4 ms·

All areas of practice have their own jargon, words that superficially sound similar to regular English but actually have specific insider meaning that promotes

by czzr 7y ago

All areas of practice have their own jargon, words that superficially sound similar to regular English but actually have specific insider meaning that promotes faster in-group communication (and a degree of in-group signalling) - this is true for scientists, software engineers, yoga instructors and yes, business people.

thaumasiotes 7y ago
> All areas of practice have their own jargon, words that superficially sound similar to regular English but actually have specific insider meaning Related: coverage of the recent cum-ex scandals has often included the factoid that "cum-ex" is from the Latin for "with-without". Of course this isn't true. While cum is Latin for "with", the Latin for "without" is sine -- ex is Latin for "from". Instead, as used in the name of the scandal and the operations behind it, ex is ordinary English financial jargon for "without".
- tomatocracy 7y ago
  Ex as a prefix does ultimately derive from Latin here but meaning "outside" (hence eg excommunicated or exclave), not "without". This makes sense linguistically because the entitlement to the dividend is outside the scope of what's being bought and sold in the trade.
  - thaumasiotes 7y ago
    The meaning of ex in ex-dividend is not "outside". As originally used in the financial jargon ex-dividend date, ex is used correctly and has the sense "after (in time)". That is, if you buy something ex-dividend, the dividend has already been paid (you're buying after the payment), and so you won't get it. [1] It's sense II in Lewis and Short ( http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3Dex http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%... ) (Note sense II.A.2, which gives us the more vernacular English prefix ex-, as in ex-wife.) "Outside" is not even one of the many senses of ex in Latin; ex always has a sense related to the core concept of "from". "Outside" is extra. [1] For some reason, the ex-dividend date is one day before the actual payment, but the idea is still that you're buying after the date of the dividend.
    - frankc 7y ago
      Just a minor correction. The ex-date is not necessarily the date it is paid. It is the day after holders of the security are entitled to the dividend. The actual pay date comes later. The important thing is that the price of the security adjusts on the ex-date because the money has now been allocated.
      - tomatocracy 7y ago
        The ex date is the first day when the security trades without rights to the dividend (or rights, or coupon etc). It's not the day when holders are entitled to the dividend because if you trade on a particular day, you don't own the securities until settlement occurs which is on a later day (different markets have different conventions here for how much later). The company/issuer will have a record date for administrative purposes when they take a snapshot of the ownership register so the ex date is the first date on which settlement will take place after that record date. The payment date may even be some weeks after this but is set by the company but this isn't really relevant to when the ex date is.
        frankc 7y ago
        I think we are in agreement?
        thaumasiotes 7y ago
        As I read your comments: >> [The ex-date] is the day after holders of the security are entitled to the dividend. > It's not the day when holders are entitled to the dividend because if you trade on a particular day, you don't own the securities until settlement occurs Imagine that the ex-date for a security is 2017-05-19. You sell one such security on 2017-05-18. Settlement clears on 2017-05-22. Because of the delay in settlement, you held the security on the ex-date (and on the day before the ex-date), but you're not entitled to the dividend because you sold the security before the ex-date. That's my reading of the two comments. I take no position on this. The point I'm making is different, that in the phrase "ex-dividend date", the "ex" and the "dividend" are not related to each other. They both relate to "date"; "ex-dividend" is not a logical unit within the phrase. However, the phrase "ex-dividend date" (good Latin usage) was clipped to "ex-dividend", and then people started assuming "ex" meant "without", because an "ex-dividend security" (no longer good Latin usage) was one that traded without rights to the dividend. Stated another way -- A "dividend date" is a kind of date, a date related to the concept "dividend". "Ex-dividend date" is (originally) a prepositional phrase meaning "after the dividend date". It's not a kind of date related to the concept "ex-dividend"; "ex-dividend" is not a concept. But then, English-speaking traders who didn't know Latin reanalyzed the phrase "ex-dividend date" as a noun phrase referring to a kind of date, which required a further reanalysis of what exactly "ex" meant. That new meaning, "without", is original to English. In tree form, we have an original phrase (ex-(dividend date)) being reanalyzed as ((ex-dividend) date).
skytreader 7y ago
> that promotes faster in-group communication I think the reason that business jargon gets more flak than usual jargon is because it does not really facilitate faster communication. At least not to everyone involved. Maybe salesman to salesman, business dev to business dev, it would make sense. But then they use that jargon with everyone else (i.e., when it is not appropriate to) and it sounds just as ridiculous as when they hear a dev say "We can't do that without considerable infrastructure overhaul. The current LTS is still a year away from EOL but the vendor has decided to use incompatible dependencies anyway". If that were me, I'd just say "There's a lot of work involved to make that happen. We're talking 60-hour work weeks if you want that deadline." Or something like that. And if you hear me use the former wording in a meeting with non-technical people involved, you can bet it's just me trying to sound relevant to the meeting (because the next question would be "Could you elaborate?" and I will use more jargon, which will cause a cycle of explanation and boy won't I look important?) It's ridiculous for me to hear "We need to get this done because we want to capture this market and turn this vertical into a core competency. This will make our portfolio more attractive to investors." when you can just say "Our client really needs/wants these features. We risk losing them if we don't deliver by the deadline." There's also something to be said about weird turns of phrase that make communications sound less personal. Whereas I would just say "As I already told you," business-speak will make me use "As per my last email...". I don't know about others but the first time I encountered "As per my last email", it did feel foreign to me, like it's not English anymore. Modesty aside, I've read a lot, fiction and nonfiction, but only in my work inbox will I find "As per my last email".
- pas 7y ago
  > As per my last email Isn't this just the "As I've written in my last letter" for the e-mail era? Maybe it's just a cultural difference. (In my native language - and probably because of that in English too - I try use the verbs corresponding to the medium, so if I wrote to someone then I'll refer to that communication as "as you probably read" instead of "heard", and so on.)
  - passer_byer 7y ago
    >As per my last email As a native English speaker, if I encounter this phrase I take it to suggest I am not paying attention.
tomatocracy 7y ago
I suppose youre talking about terms of art. That's true for business too, I agree, but I'd argue that this is words/phrases like "EBITDA", "division", "tier 1 client". There's also useful shorthand like using the CEOs first name only, which happens even in Megacorps where few people have ever even met the CEO. Corporate-speak is something different though to me - it's purpose is not to convey any specific meaning but simply to posture, which is why it's so widely hated.
stewartm 7y ago
If you work for a business, are you not all 'business people'? In my working lifetime, having people occupying managerial roles that have zero relevant shop floor experience, has gone (or at least feels to have gone) from being the exception, to the absolute norm. Therefore in my experience, this, combined with the point you started with, is the nub of the matter. Managers when faced with not having a clue what a team in a field that naturally has its own jargon are talking about, are desperate to recover the balance of power. Thus they end up speaking a language designed to to exclude all apart from those who submit to their influence and join in.

