3 ms·

I'm not a fan of this for several reasons: 1. If you say, "ISIS", everyone knows what you're talking about. Not so for "Daesh." 2. Anyone can read "ISIS" and

by ggreer 11y ago

I'm not a fan of this for several reasons: 1. If you say, "ISIS", everyone knows what you're talking about. Not so for "Daesh." 2. Anyone can read "ISIS" and know how to pronounce it. How does one pronounce "Daesh"? Is it daysh? Dash? Dah-esh? I don't know. 3. We'll still need to know and use the old names. There are thousands of historical news articles using the terms ISIS, ISIL, IS, The Islamic State, etc. Googling for them is already hard enough. It reminds me of xkcd's Standards (http://xkcd.com/927/ http://xkcd.com/927/). 4. "Daesh" autocorrects to other things on iOS, Android, and Windows 10. It was very annoying to write this comment, as I was constantly un-correcting "dash". The author makes some good points, but I think they're outweighed by the disadvantages I mentioned. Unfortunately, the cat is out of the bag. We now have yet another name for ISIS. Edit: I just thought of another one. If "Daesh" takes off, people may think those who use "ISIS" or "The Islamic State" are sympathetic toward the group. I'm certain I'll slip up in conversation and have to dig myself out of a hole.

r-w 11y ago
tl;dr: Too little, too late.
tempestn 11y ago
I can understand these concerns, but honestly I feel like they are outweighed by the potential benefits. First of all, certainly on my Android keyboard, correcting autocorrect once teaches it the new word, and it will then always use it if spelled correctly, and even begin to learn when to correct to it. So that's a pretty minor annoyance. #1 is an issue certainly, but if you run across someone who doesn't know the acronym, you can summarize the thoughts of this article. Plus, the hope is that it catches on, so that most people will end up knowing it. Presumably if that happens, #2 would also be taken care of as a consensus develops. #3 yes, true, this will make it slightly more difficult. But still, ISIS|ISIL|Daesh isn't too tough either. The name sounds trivial, but I don't think it's a stretch to believe that if this name actually became widespread, it could have a significant (if small) impact on "Daesh's" recruitment, which would seem to be worth the annoyance.
reedlaw 11y ago
At one point no one knew what ISIS meant. This article is trying to educate about use of a better term. There are plenty of words that go out of style. "ISIS" is no more pronounceable than Daesh. Is-is? Ice-iss? Eye...Ess...Eye...Ess? Auto-correct dictionaries should reflect modern usage, not the other way around. The advantages of the term Daesh are clear from the article. None of the disadvantages listed seem significant in comparison to the strategic value of using a term that accurately reflects how most of the world views the matter as opposed to a term that favors the terrorist group.
- ggreer 11y ago
  There is an Egyptian goddess named Isis. Many women have the name as well. It's much less likely to be mispronounced than Daesh. Also, autocorrect usually leaves all-caps acronyms unmolested.
wellyWellyWell 11y ago
THE most hilarious variant so far, for me, has been: Islamic State in Iraq & Al-sham Wow. Really? That one, to me, was even MORE ridiculous than ISIL which was stupid to begin with. Who the fuck calls anything "The Levant" anymore, Jesus Christ himself? What century is this? This is where you start to understand 2 things. 1. There are people trying to erase Syria and invalidate the concept of Syria's statehood, and erode the public perception of national borders as they exist, so that amidst the propaganda campaign, we forget about the inconvenient countries that get in the way of campaigns for regional repartitioning along sectarian boundaries. 2. There are political motives to avoid using "ISIS" because it "sounds cooler" like a cartoon super villain, and seems to "send the wrong message" to viewers. So, anything to help people forget that Syria was a country, and anything to prevent ISIS from using the cooler sounding name. That's the subliminal message I'm noticing within all the spin doctoring.
- anonu 11y ago
  Its true that using the term "Levant" may seem outdated. However, if you recall ISIS' (or Daesh's) call to arms, it was to erase borders - and specifically the ones delineated in the secret WWI agreement known as Sykes-Picot. Back then, the goal was to carve up the Levant between France and the UK. So, using ISIL is in reference to their stated mission. Maybe more reason to not use any IS or IS derivative...

by ggreer 11y ago

r-w 11y ago

tl;dr: Too little, too late.

tempestn 11y ago

I can understand these concerns, but honestly I feel like they are outweighed by the potential benefits. First of all, certainly on my Android keyboard, correcting autocorrect once teaches it the new word, and it will then always use it if spelled correctly, and even begin to learn when to correct to it. So that's a pretty minor annoyance. #1 is an issue certainly, but if you run across someone who doesn't know the acronym, you can summarize the thoughts of this article. Plus, the hope is that it catches on, so that most people will end up knowing it. Presumably if that happens, #2 would also be taken care of as a consensus develops. #3 yes, true, this will make it slightly more difficult. But still, ISIS|ISIL|Daesh isn't too tough either. The name sounds trivial, but I don't think it's a stretch to believe that if this name actually became widespread, it could have a significant (if small) impact on "Daesh's" recruitment, which would seem to be worth the annoyance.

reedlaw 11y ago

At one point no one knew what ISIS meant. This article is trying to educate about use of a better term. There are plenty of words that go out of style. "ISIS" is no more pronounceable than Daesh. Is-is? Ice-iss? Eye...Ess...Eye...Ess? Auto-correct dictionaries should reflect modern usage, not the other way around. The advantages of the term Daesh are clear from the article. None of the disadvantages listed seem significant in comparison to the strategic value of using a term that accurately reflects how most of the world views the matter as opposed to a term that favors the terrorist group.

ggreer 11y ago
There is an Egyptian goddess named Isis. Many women have the name as well. It's much less likely to be mispronounced than Daesh. Also, autocorrect usually leaves all-caps acronyms unmolested.

wellyWellyWell 11y ago

THE most hilarious variant so far, for me, has been: Islamic State in Iraq & Al-sham Wow. Really? That one, to me, was even MORE ridiculous than ISIL which was stupid to begin with. Who the fuck calls anything "The Levant" anymore, Jesus Christ himself? What century is this? This is where you start to understand 2 things. 1. There are people trying to erase Syria and invalidate the concept of Syria's statehood, and erode the public perception of national borders as they exist, so that amidst the propaganda campaign, we forget about the inconvenient countries that get in the way of campaigns for regional repartitioning along sectarian boundaries. 2. There are political motives to avoid using "ISIS" because it "sounds cooler" like a cartoon super villain, and seems to "send the wrong message" to viewers. So, anything to help people forget that Syria was a country, and anything to prevent ISIS from using the cooler sounding name. That's the subliminal message I'm noticing within all the spin doctoring.

anonu 11y ago
Its true that using the term "Levant" may seem outdated. However, if you recall ISIS' (or Daesh's) call to arms, it was to erase borders - and specifically the ones delineated in the secret WWI agreement known as Sykes-Picot. Back then, the goal was to carve up the Levant between France and the UK. So, using ISIL is in reference to their stated mission. Maybe more reason to not use any IS or IS derivative...