Blogarithm

Don't forget that "my MOC" would be "my my own creation"

Right away, we can be thankful for two things: one, that "MOC" isn't a recursive acronym, and two ... well, there's no set pronunciation. So both ways are right.

Both ways actually aren't right, which is why your version ("Em Oh Cee") is the minority one. MOC is an acronym, not an initialism.

 

Acronyms get pronounced (NASA, MOC, NATO, etc), however, initialisms don't (HTML, BBC, USA, etc).

 

The difference between the two is slight, but an acronyms is when you abbreviate a word or phrase in a way that creates a pronounceable word, while initialisms do not create a pronounceable word.

 

The more you know.

An acronym is broadly defined as an abbreviation that is formed from the initial letters of other words. I can't find any definition that links pronunciation with acronym, while initialisms hinge on such a definition. Maybe I'm not getting the right definitions, or maybe it's too late for me to go hunting around sanely because it's past midnight.

 

Either way, I don't think it really changes the point of the entry. Now it's going about two different pronunciations, but rather the question of "is 'MOC' an acronym or initialism?" I think the initialism version sounds better, but that's the minority view and I accept that.

There's no debate over whether it's an acronym or an initialism, as it creates a pronounceable word, it's an acronym. A look at the difference between acronyms and initialisms on any grammar site should show you the difference. Both are a type of abbreviation, and you can argue that initialisms are a type of acronyms as some (in the grammatical minority) do, but that's the difference.

Sorry, I'm gonna have to support Sumiki's definition of acronym here. According to a couple of different definition sources, the pronounceability of a word is not a defining characteristic of an acronym. I see it as kind of a broad term with subcategories to make things more specific, like initialisms (which, coincidentally, show up unrecognized in my spellcheck). Thus, all initialisms are acronyms, but not all acronyms are initialisms. If you want to label an acronym as pronounceable, perhaps you really need another term.

 

Although saying "No this way is right and that's the way it is" does seem counter productive to the message of this blog entry, IMO. It's about compromise and showing that both ways can be used well within the community, and not as much about "I'm right, you're wrong."

 

Also, Em-Oh-Cee!

 

The English language isn't a democracy.

Seriously, this is a simple Google search. From the wikipedia article on acronyms:

 

The distinction, when made, hinges on whether the abbreviation is pronounced as a word, or as a string of letters

 

The distinction is not always made, but the defining characteristic of an acronym is that it is an abbreviation formed form the first letter (or letters) of a phrase, and makes a word. An initialism is an abbreviation made the exact same way that is pronounced by saying each letter (such as FBI). This is taught in every grammar book I ever had to read for every writing or editing class I ever took, from elementary school through college. Both are a type of abbreviation, but they are not the same.

 

If you want to label an acronym as pronounceable, perhaps you really need another term.

That is the term. And abbreviations that don't have pronunciations as words have a term too. Just because you were unaware of it does not mean it is not the proper and correct terminology. Grammar persists whether it is recognized by all or not. Any copy-editor worth anything will be able to tell you this distinction, and the wikipedia article makes it in the first body paragraph. It also goes on to note that the word "acronym" has been used to mean "an abbreviation made from the first letter(s) of a phrase that makes a word."

 

Although saying "No this way is right and that's the way it is" does seem counter productive to the message of this blog entry, IMO. It's about compromise and showing that both ways can be used well within the community, and not as much about "I'm right, you're wrong."

Well, the blog entry is wrong on that front. There is a reason the community uses the acronymic pronunciation and not what it would be were it an initialism 99% of the time.

 

(The one frustrating thing about Wikipedia, of course, is that it makes things that are minor controversies with a very small dissenting world seem larger. The disagreement on acronyms vs initialisms in the grammar world is very small, and those who think the term initialism is unnecessary are very few, but what can you do).

 

(Also, you may also hear initialisms referred to as "alphabetisms".)

Seriously, Wikipedia is the source you're gonna cite? If you're gonna make some elite literature know-it-all claim, at least cite a source that isn't built on user generated content. (Sure, it's better than it used to be, but still, all my courses frowned on citing from wikipedia.)

 

But whatever, I guess they do have terms for this kind of stuff. But where was it ever defined that MOC was strictly an acronym and not an initialism? (Sorry, Wikipedia doesn't classify this. )

 

I've noticed the same problem when you spell it out, but I think it's become a noun in it's own right.

I used to use em-oh-cee exclusively, but there are so many of extensions of the term that sound awkward that way, like MOCist (em-oh-ceeist).

Does it even matter whether "MOC" is an acronym or initialism? Now, that might change some of the wording that I used in the entry, but it doesn't change the gist of it. The pronunciation doesn't hurt anyone else, nor is one more right than the other.

Replacing it with "my own creation" leaves posts looking like they've either been caught by a new word filter or run through the bad translator a couple of times.

Oh man, I know how to totally fix the word filter now.

But whatever, I guess they do have terms for this kind of stuff. But where was it ever defined that MOC was strictly an acronym and not an initialism? (Sorry, Wikipedia doesn't classify this. )

Yes, by spelling out an actual pronounceable word, it becomes an acronym. Initialisms are only when the abbreviation created cannot be pronounced (or if it's a proper noun, like the name of a company or organization, who has a preference for how to pronounce it, like the World Health Organization, which prefers to be pronounced as an initialism, not the word "who").

 

Also, I used Wikipedia because we can actually mention it, whereas other grammar sites often have comment systems.

I only pronounce it mock at Brickfair because everyone else does :< I heard it and it took a second for me to recognize it as the second pronunciation

 

I think it depends on the vowels in it. We wouldn't pronounce DNA "duh-nah" , but we would pronounce NATO like an actual word. Guess it's just how you see it.