5 ms·

Consider non-native English speakers. For them, the abbreviation makes it much harder to read.

tkln 7y ago
I, as a non-native English speaker, disagree.
GuB-42 7y ago
I am not a native English speaker. Reasonably skilled, but nowhere near native. Abbreviations don't make it harder because of it. If anything, it is less of a problem. Because using the proper English word doesn't help more than using an abbreviation if you don't know the meaning of the English word in the first place. On a side note, I have more trouble understanding code written in French (my native language) than in English. Simply because when we learn programming, we learn it with the English terms. For example, we know what a "token" is in the context of a "parser", that's how we call it. The french translation would be "symbole" and "analyseur syntaxique" respectively, but you will be better understood if you use the English words.
- schoen 7y ago
  Was there a period in the 1960s or 1970s where French speakers used native terms instead of English for computing terminology? I'm wondering about this because a Brazilian friend is doing a computer history project and he noticed that 1970s documentation used literal Portuguese translations of English technical terms, and the translations are no longer transparently comprehensible to present-day Brazilians because of the subsequent switch to using the English terminology. For example, the documentation refers to a "montador", and he had to translate that into English for his Brazilian audience ("assembler").
- psychoslave 7y ago
  >Because using the proper English word doesn't help more than using an abbreviation if you don't know the meaning of the English word in the first place. If you don't know the meaning of an English word, you can use a dictionary. If you don't know the meaning of some ad hoc abbreviation, unless you can waste even more human time by asking at people who already are in the secret, you are left on your own. > On a side note, I have more trouble understanding code written in French (my native language) than in English. USA soft power is strong, that's it. It's people duty to take care of better mastering their own languages if they don't want to see it ineffective in their daily linguistic needs. People know what a token is in the context of a parser, only after they learned it. When this is not the learner native language, they will learn it most likely without having a clue of how it makes sense in the semantic network of English. If a French is first introduced to this notion using the term "lexie" (which also exists in English by the way, as a borrowing from French to English in linguistic this time), chances are far greater that it will evoke something meaningful to this person, as it's lexically close to the term lexic. Using French morphemes, one could also easily produce terms like métataxeur[1], or even distaxeur and transtaxeur. >but you will be better understood if you use the English words. Chance are greater that they will see what you are referring to as they already crossed the term before more often. It doesn't necessarily imply that they will better understand what it means. When a notion is well assimilated, it's recognized in any language mastered, even when it's expressed under a bright new metaphor. [1] see https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/m%C3%A9tataxe https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/m%C3%A9tataxe and https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/-eur https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/-eur
userbinator 7y ago
If they don't speak English, it matters even less... (I've read code written by Chinese --- variables named dzhq, xljn, etc. are not uncommon. If anything, they like to abbreviate even more.)
- lifthrasiir 7y ago
  I have read many Korean codes and while there are lots of Latin transliterations abbreviations were rare.
- LeifCarrotson 7y ago
  If they're not fluent in the same abbreviations but have decent English-as-a-second-language skills, they can read Rosalyn style code but not 2-letter abbreviations. Heck, I can't even read my own 2-letter abbreviations a year later sometimes. When I write the code, I'm likely coming off reading a paper or datasheet that used certain abbreviations. I might have seen the word "token" so many times in that week so in that moment, I can't imagine what else 'tk' might mean. But it's when I come back a year later off a heat stake project that used K-type thermocouples where seeing 'token' is much clearer. If those Chinese variables were named DaanZenghQian (sorry, I know my Mandarin sucks) instead of dzhq you might have a chance to translate that into "result of the upper thousands" for whatever that means in your context. Pretend you're someone who doesn't have exactly the state of mind and background knowledge you have right now. That might be a Chinese person with limited English, it might be your coworker who was working in Delphi instead of assembler in the 90s, it might be yourself with a bit of time elapsed. That's the person who you need to be writing for, not for you in the moment of writing it.

tkln 7y ago

I, as a non-native English speaker, disagree.

I am not a native English speaker. Reasonably skilled, but nowhere near native. Abbreviations don't make it harder because of it. If anything, it is less of a problem. Because using the proper English word doesn't help more than using an abbreviation if you don't know the meaning of the English word in the first place. On a side note, I have more trouble understanding code written in French (my native language) than in English. Simply because when we learn programming, we learn it with the English terms. For example, we know what a "token" is in the context of a "parser", that's how we call it. The french translation would be "symbole" and "analyseur syntaxique" respectively, but you will be better understood if you use the English words.

schoen 7y ago
Was there a period in the 1960s or 1970s where French speakers used native terms instead of English for computing terminology? I'm wondering about this because a Brazilian friend is doing a computer history project and he noticed that 1970s documentation used literal Portuguese translations of English technical terms, and the translations are no longer transparently comprehensible to present-day Brazilians because of the subsequent switch to using the English terminology. For example, the documentation refers to a "montador", and he had to translate that into English for his Brazilian audience ("assembler").
psychoslave 7y ago
>Because using the proper English word doesn't help more than using an abbreviation if you don't know the meaning of the English word in the first place. If you don't know the meaning of an English word, you can use a dictionary. If you don't know the meaning of some ad hoc abbreviation, unless you can waste even more human time by asking at people who already are in the secret, you are left on your own. > On a side note, I have more trouble understanding code written in French (my native language) than in English. USA soft power is strong, that's it. It's people duty to take care of better mastering their own languages if they don't want to see it ineffective in their daily linguistic needs. People know what a token is in the context of a parser, only after they learned it. When this is not the learner native language, they will learn it most likely without having a clue of how it makes sense in the semantic network of English. If a French is first introduced to this notion using the term "lexie" (which also exists in English by the way, as a borrowing from French to English in linguistic this time), chances are far greater that it will evoke something meaningful to this person, as it's lexically close to the term lexic. Using French morphemes, one could also easily produce terms like métataxeur[1], or even distaxeur and transtaxeur. >but you will be better understood if you use the English words. Chance are greater that they will see what you are referring to as they already crossed the term before more often. It doesn't necessarily imply that they will better understand what it means. When a notion is well assimilated, it's recognized in any language mastered, even when it's expressed under a bright new metaphor. [1] see https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/m%C3%A9tataxe https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/m%C3%A9tataxe and https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/-eur https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/-eur

userbinator 7y ago

If they don't speak English, it matters even less... (I've read code written by Chinese --- variables named dzhq, xljn, etc. are not uncommon. If anything, they like to abbreviate even more.)

lifthrasiir 7y ago
I have read many Korean codes and while there are lots of Latin transliterations abbreviations were rare.
LeifCarrotson 7y ago
If they're not fluent in the same abbreviations but have decent English-as-a-second-language skills, they can read Rosalyn style code but not 2-letter abbreviations. Heck, I can't even read my own 2-letter abbreviations a year later sometimes. When I write the code, I'm likely coming off reading a paper or datasheet that used certain abbreviations. I might have seen the word "token" so many times in that week so in that moment, I can't imagine what else 'tk' might mean. But it's when I come back a year later off a heat stake project that used K-type thermocouples where seeing 'token' is much clearer. If those Chinese variables were named DaanZenghQian (sorry, I know my Mandarin sucks) instead of dzhq you might have a chance to translate that into "result of the upper thousands" for whatever that means in your context. Pretend you're someone who doesn't have exactly the state of mind and background knowledge you have right now. That might be a Chinese person with limited English, it might be your coworker who was working in Delphi instead of assembler in the 90s, it might be yourself with a bit of time elapsed. That's the person who you need to be writing for, not for you in the moment of writing it.