From: gaf@uucs1.UUCP (gaf)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Why all the jargon?
Message-ID: <563@uucs1.UUCP>
Date: 1 Aug 91 00:43:00 GMT
References: <551@uucs1.UUCP> <RBNSTEIN.91Jul28212527@bucsf.bu.edu>
Reply-To: gaf@uucs1.UUCP (Guy Finney)
Distribution: alt.religion.scientology
Organization: UUCS inc., Phoenix, Az
Lines: 27

Michael Rubinstein writes:
>
>I doubt that jargon is created intentionally to confuse people. From the
>point of view of the person or persons creating it, it is not jargon,
>but more likely a new vocabulary to decribe things that English just
>doesn't have the words for.

Wellllll, yes and no.  If you need a word to describe a new thing, say,
the speed of sound, and there isn't one already, you make one up ("mach").

The original poster used the word "argot" instead of the already
existing and well understood word "jargon".  I'm not picking on that
person at all, I just use that as an example of how Scientology has
needlessly invented a word to replace one which is already well
established in the language.

>From the televised corporate presentations I've seen, there are lots of
other examples.  I could barely understand what was being said
sometimes, and had to really work to figure it out from the context of
the speech.  The jargon was so thick and deliberate I started wondering
if it was a way of speaking to the "in" crowd in code, so that outsiders
like me wouldn't know what they were saying. 
-- 
Guy Finney					"Ah, this is obviously some
UUCS inc.   Phoenix, