I usually only use acronyms if I can pronounce them... so LOL is quicker to say than laughing-out-loud (although not quicker than actually laughing) but WTF is not quick than what-the-fuck so I don't. Except in OMGWTFBBQ111 which I do say.
I mean, sorry, I probably would, but I'm not sure if I could. Do you normally say "oh emm gee double yu tee eff bee bee qu one one one" or "omgawtbubuqononon"... :)
"Lol" is probably nearly a word in its own right now (although I'd only pronounce it as a word rather than as letters when I'm being sarcastic[1]) as are a couple of the others. Most I don't use often enough to read seamlessly even in print.
Well, you'd think so, but if someone says something funny, and then you pause while you work out how funny it is, and then choose to laugh, it's always really artificial and fake. I don't know if saying "LOL" is better but it's probably not worse :) (Probably saying something like, "nice one" is best :))
If it wasn't actually funny enough to *actually* LOL at but was funny? LOL rarely actually means that the typist is laughing. It can be sarcastic too.
Also, I think lol can be used as a noun as well as as a verb. So I might say "what's lol?" and mean "what is it that has caused you to laugh?". And I talk about lolcats.
I'm sure I have, on occasion. I'd prefer not to. And prefer Liv not to as well. But in honesty, if they're part of our daily vocabulary, they are going to end up being said, like it or not.
Of course, they divide fairly neatly into two groups. "LOL" and "ROFL" are useful additions to the language, to show if you think something was funny, but didn't literally make you laugh. But are embarrassing to say because they describe something that is inherently literally false.
The other abbreviations join the venerable classification headed by "www" of "abbreviations which are longer to say than the original"
Mmm, maybe. But in real life, you wouldn't say "in my humble opinion" to get your word in edgeways, you'd cough and make eye contact.
St-foo is quite short.
True. And come to think of it, I might say "R. T. F. M." because I certainly wouldn't say "fucking", but I might be unable to resist saying "it tells you in the helpfile"in an amusing way :)
That is, using acronyms in speech automatically would be a notional-minus for dating someone: it feels sort of lacking in style. But doing so ironically would be a plus.
I think that "ister" (from ISTR; rhymes with 'vista') would make a useful new word. However, I only use it in my head and not in conversation with other people, on the assumption that they wouldn't understand :-)
Mind you, I'd say many more of them in full than I do as initials or acronyms. And I only put one S in TMBetc (no "strange"). And I had to look up UTSL, although it turns out I know the phrase.
I dont think that qualifies in quite the same category as it predates most of the others *grin* - it is a good one though. And I'm sure we use so many stupid geeky TLA's that are just as bad.
I've probably used RTFM in real life. My not going out with anyone who used them is because I'm married to someone who doesn't use them and the being married bit prevents me going out with anyone else, not an objection to their use. Though it might cause some hesitation in any case.
I use several in reference to their use as it were and in sarcasm - LOL being the obvious example, also OMG. I do use many of the complete phrases though.
Generally if someone says something funny to me I use the strategy of going 'Hahahaha' instead of saying 'LOL'. But you never know, I might actually say something like that one day, because often my first reaction is to think something like 'IMO', or my particular favourite 'IIRC' (which one day I'm sure I will say out loud!), before I settle on some whole words to say. Oh, and my wonderful supervisor enjoys saying 'BTW' despite it being a bit unwieldy.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 08:51 pm (UTC)*ahem*
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 10:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 11:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 08:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:02 pm (UTC)How?
I mean, sorry, I probably would, but I'm not sure if I could. Do you normally say "oh emm gee double yu tee eff bee bee qu one one one" or "omgawtbubuqononon"... :)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:05 pm (UTC)oh-em-gee-double-you-tee-eff-bee-bee-queue-eleventy-one
But *normally* I pronounce acronyms as words. The WHO is slightly confusing. Not always. I say gee-cee-es-eee for example.
And I probably do say some of these as letters sometimes. Just not often.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:59 pm (UTC)"Lol" is probably nearly a word in its own right now (although I'd only pronounce it as a word rather than as letters when I'm being sarcastic[1]) as are a couple of the others. Most I don't use often enough to read seamlessly even in print.
[1] Which admittedly I normally am.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:37 pm (UTC)Why not just laugh, out loud?
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 11:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 10:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 11:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 11:26 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 10:36 am (UTC)Also, I think lol can be used as a noun as well as as a verb. So I might say "what's lol?" and mean "what is it that has caused you to laugh?". And I talk about lolcats.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 01:09 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 02:09 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:00 pm (UTC)Of course, they divide fairly neatly into two groups. "LOL" and "ROFL" are useful additions to the language, to show if you think something was funny, but didn't literally make you laugh. But are embarrassing to say because they describe something that is inherently literally false.
The other abbreviations join the venerable classification headed by "www" of "abbreviations which are longer to say than the original"
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:08 pm (UTC)But yeah, some are worse than saying the words. And 'www' is awful. Who picked that? silly people.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 02:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 01:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:57 pm (UTC)St-foo is quite short.
True. And come to think of it, I might say "R. T. F. M." because I certainly wouldn't say "fucking", but I might be unable to resist saying "it tells you in the helpfile"in an amusing way :)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 10:34 am (UTC)I just say fucking... except at work... but I probably wouldn't use rtfm at work either.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 10:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 12:53 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 02:07 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 11:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:15 pm (UTC)Do you include ironic uses? (-8
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:16 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 09:34 pm (UTC)I demand a recount.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 10:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 10:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 10:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 12:28 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 10:44 pm (UTC)My not going out with anyone who used them is because I'm married to someone who doesn't use them and the being married bit prevents me going out with anyone else, not an objection to their use. Though it might cause some hesitation in any case.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-22 11:53 pm (UTC)I use several in reference to their use as it were and in sarcasm - LOL being the obvious example, also OMG. I do use many of the complete phrases though.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 08:20 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 10:58 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-23 11:23 am (UTC)