword as "A backronym (or bacronym) is the reverse of an acronym, a phrase constructed after the fact to make an existing word or words into an acronym." Or, instead of "reverse", use "inverse" which, to me, implies an undoing of the acronym process. 132.228.195.207 (talk) 14:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)JohnY

You could be right. Do you have a source for this definition? --hippo43 (talk) 20:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I checked the definition of "backronym" at dictionary.com. I was mistaken/misled by this wikipedia entry. The dictionary.com entry is fairly clear. The wikipedia entry is confusing. According to dictionary.com, a backronym is an acronym. It's a word that wasn't meant to be an acronym, but now has an associated phrase that makes it an acronym.132.228.195.207 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)JohnY

Why the Vulgarity

Is "F-U-know what" really an appropriate example? Was a little suprised by it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.180.145 (talk) 21:01, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

It may or may not be a good example, but vulgarity isn't what decides: WP:NOTCENSORED. DavidOaks (talk) 19:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed vulgarity. Unnecessary and didn't add much to the article. 216.166.234.203 (talk) 17:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Another possibility: creating a separate 'list' article. Luminifer (talk) 20:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Please, God, no. --hippo43 (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

To 216.166....: With due respect, the bacronym FUCK is one of the most significant to my mind, because it is a common misconception honestly held. No one believes that FORD stands for "Fix Or Repair Daily", but lots of folks have the odd idea that FUCK stands for "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge". This fact makes it a useful example for this page. Phiwum (talk) 02:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Well put! Luminifer (talk) 06:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I still agree strongly with 74.92.180.145. It's EXTREMELY inappropriate and shouldn't be put on Wikipedia! Dragon798 (talk) 20:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Have you read WP:NOTCENSORED? If you disagree, you can argue about censorship at the talk page there. --hippo43 (talk) 21:33, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Perl punctuation

Look at the paragraph containing the second appearance of the phrase "Perl documentation." Something funny is happening with periods and commas there. I tried to fix but am not sure how.

Yes, I must admit I couldn't find any references to the subtitle or the backronym on what I could see of the official Perl websites. Is that surprising? I have cited at least one teaching website which does so. It is something to get on with, and if someone else can find and show the websites and citations so much the better. Have reverted the links to the Perl websites until someone can find the missing info. Dieter Simon (talk) 22:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

B. D. Bhargava

Hi, I am trying to edit Backronym. I am stating that Bisheshwar Dayal Bhargava has coined thousands of backronyms which can be found at http://bdtara.bhargavas.net/. I have been told that this is an inappropriate link. I am not trying to promote this site, instead giving more info about backronyms. Bhargava's backronyms illustrate the meaning of the word, such as Earliest Audio Reciever for Ear, or constantly repeat and memorize for cram. These are the facts: 1) The site exists, and 2) This is another way to create backronyms. Why am I being denied the right to add these facts?

Regarding your concern about reliable sources, I can explain this. This style of writing bacronyms is described in a book "Entertainment, Word Magic: Bacronyms" by Bhargava, published by Minerva Press in 2002.

69.237.70.205 (talk) 02:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

bacronym drifting off subject

Backronym or bacronym is a fictitious acronym created after the fact or "backwards acronym". Many are folklore or urban legend type explanations (like "Cop" being explained as an acronym for "constable on patrol" when in fact "cop" seems to trace back to the Latin word "capere", to capture, pronounced 'cah-pay-ray' which became copper or cop in common usage.

NESW ROYGBIV MVEMJSUNP are mnemonics, neither bacronyms nor acronyms. Naaman Brown (talk) 15:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

GI Joe

When I first heard of the concept of a Backronym, the first thing that jumped to mind was how GI Joe was changed to Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity for the new movie. It's an example of a category of backronyms I don't see in the article (maybe it's unique? I can't think of any others). I'd describe it as an intentional distortion of a familiar term in an attempt to alter how it would be perceived by the public. In this case, emphasizing an international vs. American team of heroes. Worth a mention in the article? Lykos359 (talk) 05:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Only if you can reference reliable sources. Powers ^T 13:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that was a quick response, but not exactly productive. Let me make my intentions clear. All I wanted to do is alert whoever might possibly be monitoring this page of a possible example. It was really more work than I ever intended to invest in this to figure out how to post the topic and this response. I'm not a wiki veteran and don't intend to become one. I have nothing against wikipedia users, in fact I greatly appreciate their work on the site. Learning all the editing rules, conventions, and formatting is just not how I want to spend my time. Therefore, "reliable sources" for a generally known fact are not going to be forthcoming from me. I chose to put a comment in the discussion page because I didn't want to make changes to the page when I don't have a clue what I'm doing. So, if anyone with wikipedia experience considers GI Joe to be a good addition to the article, I humbly request that they find a reliable source and add it, since I don't know how to do it properly. The part of my original comments that are clearly just my opinion can certainly be omitted, but the fact that GI Joe's meaning was reinvented for the movie is most certainly a fact. If no one thinks it's a good example in the first place, then I'll respect the opinion of whatever community reads this and leave it alone. Thanks! Lykos359 (talk) 22:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Easiest thing to do is just copy/past the URL of the place where you found the info, put it inside square brackets, and insert it after your addition. A bot will come along to format it correctly. Your contributions ARE valued. DavidOaks (talk) 23:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4