Complexity LO10482

BrooksJeff@aol.com
Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:30:28 -0400

Replying to LO10413 --

> From: JC Howell <orgpsych@csra.net>
> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 08:39:54 -0400
> ....
> The
> challenge is to translate [LO] concepts into language that others can
> understand and to which they can relate in some meaningful way.
>
> I wonder, why do we often try to circumvent jargon by commonly creating a
> different jargon? Why do we seem to have difficulty using "common
> language" that everyone already understands to express these ideas and
> visions?

Clyde,

I'd suggest several different factors:
1) Self/ego-gratification (as you suggest)
2) Ownership of a concept: If people use your jargon, you get recognized as
having created it. This is not just ego, it's also money.
3) Jargon is short-hand: Rather than using "common language" that must make
do with description, jargon can "point to" a concept with a single word, a
short phrase, or an acronym.

This makes me think about the users of a particular jargon forming a
subculture, and all the in-group/out-group, us/them dynamics that entails.
Also, the role of translater becomes very important. And translating is
not easy, as you point out. People make careers out of "popularizing"
different specialized fields, from astrophysics to modern art. Perhaps as
we "jargonize" concepts we're evolving a vocabulary - some jargon either
does not capture a concept well, or the concept captured is not so
important, and the particular piece of jargon is lost. Sometimes the
jargon "fits" and becomes part of the general lexicon.

Regards,
Jeff

--

Jeff Brooks <BrooksJeff@AOL.com>

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>