by czzr 7y ago

thaumasiotes 7y ago

> All areas of practice have their own jargon, words that superficially sound similar to regular English but actually have specific insider meaning Related: coverage of the recent cum-ex scandals has often included the factoid that "cum-ex" is from the Latin for "with-without". Of course this isn't true. While cum is Latin for "with", the Latin for "without" is sine -- ex is Latin for "from". Instead, as used in the name of the scandal and the operations behind it, ex is ordinary English financial jargon for "without".

tomatocracy 7y ago
Ex as a prefix does ultimately derive from Latin here but meaning "outside" (hence eg excommunicated or exclave), not "without". This makes sense linguistically because the entitlement to the dividend is outside the scope of what's being bought and sold in the trade.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago
  The meaning of ex in ex-dividend is not "outside". As originally used in the financial jargon ex-dividend date, ex is used correctly and has the sense "after (in time)". That is, if you buy something ex-dividend, the dividend has already been paid (you're buying after the payment), and so you won't get it. [1] It's sense II in Lewis and Short ( http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3Dex http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%... ) (Note sense II.A.2, which gives us the more vernacular English prefix ex-, as in ex-wife.) "Outside" is not even one of the many senses of ex in Latin; ex always has a sense related to the core concept of "from". "Outside" is extra. [1] For some reason, the ex-dividend date is one day before the actual payment, but the idea is still that you're buying after the date of the dividend.
  - frankc 7y ago
    Just a minor correction. The ex-date is not necessarily the date it is paid. It is the day after holders of the security are entitled to the dividend. The actual pay date comes later. The important thing is that the price of the security adjusts on the ex-date because the money has now been allocated.
    - tomatocracy 7y ago
      The ex date is the first day when the security trades without rights to the dividend (or rights, or coupon etc). It's not the day when holders are entitled to the dividend because if you trade on a particular day, you don't own the securities until settlement occurs which is on a later day (different markets have different conventions here for how much later). The company/issuer will have a record date for administrative purposes when they take a snapshot of the ownership register so the ex date is the first date on which settlement will take place after that record date. The payment date may even be some weeks after this but is set by the company but this isn't really relevant to when the ex date is.
      - frankc 7y ago
        I think we are in agreement?
        thaumasiotes 7y ago
        As I read your comments: >> [The ex-date] is the day after holders of the security are entitled to the dividend. > It's not the day when holders are entitled to the dividend because if you trade on a particular day, you don't own the securities until settlement occurs Imagine that the ex-date for a security is 2017-05-19. You sell one such security on 2017-05-18. Settlement clears on 2017-05-22. Because of the delay in settlement, you held the security on the ex-date (and on the day before the ex-date), but you're not entitled to the dividend because you sold the security before the ex-date. That's my reading of the two comments. I take no position on this. The point I'm making is different, that in the phrase "ex-dividend date", the "ex" and the "dividend" are not related to each other. They both relate to "date"; "ex-dividend" is not a logical unit within the phrase. However, the phrase "ex-dividend date" (good Latin usage) was clipped to "ex-dividend", and then people started assuming "ex" meant "without", because an "ex-dividend security" (no longer good Latin usage) was one that traded without rights to the dividend. Stated another way -- A "dividend date" is a kind of date, a date related to the concept "dividend". "Ex-dividend date" is (originally) a prepositional phrase meaning "after the dividend date". It's not a kind of date related to the concept "ex-dividend"; "ex-dividend" is not a concept. But then, English-speaking traders who didn't know Latin reanalyzed the phrase "ex-dividend date" as a noun phrase referring to a kind of date, which required a further reanalysis of what exactly "ex" meant. That new meaning, "without", is original to English. In tree form, we have an original phrase (ex-(dividend date)) being reanalyzed as ((ex-dividend) date).

skytreader 7y ago

> that promotes faster in-group communication I think the reason that business jargon gets more flak than usual jargon is because it does not really facilitate faster communication. At least not to everyone involved. Maybe salesman to salesman, business dev to business dev, it would make sense. But then they use that jargon with everyone else (i.e., when it is not appropriate to) and it sounds just as ridiculous as when they hear a dev say "We can't do that without considerable infrastructure overhaul. The current LTS is still a year away from EOL but the vendor has decided to use incompatible dependencies anyway". If that were me, I'd just say "There's a lot of work involved to make that happen. We're talking 60-hour work weeks if you want that deadline." Or something like that. And if you hear me use the former wording in a meeting with non-technical people involved, you can bet it's just me trying to sound relevant to the meeting (because the next question would be "Could you elaborate?" and I will use more jargon, which will cause a cycle of explanation and boy won't I look important?) It's ridiculous for me to hear "We need to get this done because we want to capture this market and turn this vertical into a core competency. This will make our portfolio more attractive to investors." when you can just say "Our client really needs/wants these features. We risk losing them if we don't deliver by the deadline." There's also something to be said about weird turns of phrase that make communications sound less personal. Whereas I would just say "As I already told you," business-speak will make me use "As per my last email...". I don't know about others but the first time I encountered "As per my last email", it did feel foreign to me, like it's not English anymore. Modesty aside, I've read a lot, fiction and nonfiction, but only in my work inbox will I find "As per my last email".

pas 7y ago
> As per my last email Isn't this just the "As I've written in my last letter" for the e-mail era? Maybe it's just a cultural difference. (In my native language - and probably because of that in English too - I try use the verbs corresponding to the medium, so if I wrote to someone then I'll refer to that communication as "as you probably read" instead of "heard", and so on.)
- passer_byer 7y ago
  >As per my last email As a native English speaker, if I encounter this phrase I take it to suggest I am not paying attention.

tomatocracy 7y ago

I suppose youre talking about terms of art. That's true for business too, I agree, but I'd argue that this is words/phrases like "EBITDA", "division", "tier 1 client". There's also useful shorthand like using the CEOs first name only, which happens even in Megacorps where few people have ever even met the CEO. Corporate-speak is something different though to me - it's purpose is not to convey any specific meaning but simply to posture, which is why it's so widely hated.

stewartm 7y ago

If you work for a business, are you not all 'business people'? In my working lifetime, having people occupying managerial roles that have zero relevant shop floor experience, has gone (or at least feels to have gone) from being the exception, to the absolute norm. Therefore in my experience, this, combined with the point you started with, is the nub of the matter. Managers when faced with not having a clue what a team in a field that naturally has its own jargon are talking about, are desperate to recover the balance of power. Thus they end up speaking a language designed to to exclude all apart from those who submit to their influence and join in.