Talk:Backronym

Early Comments

I am a little confused here. It seems that there are different definitions.

• Jargon-file style: a word interpreted as an acronym, though it was not originally intended.

• word-like acronym: an acronym that interpreted as a word has some (funny) meaning.

Examples of the jargon-file style are: acme, mung.

Examples of word-like acronym: basic, mad, atlas (an experiment at Cern).

This article initially had the jargon-file definition (the only one I knew), and somehow it has now switched to that other meaning (that I had never called "backronym"), while still having parts that imply the first meaning. What's going on? Where did you see that called "backronym"? - jbc May 28 09:15 UTC 2003

The entry on apronym seems to describe the latter style, where the acronym was created first (as in USA PATRIOT) and the words that it would stand for were chosen second. So perhaps that's where references to the second definition should be moved. -- Arteitle 09:34 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Upon closer inspection, it looks like apronyms are meant as lighthearted jokes, though they're created in the same way as the "word-like acronym" style you mentioned. -- Arteitle 09:38 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I'd say that an apronym can be either jocular or quite serious. The ones at apronyms.com are largely jocular, but "USA PATRIOT" is a serious apronym if you ask me. So I'd be all for moving it and the others that aren't really backronyms so much as apronyms to apronym. In fact, I think I'll investigate into a means of doing such, if it's conveniently possible. JeffTL 16:27 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Essentially, it seems to me that apronymns are wordplay (i.e. they are deliberately designed to reflect the world they form), while backronyms actually stand for something in the real world (i.e., they abbreviate something else). Which isn't to say that the two categories can't overlap, as in "USA PATRIOT". But the Algebra I "FOIL" (first, outer, inner, last) would be a backronym, but not a apronym (because it has nothing to do with foils), and the SADDAM (Savage Arab Dictator, Dangerous And Murderous), while, although it may be true and an apronym, is not a backronym because nobody would ever use "SADDAM" to abbreviate "Savage.... Murderous" in real life. Does anybody else also parse the two this way? Seth Ilys 17:53, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Actually, I'd call "FOIL" a mnemonic, rather than a backronym, since "first, outer, inner, last" in some combination was known first, and the acronym was derived from that so as to be a memorable word, but as you pointed out, not an "appropriate" one (since algebra and "foil" aren't related). I'd call "SADDAM" a backronym, since it was formed "backwards", as wordplay, starting with the name "Saddam" and thinking up words that it could potentially stand for. --Arteitle 23:50, Mar 20, 2004 (UTC)

---

So why were BASIC, ZIP, USA PATRIOT removed from the list of backronyms? So far as I can tell, they are... - Seth Ilys 06:44, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

According to the definition currently included, BASIC and USA PATRIOT are most definitely not backronyms - they are simply acronyms designed to spell out an appropriate existing term. In fact, this is closer to the definition currently listed under apronym (although that article then wrongly suggests that BASIC is a backronym, when as far as I know it was always officially an acronym).

Also, I notice that you've taken out the link to apronym, calling it an "invented word" - in what way is 'backronym' not invented? Surely both are neologisms intended to mean slightly different things (by the way, both get just over 10000 hits on a Google search). While a large amount of clarification is clearly needed, the overlap surely necessitates more cross-referencing between the two articles, not less.

Either we decide on a definition for each, describe it more fully than either does at the moment, and add a prominent note on the occasional intrerchangability - eg: apronym=any acronym whose meaning as a word is apt to its meaning as a phrase (eg. BASIC); backronym=specifically those acronyms [and they would normally be apronyms] that expand terms not intended as acronyms (which are often humourous, like Fix Or Repair Daily). Or we decide that there is no clear seperation between the two words, and cover them in one article with the other as a redirect. I will wait and see if anyone has any strong feelings on the matter before acting.

- IMSoP 14:51, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Ok, let me comment on apronym. The entry in wikipedia was created by 202.89.128.87, who also included the reference to it in this article. Nothing wrong with that. But, have you seen the apronym article? It's like just a big propaganda for http://www.apronyms.com/ ! And there, they define it as a special kind of acronym where the initials spell out a word or phrase relevant to the expanded version, which is indeed very common for acronyms (not big deal, I can invent acronym-like things too). Sure, both backronym and apronym are neologisms, but I do have heard about backronyms before, and they are quite different from acronyms to deserve their name (imho), but I've never heard of apronyms and there is a guy with a web site (making money/fame from it?) "inventing" this word and having the entry in wikipedia like a neon panel to the website... I dunno, made me suspicious/reticent.

