cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/70869345

Credit to Jack Scully

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 2 hours ago (1 child)

The pronunciation of an anagram's component words has no bearing on the anagram's pronunciation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 hour ago (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 1 hour ago (1 child)

    I think that question is best posed to the Joint Photographic Experts Group, better known as "jay-fegg".

    (For the record, I'm in camp "G as in Graphic", but it's still true that an acronym's source words don't dictate the pronunciation.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 hour ago (1 child)

    They dont absolutely define it, but they certainly contribute. Assuming one or the other as sole definer seems silly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 44 minutes ago (1 child)

    Except they don't. The vast majority of acronyms have at least one letter that's pronounced differently than in the word it's representing. Any correlation is purely coincidental.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 27 minutes ago

    So occasionally one letter doesnt fit with the rest... doesnt that mean that the rule is not absolute and my statement is correct? That often the originating phrase contributes and often it does not, and that neither is exclusive to the other?

  • source
  • parent