Websterrifying

TorgoX on 2002-06-17T21:36:23

Dear Log,

I invented a new word: "Websterrifying". It's when someone spends five pages uselessly defining something that the reader basically already knows the meaning of, just because he wants to ramble about "what IS a [tape player, or function, or whatever], REALLY?" It's all too common in technical writing. Instead of "defining" (a word and concept that I would banish from the language, if I could), show by example.

---

I guess ...

jhi on 2002-06-18T04:25:10

...you just need to submit your new word to Webster.

Websterrify

jdporter on 2002-06-18T15:42:41

A related word would be "websterrorism".

Although, frankly, that sounds like something having to do with the internet.

Btw -- you want to banish "define", yet "define" is what you did for your new word.

Besides, we need a word that means "to give a meaning to (a variable, subroutine, etc.)"

:-)

Re:Websterrify

TorgoX on 2002-06-18T19:23:50

I said I wanted to banish "define", not define. The word, not the reference.

Re:Websterrify

jdporter on 2002-06-19T03:19:49

Either I'm severely failing to comprehend your point, or you persist in using a word which you want to banish. If the word "define" were banished, how would you be making your point? What do you mean by "reference", anyway? You've done a fair amount of defining, yourself; but you feel that activity should not have a single-word label? Where people now say "define", they should instead say something like "establish the meaning of"? Why is that an improvement?

Puzzled,
/me

Proprieterrorism

brevity on 2002-06-21T06:45:25

Halfjack coined this by accident one day (offline, actual sounds involved).

We were all enchanted.