Now, if I am the only one with this feeling or it's a common word or anything, I am not against including a reference to it here (more the contrary). I am just worried of including crap, but surely I may be wrong. - jbc 20:34, Jan 13 2004 (UTC)

I understand your reticence, jbc - certainly the article needs rewriting to eliminate the advertising-like stance. In fact, a more thorough investigation of those Google results shows that apronym has only a handful of distinct hits, whereas backronym seems genuinely well-established. Perhaps the whole article could be deleted in favour of mentions under acronym and backronym - or is it worth keeping as a stub? Certainly, it has a subtly different meaning to backronym, but is it too new to be worthy of mention? - IMSoP 22:11, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Here's how I see the difference: An apronym is an acronym designed to spell something out, and fitting that "something." -- e.g. "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism" intentionally was designed to spell "USA Patriot" and refers to...well..the Patriot Act. Apronyms are common for proper nouns of organizations, laws, etc. They are (as demonstrated at the one website, where I must disclaim I have some contributions) also relatively common as a form of wordplay. A backronym is an unintended prepresentation, often similar to what can be called an apronym, for lack of a better specific term. An example of a backronym is "Beginners' Allpurpose Symbolic Instruction Code" for the BASIC programming language. The pop-culture belief is that the name of said language is an apronym; rather, it is closer to a backronym, as it was retroactively created as a believed apronymic exansion -- apronymic because "Beginners' Allpurpose Symbolic Instruction Code" does indeed describe Basic, which is often written in all capitals (suggesting an acronym of some sort). There is a clear difference between an "apropos acronym" and a "back-formed acronym." Jeff Anonymous 04:23, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Just for the record, I we should all stop using BASIC as an example, because it is very much unclear whether it was originally intended as an acronym. More generally, the problem is that the humourous apronyms on the website are of course also backronyms (since they are taking existing terms and turning them into acronyms); and, indeed, most backronyms are also apronyms (since if it's not an appropriate expansion of the term, in what sense can it have the same meaning?). So we could perhaps define an apronym as any acronym that forms a word appropriate to its meaning; and a backronym as any acronym (or initialism, for those who insist) that was created from an existing term that was not originally created as one - and then note that most examples of one are also examples of the other. - IMSoP 12:37, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Those seem to be the best definitions. If the acronym is a real word and the expansion is appropriate to that, it is an apronym. If it is retconned, it is a backronym (which, as an ex post facto acronym, can be an apronym). Jeff Anonymous 18:36, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I agree. These definitions sound good to me. So to restate them, an apronym (apropos acronym) is a multiword term or name (such as for a law, agency, etc.) with words deliberately chosen so that the resulting acronym will spell out something apropriate (e.g. USA PATRIOT), while a backronym is a (usually humorous, usually unofficial) set of words derived after-the-fact by interpreting something that wasn't originally an acronym as one (e.g. FORD = Fix Or Repair Daily). However, this definition disagrees with most of the examples given at apronym right now, and with the definition there (which refers to coining thousands of apronyms as wordplay). --Arteitle 22:26, Mar 20, 2004 (UTC)

Your example of FORD would be an apronym of the humorous type, as the person who wrote it must have had a broken-down Ford. Backronym implies linguistic back fomation, as noted at Jargon File. If something seriously becomes acronymic after the fact, such as BASIC basically has (It is the canonical example because it is the best known example), to the point that everyone believes it is an acronym, is is a backronym by means of reification. Most are also apronyms -- a case of overlapping sets. An apronym can be thought of as any acronym appropriate to the expansion, often jocular but they can also be serious. A point could be made that most of the apronyms.com collection are backronyms by certain definitions (albeit not a definition of a reified acronym, which seems to be the current accepted definition). Noone actually believes that AA batteries stand for "Always Alkaline," but if that became believed in a widespread way it would be a clear backronym, despite its origins as a humoristic apronymic expansion. Not all apronyms are backronyms, and not all backronyms are apronyms. --Jeff Anonymous 06:31, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

---

Is there a List of backronyms somewhere ? Jay 14:40, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Not sure if Microsoft's Critical Update Notification Tool should be included... JoeBaldwin 23:29, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

This wouldn't be a backronym as described in the article, unless someone started with that four-letter word and decided that "Critical Update Notification Tool" was a suitable definition for it. --Arteitle 22:08, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)

So it's an accidental derogatory acronym? Another such example is Martti Oiva Kalevi Ahtisaari, whose initials spell a Finnish slang word for "mistake". Is there a proper term for this? 17:50, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

KFC - Kitchen Fresh Chicken

KFC, which stands for Kentucky Fried Chicken, has recently launched an ad campaign rebranding the KFC to stand for Kitchen Fresh Chicken. Would this count as a backronym?

Is this an official renaming as with DVD, or a promotional alternative expansion? Don't know if that makes a difference.... -- Smjg 15:05, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Censoring of f-word

I notice that in some parts of this article (like the Lufthansa entry), "fuck" is replaced with "f***", and in other parts (like Fiat), it is not censored. I think we should probably be consistent with this... which way do we go, "fuck" or "f***"?

I say spell it out. PS you forgot to sign your posting. ;Bear 17:45, 2004 Jul 11 (UTC)

Ironic that this should be an issue on this of all pages, since "fuck" is itself often backronymed: [1] . If we've decided it's OK to use this word on the page, we probably should mention it as a backronym as well. --Iustinus 06:08, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) (it's also Ironic that when I tried to post this comment I somehow deleted this whole section of the discussion. Trust me: I wasn't trying to censor it! ;) )

MUNG

* Mung - Green gram, a kind of pulse (Phaseolus Mungo), grown for food in India, commonly backronymed as "Mash Until No Good". Later it had become "Mung Until No Good", making it a rare example of a recursive backronym.

---

no, Mung, the 'acronym' originally meant "to clumsily debug a program" , then later it became 'to clumsily debug a program to such an extent that it was rendered unfixable' I don't think it had anything to do with Mung Maybe we take this out and put "KFC" (see above) in?Pedant 13:37, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The derivation of that meaning doesn't seem to be exactly known, but see [2]. -- Smjg 15:05, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Expansions

Should the expansions be in a different font or in quotes or differentiated by some means from regular text? I know they're capitilized now but that seems rather weak. I'm espcially think of entries like Ford with multiple expansions. Lefty 17:42, 2004 Aug 14 (UTC)

Changing the first para

Lefty, I had changed the first intro because it had been taken straight from this:
backronym n. [portmanteau of back + acronym] A word interpreted as an acronym that was not originally so intended. Examples are given under BASIC, recursive acronym (Cygnus), Acme, and mung. Discovering backronyms is a common form of wordplay among hackers.
As well as this there are about twenty other in Yahoo Search alone which all read the same. My contention was that we can do better than copying articles from other websites and can create our own. That is why I did it. Dieter Simon 23:30, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Okay, how about this version? It's your formulation, except I changed the "noun or adjective or verb" wordage to simply "word". Lefty 23:41, 2004 Aug 14 (UTC)

Many thanks, Lefty, that's fine. If you want to see how much searching into it it took before I understood the concept backronym just take a look in the talk page of the -onym article. It also gives you details about the "Hacker's Dictionary", where all these articles on the web seem to come from. Dieter Simon 00:25, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If you go back to the very first version of this article, you'll see that the language you found was copied from public-domain material. I'm against copyvios but I'm not against using something in the public domain if it explains the point correctly. JamesMLane 00:55, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, James, I realize that and it was a good idea of yours to create an article about the subject. However, searching the web there must be at least twenty-five websites also copied from the "Hacker's Dictionary". I would have thought we might do a bit better and create our own version, since we know all about the subject - well, I do at least now, having read all your quoted examples - and explain things a bit better than they do. Well, that's why I did it and I hoped people would understand. Dieter Simon 00:03, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, but I can't take credit for creating this article, and I've made only a few additions to it. An article like this gets better when several people look at it and each thinks, "I see a way to explain things a bit better." So improving on the public-domain stuff is perfectly proper. I just wanted to make clear that it's not a copyvio situation. In copyvio, we must change the wording even if we don't think the change is an improvement. JamesMLane 00:49, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Something-ronym

It seems to me that there ought to be some distinction between genuine or official backronyms (such as Perl) and those that are just invented for humorous purposes. I don't know if there's another term for joke-acronyms like Fix Or Repair Daily, Need Another Seven Astronauts, etc. or if there's even a reliable way to differentiate them from those which may have originally been jokes, but were adopted in some official capacity. For whatever reason, I don't think that words which were originally acronyms (including most of the ones in this article) should qualify as backronyms. At the very least, there should be some separation in the article between "true" backronyms (expansions that were not acronyms in their original formulation) and alternative-acronym backronyms (all the rest). Otherwise, readers may be led to believe that NASA was not an acronym until the Challenger disaster. -- Wapcaplet 18:00, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I believe the resolution is to state the official acronym as such or remove all official acronyms all together and let the main page (that the word should link to) handle it. Dustin Asby 08:28, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've reworded the intro and split the acronyms up into (as near as I can tell) non-acronyms and re-interpreted acronyms. It strikes me that a great many of these are the kind of thing you'd expect to get in one of those lame "funny acronyms" emails from your friends, chain-forwarded throughout the internet, rather than encyclopedic material. This list would be gigantic, if it included every "Found On Road Dead", well-known and obscure, of the backronymical lexicon. It's tricky separating the lame from the interesting. I'm not sure what to do with this article. Any ideas? -- Wapcaplet 00:57, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Most of these are just jokes. One possibility would be to segregate out all the mere jokes, while giving more prominence to backronyms like the one for Arby's that had some significance in the real world. Some jokes might deserve to be in the upper echelon, such as Ada, if "Another Damn Acronmy" was indeed intended as a humorous reference when the language was named. JamesMLane 01:47, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Invento-ronym? Bogus-ronym?

What do they call the reverse of an acronym that was created solely to give the acronym a meaning? I'm thinking of things like BASIC and PLATO, as well as the hundreds of other examples found in the computer world, where the acronym was invented first and the bogus terminology later

Maury 22:32, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I guess I should have read the whole article. However it appears several of the listings on apronym are common with ones here. Some cleanup in order?

Maury 22:34, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Definition of "acronym"

I've removed the addition that restricted the applicability of "acronym" to terms like radar that can be pronounced as a word. Other terms, like HTML, are considered by some people to be acronyms as well, while others would exclude them from the definition and call them initialisms. The article links to acronym where this difference is described. JamesMLane 03:48, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

NASA

In "From the Earth to the Moon", one character comments that NASA stands for Never Absolutely Sure of Anything. (Was this made up for the show, or has it been heard elsewhere?)

No, but I've read "Need Another Seven Astronauts" before. --82.141.48.65 23:27, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lisp made the list twice. Which to keep?

FIAT

Did Fiat stand for anything originally? There's entries for it on both 'sides' in this article. Krupo 22:16, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)

Società Anonima Fabbrica Italiana Automobili Torino -- Italian Automobile Factory Turin, Ltd. -- Arwel 23:33, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

COP

The entry for this is wrong. The word is a shortening of "copper," a term used to refer to early American police officers due to their copper badges. I forget whether it was NYC or Chicago that originated the term. This is from the History Channel; Merriam-Webster agrees. Ari 19:51, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

i've read on several occasion that the word copper has a simmilar etymology as capture. the cop/copper being someone who captures perpetrators. i can't find any reliable sources though.

Suggestion for MCSE

Should MCSE be called Multiple Choice Special Edition?

It's widely known as "Minesweeper Consultant / Solitaire Expert" --82.141.48.65 23:29, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've seen "Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer" more commonly used" --Daedalus01 18:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Up here in Canada, MCSE doesn't stand for anything at all, because use of the word "engineer" is regulated, and it's not actually a form of engineering. I'm not sure if that deserves a mention or not in this article...--24.42.245.92 14:33, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

GNU

According to the GNU entry, GNU stands for "GNU's Not Unix." Thus, that translation isn't really a backronym ... is it? --Joe Sewell 21:13, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No, that's a recursive acronym.

CQD

I'm going to revert CQD as being a backronym unless someone can come up with a citation. *Every* reference I've ever seen to it allocates it as a conscious initialism. It's not really an acronym, anyway: an acronym is by definition a *word* formed from initials.
--Baylink 23:55, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

confusing acronyms and backronyms

"Many people confuse acronyms and backronyms, like DVD for example"

Aren't backronyms also acronyms? But not all acronyms are backronyms. I don't see how backronyms become not acronyms.

I think a more accurate phrase would be, "Many people don't recognize backronyms because they aren't aware that the original acronym has been redefined."

Anyhow, thanks for this page, I wasn't even aware of this word. :)

"longer"

"In other words, only after the acronym was first created did people try to create an longer definition for each of the letters —that is to say, the words of the expanded term were chosen to fit the letters of the acronym."

I think the word "longer" is ambiguous. Does it mean the new words chosen have to be greater in length than the original acronym's words?

I think this really means the words chosen are new or updated or something of that sort.

