British media use abbreviations more and more sloppily. Standards are slipping there, in spelling, and in grammar. This is probably just a further fall-out from the excellent British education system where most pupils leave school unable to read and write. No need to blame lazy pupils when more than 50 per cent of teachers are unable to properly spell even basic English words.
Writers should use the language properly. Calling yourself a journalist doesn't free you of using proper spelling and grammar. That is my opinion. I might be alone with that opinion, but I can live with that. Proper spelling and a reasonable grasp of grammar are what I expect to find in any written piece, be it online or in the printed media. Even if fewer people are able to read these days, those that do should be treated with respect. That includes the correct use of spelling, grammar, and abbreviations.
Incorrect use of abbreviations is not limited to print or web. The incorrect use of v. in a TV announcement made it all but incomprehensible to me. And I deplore that v said as a letter has replaced proper English diction. I had missed the beginning of the TV announcement, though, and therefore it left me completely puzzled as to what was going on. What I did catch was something like: 'Arsenal v. Tottenham at 5 pm'. Sorry? What kind of soccer result is that? It only dawned on me at the end of the announcement ('get all the football today on ITV') that the speaker hadn't meant v. but vs.
The abbreviation v. stands for Latin vincit (basic translation: he/she/it won). It is used when announcing winning results of any kind, e.g. Arsenal v. Tottenham 6:1. And it should not be pronounced as 'v', or the speaker on ITV should read the last part as 6 colon 1). It would be easier to read using the abbreviation vs. The abbreviation vs. stands for Latin versus (basic translation: against, towards). It should be used to announce a forthcoming encounter as it is highly unfair to implicate a winner before they even meet.
I probably lost anybody who is interested in sports already. I will go ahead anyhow with a few other abbreviations that get mangled all too often. One of these abbreviations is etc. from Latin et cetera (basic translation: and otherwise, and furthermore). As we have two words in the abbreviation and only abbreviate the second word, there is only one point to set (etc.) and not three (e.t.c.).
Two others I noticed being mixed up frequently are e.g. and i.e. They are not the same and they don’t mean the same. E.g. stands for Latin exempli gratia (basic translation: for the sake of an example) and is used when leading up to state an example. I.e. stands for Latin id est (basic translation: it/this/that is) and is used to lead up to an explanation which is not an example. Use the first whenever something is explained by means of an example; use the second one whenever you need to define or explain something in so many more words.
If unsure how to abbreviate correctly, or if you have the feeling that there is more than one way to abbreviate or that there is more than one meaning to an abbreviation, don't use it. There are ways to get around abbreviations; for the sake of clarity it is advisable to do some more typing rather than compromise your writing.
There are many more that could be mentioned. The ones that get mixed up the most often are Latin in their origin. They continually get lost in translation. Governments safe education to death and thereby make life ever more difficult for everybody.
No comments:
Post a Comment