Clyde Howell <orgpsych@csra.net> wrote:
"Jargon arises out of a complex set of interactions in which there is a
need for specific (specialized) language to exactly describe what is
happening in a field of endeavor and a need fofr self/ego-gratification
for the work that people perform. By creating jargon we effectively
exclude those who do not do what we do and can, therefore, justify (in our
minds) some degree of superiority over others . . . I wonder, why do we
often try to circumvent jargon by commonly creating a different jargon?
Why do we seem to have difficulty using "common language" that everyone
already understands to express these ideas and visions? "
I agree that jargon is a tool to facilitate communication among
like-minded individuals and groups. I'm not sure that it follows that
jargon is evidence of exclusion and elitism. Among my family, the
expression "Did Maya get mooshies?" is jargon for "Has anyone given our
pet cat her daily ration of canned cat food?" It's shorthand, and, yes,
it's an insider's identifier, but I assure you that no one in our
household feels superior for saying it.
People who need ego gratification and who need to feel superior often use
jargon to keep secrets and exclude outsiders, but it's just one of many
means of doing so. See Dr. Seuss re: "Star-Bellied Sneetches." In the
dialog on this list, expressions like BTW, IMHO, TIA, :-), and for that
matter LO and CBT are jargon, simple ways to telegraph something larger.
Newbies (more jargon) are at a disadvantage until they learn them, but we
accept that tradeoff in return for streamlined dialog. Most of us want and
encourage newcomers to find the groove quickly (as Michael McMaster says,
"to have access to the language"). Only a few use "newbie" as an epithet.
Mark Peal
Massachusetts Medical Society
mpeal@mms.org
"We're all chunks in the same chowder."
--"Mark L. Peal" <mpeal@mms.org>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>