SCREEN-L Archives

March 1991

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 27 Mar 91 12:39:09 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (16 lines)
I must side with J. Berkley who sides with M.  There are many simple
methods of saying complex things: E=mc2 is about as simple as it gets--
but woe betide the one who tries to explain it without jargon....
Jargon in and of itself is value free; it is, as was pointed out,
a shorthand by which one signifies larger and more complex concepts and
constructs.
Jargon used to make others feel less than what they are is snobbery;
jargon used to identify and summarize relatively non-controversial,
agreed-upon conventions concerning given phenomena is economical,
plain _and_ simple.
 
In brevity,
Jim Barnes
Office of Information Technology (unfortunately not jargon-free)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

ATOM RSS1 RSS2