Priorty Interrupt by Steve Ciarcia Techno-Jargon

Every industry and occupation has its jargon. At one time, it was just the military that came up with acronyms and abbreviations that stumped the conscious mind. These days, every technical discussion is interspersed with so much techno-speak, you need an acronym dictionary to participate.

There's no rational approach to its creation either. We create new acronyms as if coining one is a necessary marketing tactic. At one time, we just used the acronym with a prefix or suffix to keep things simple. A 1200-bps modem (MOdulator-DEModulator) and a 56.7-kbps modem served the same purpose, but you easily knew the difference. A new Jeep (I forgot what it stood for) isn't called a Jeep XR5. It's an HMMWV (High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle). Of course, the guy who coined the acronym and the people who tried to pronounce it had some disagreement. Now, it's spelled Humvee, but it still has the original description. Talk about muddying the waters.

The worst part about using explicit technical jargon and acronyms in conversation is that unless everyone is clued into exactly the same definitions, everyone can come away with different understandings of what was communicated. An editor attending a news conference had better know that this latest computer widget with ESP has an Enhanced Serial Port - not Extra Sensory Perception.

Keeping up on the latest techno-speak is no easy task. It's a language with no regulations other than use three times as many syllables as would normally suffice, forget all the grammar rules, and try to arrange it into a catchy acronym if possible. The only guide to actual meaning is often the context in which it's used. Even then, you might have to listen very carefully. You can't blindly assume that IDE always means Integrated Device Electronics (hardware), when the reference may in fact be to an Integrated Development Environment (software) instead.

The downside of all this language modification is that we end up with a different language for every expertise. I had a very real demonstration of this during a meeting at a recent computer conference. Typical of tradeshows where time is at a premium, marketing people, engineers, editors, and advertising representatives all meet together. Invariably, as the engineers and editors discuss the latest technical attributes of a new product, you can watch as the other meeting attendees start counting the holes in the acoustic ceiling tiles. As the marketing and advertising people banter in their equally obscure terminology, the editors and engineers fidget with their electronic notepads or just glaze over. As for myself, I nodded confidently at most of the presentation. That was true until their development software description included the sentence, ".and the whole system is cued from the RMB."

Say what? I had familiarized myself with most of the terms in their new product literature just in case. This was one I didn't remember. I could feel a little sweat forming as I tried to inconspicuously open the product brief and scan the block-diagram notations. I couldn't help feeling like a school kid hoping to be invisible to the teacher. All I needed was for the speaker to say, "So Steve, how do you think INK readers will feel about our use of the RMB?"

The meeting broke up with everyone feeling that a lot had been accomplished. I frowned as I walked away muttering to myself, "What is this RMB triggering logic?" Later, after a few drinks in the restaurant, I decided to probe the question without directly admitting ignorance. "Should we be investigating the significance of their RMB cueing?" I asked.

One of my editors laughed and said, "I hardly think an exposé on using the Right Mouse Button will excite our readers."

"Right mouse button! Why the hell didn't he just say you start the development program by clicking the right mouse button?"

I know I really shouldn't be criticizing the use of technical acronyms, even techno-speak. After all, when it's used correctly, it's an expedient means for rapidly communicating concepts and ideas. Surely, if everyone at the table understands that BDM means Background Debug Mode, it can more easily be used in the descriptive explanation of another concept. The downside of the constant and arbitrary use of vague acronyms in technical descriptions (especially proprietary ones), however, is that invariably they often serve only to obscure a simpler explanation.

Before you cave in to language intimidation, realize there's no requirement that technical explanations include a dozen six-letter acronyms. Simply presuming that someone who uses a lot of techno-jargon has a better technical understanding is an oversimplification and often incorrect. And unfortunately, even when you know exactly what's being discussed, it can still be very difficult to determine the dividing line between Babel and genius. I certainly discovered that.

steve.ciarcia@circuitcellar.com

Published: February-1998