On Tue, 08 Dec 1998 19:23:42 +0000
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> >-----------------------------
> >>Great idea. I suppose acronyms will still be the mainstay of shorthand
> >>like NAD, GOK and TTFO..sorry, not that last one. If you look at the
> >>multiplicity of initials on the ether,IMNSVHO ;-)
>
> Pardon the interruption, but has the distinction between an acronym and an
> abbreviation gone down the tubes along with the use of 'might'?
>
> Senior Lurker
> (in ever-more-usual pedant mode)
I was hoping no-one was going to notice. You have been so quiet
recently, SL, I was afraid that your seniority had caught up with
you.;-)
On an equally pedantic note, is there a distinction between an
abbreviation such as obs. or gynae, and a set of initials that do not
form a word, such as TTFO? And if not, WHY NOT?!
Cheerio,
Pedants People's Militia (Provisional Wing)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|