Re: AIS: HIST: REF: Early Checklists

John; I have a tendency for overstatement, but the
point I have been trying to make is a little jargon
goes a long way, and I abhor abbreviations and only
use them when really necessary or to make a point. The
39 checklist retrospectively is excessive in its use
of abbreviations. At the time it may have seemed just
fine. But today when many of the terms have changed,
or, are no longer used, an abbreviation of them makes
it that much more arcane. 

 Think of the person who may speak a different
language. Standards and falls are probably hard enough
for a translation program but S. and F. forget it. I
have been trying to translate Dutch Iris descriptions
to English. They use a word for falls that translates
as slip (a garment below the belt). I would be totally
lost if they said S. for falls. 

I realize that standards and falls are useful,
well-defined terms and there is really no substitute,
Its their unnecessary abbreviation I object to. Jargon
may bond a group together, but intrinsically it is
still a, them as opposed to us, type of bonding. I
only ask that we use abbreviation judiciously. Perhaps
we are so used to doing it, we apply this when it is
not really necessary. 

In this age of text-messaging I am certain I am
fighting a loosing battle. But one less *. For A.I.S.
is one less *. For mankind. Oh, and after another ten
years, Anner and I will show you the secret handshake.
L.O.L.

--- John I Jones <jijones@usjoneses.com> wrote:

> You know I was new to irises in 1992, and I don't
> remember having any  
> difficulty understanding what "standards" or "falls"
> were or getting  
> acclimated to any of the particular jargon used by
> the AIS and  
> irisarians, nor do I think is is or was elitist.
> 
> Every group has its particular vocabulary, and
> persons new tot he  
> group learn the words and by doing so feel a part of
> the group. I  
> might have felt left out if there were a secret
> handshake that I  
> didn't know about... but wait, if it were a secret
> how would I know  
> about it?
> 
> John
> 
> On Aug 1, 2007, at 1:57 PM, Robt R Pries wrote:
> 
> > It would be just as valid for me to refer to inner
> and
> > outer tepalsegs as S or F. But if I started using
> OT
> > and IT I don't think anyone would lap it up. I am
> not
> > disputing that certain terminolgy is useful but by
> > abbreviating unnecessarily we will leave a few
> people
> > behind. I am for a kinder gentler rhetoric that
> > doesn't present a snobbish elitism but tries to
> meet a
> > new reader halfway.
> > TWOI is not a particularly common abbreviation
> even on
> > this list. But The World of Iris was not the
> > originater of our present terms for dwarf, etc.
> These
> > all have evolved. The World... just recorded where
> the
> > thinking was at the time. I find abrreviations
> > annoying because I usually can think of several
> things
> > they could stand for even in the context of most
> > usages. Of course the federal bureaucrasy loves
> these
> > things and unlike a scientific paper where the
> > abbreviation is always defined before it is
> repeated
> > throughout, we get a ridiculous alphabet soups
> that
> > only attests to our laziness.
> >
> > --- ChatOWhitehall@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >> In a message dated 8/1/2007 3:54:23 PM Eastern
> >> Daylight Time,
> >> rpries@sbcglobal.net writes:
> >>
> >> . Of  course we compound this by then
> abbreviating
> >> the jargon; ergo
> >> standards,
> >> falls,
> >>
> >>
> >> Nah. We are not responsible for that one.
> >>
> >> I've documented an instance of that particular 
> Iris
> >> terminology in the
> >> seventeenth century. An English author  remarked
> >> upon the use of just those terms
> >> by a French nurseryman.
> >>
> >> The stuff that made me crazy in the beginning was
> >> things like how Standard
> >> Dwarf Bearded Irises were not classed as Dwarf
> >> Irises, and how AIS had the
> >> unvarnished effrontery in TWOI to apply its
> bearded
> >> cultivar size
> >> classifications to the bearded Iris species.
> >>
> >> And of course, all that fundamentally
> unsatisfying
> >> balderdash in the
> >> literature, meaning Mathew and the whole lot of
> the
> >> wise men, about the  germanica
> >> complex, so called. I figured if someone as
> >> botanically dumb as I ---I  was
> >> trained as an art historian, you
> understand---could
> >> recognize  palpable nonsense
> >> on the hoof, then it was likely to be pretty
> >> egregious nonsense.
> >>
> >> But all that said, I think any specialized field,
> >> including a floral
> >> society, must have a specialized vocabulary,
> >> possibly even a large one, to  meet the
> >> group's innate need for precise communication,
> and I
> >> think that is  entirely
> >> okay.
> >>
> >> I really don't think people get scared off things
> >> they are interested  in by
> >> new words or concepts. I think they lap them up.
> >>
> >> Anner Whitehead
> >> Richmond VA USA
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ************************************** Get a
> sneak
> >> peek of the all-new AOL at
> >> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
> >>
> >>
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To sign-off this list, send email to
> >> majordomo@hort.net with the
> >> message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
> >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To sign-off this list, send email to
> majordomo@hort.net with the
> > message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to
> majordomo@hort.net with the
> message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index