Maybe something like: "In othe words, only after the acronym was first created did people realize the words in the acronym were inappropriate, leading them to redefine the words while keeping the resulting acronym the same."

backronym for backronym

I tried to make a backronymn for the word backronymn, and found it exceedingly difficult. The closest I got was "Backwards-adapted Acronymn Conveying Representation Originally Not Meant" (BACRONM). Oh well. Rohirok 02:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

ambiguity

This article is somewhat ambiguous. The first definition is: "A backronym is the phenomenon that the short word exists first and is then expanded to a phrase." this definition is fine, and makes sense... but is later countered. here: "Some backronyms are back-formed by replacing one word in an acronym with another, when the original meaning is deemed obsolete or inaccurate." according to the first definition, it's not possible for that to be a backronym, as it had an original meaning, lest it be suggesting that the original meaning was lost or forgotten, which could easily be the case, as with dvd... but then we must bring up the purpose of the acronym in general: is it created to replace the word? anyways, i think it would be more accurate to say "A back-formed backronym is formed when the original meaning becomes obsolete or inaccurate, and as such must be changed..." or something like that. it seems to me that there is a lot of redundance and blurry lines in the acronym community, because even under that definition (or rather change of subject) it's still inaccurate in reference to the first definition. conceivably there are only rare instances (as phenomenon are) in which a true or pure backronym exists, those being when letters are used as symbols, much like the SOS example. the only other example i can think of is qwerty, though that doesn't work because there's no words attached to it (yet), only an object or idea.

much of the rest of the article also contains descriptions of "backronyms" which are contradictory to the first definition. Dreamer.redeemer 01:19, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

The definition does seem to only address word->acronym expansion and not reengineered acronyms. Unless a better term can be established for reengineering acronyms I think the definition should be modified to include them. These two sources of letter sequences for backronyms are compatible and not really relevant to the concept being addressed: the reverse-engineering of an acronym from a sequence of letters.

perhaps a better definition would be: "Backronym is a type of acronym that begins as a sequence of characters, from which the constituent words are derived. The word "backronym" is a portmanteau of back and acronym, and was coined in 1983."

It may help to start off with a description of the two sources of backronyms (acronyms and non-acronyms) as well as the two major types: Positive/neutral (often replacing obsolete or undesirable constituent words) and negative ( satire/prejorative). Special attention should be paid to the negative type as a common form of cultural criticism

SATs

SAT now doesn't stand for anything at all. The article should be changed to reflect this. Mkop 18:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Acronym vs Initials

The paragraph referring to A.D., R.I.P. and R.P.G. is in error - these are initials, not acronyms (and therefore not backronyms). Interesting info, though. 03:58, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

SNAFU

There seems to be a descrepency between the SNAFU article and this one: The SNAFU article claims that the 'F' in this acronym originally stood for 'Fouled' and was later changed to 'Fucked'. This article claims alternately that the 'F' stood for 'Fucked' originally, and was (for the sake of politelness) backronymed to 'Fouled'. I don't know what the correct facts are, but certainly only one of these is right. Perhaps the SNAFU article is more likely to be accurate? Since SNAFU is used here as an example of an backronym, perhaps it should be removed as it may be incorrect? Cai 12:33, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Derogatory Backronyms

There seems to be insufficient discussion of the common practice of derogatory backronyms, especially against commercial products and government agencies. These appear to be more common in every day conversation, if not popular culture than the atricle suggests. An exhaustive list is not necessary, but an acknowledgement of the cultural significance of the activity and some additional examples would be helpful.

Here are a few examples that could illustrate:

• FORD: Fix Or Repair Daily, Found On Road Dead
• FIAT: Fix It Again Tony
• NASA: Never A Straight Answer
• SUV: Stupid Ungainly Vehicle
• PS/2 (computer): Piece of Shit 2 (extremely popular in it's day)
• OS/2: Half of an Operating System
• ISDN: It Still Does Nothing (see EFF bumper stickers)
• ICOM: I Can Only Monitor (ham radio manufacturer)
• FJ: Mother Fucking Junk (ham radio manufacturer)

Some other interesting but not necessarily derogatory backronyms:

• NSA: No Such Agency
• SPAM: Send Phenomenal Ammounts of Mail (fake etnymology not mentioned on the spam page)
• PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
• NFL: Negro Football League (not necessarily racist or derogatory depending on context)

"Erroneous backronyms"

I've just put a reference to "erroneous backronyms" in the sic article, but am now given to wonder whether "erroneous backronym" is a tautology. Any thoughts?

=

Addition to FIAT.... there is a popular joke stating that it means First In All Trouble.

Reuben

TWAIN

Similar to the cited PCMCIA, the scanner device standard TWAIN can be backcronymed (or even it was the original meaning, I cannot tell for sure) to "Technology Without An Interesting Name" --Michele.alessandrini 17:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

It is bad enough that Wikipedia has a mostly useless List of backronyms consisting of something like a bunch of jokes, but without the funny bits. But despite this, there is also a constantly increasing list of similarly high-larious backronyms on this page. Why the redundancy? Indeed, why list so many of these things in the first place? Very few of them are known to anyone besides the guy that made them up and put them on Wikipedia. Phiwum 17:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)