From: gaf@uucs1.UUCP (gaf)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Why all the jargon?
Message-ID: <563@uucs1.UUCP>
Date: 1 Aug 91 00:43:00 GMT
References: <551@uucs1.UUCP> <RBNSTEIN.91Jul28212527@bucsf.bu.edu>
Reply-To: gaf@uucs1.UUCP (Guy Finney)
Distribution: alt.religion.scientology
Organization: UUCS inc., Phoenix, Az
Lines: 27

Michael Rubinstein writes: > >I doubt that jargon is created intentionally to confuse people. From the >point of view of the person or persons creating it, it is not jargon, >but more likely a new vocabulary to decribe things that English just >doesn't have the words for.

Wellllll, yes and no. If you need a word to describe a new thing, say, the speed of sound, and there isn't one already, you make one up ("mach").

The original poster used the word "argot" instead of the already existing and well understood word "jargon". I'm not picking on that person at all, I just use that as an example of how Scientology has needlessly invented a word to replace one which is already well established in the language.

>From the televised corporate presentations I've seen, there are lots of other examples. I could barely understand what was being said sometimes, and had to really work to figure it out from the context of the speech. The jargon was so thick and deliberate I started wondering if it was a way of speaking to the "in" crowd in code, so that outsiders like me wouldn't know what they were saying. -- Guy Finney "Ah, this is obviously some UUCS inc. Phoenix, Az new usage of the word 'safe' ...!ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!uucs1!gaf I was previously unaware of." ...!sun!sunburn!gtx!uucs1!gaf

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank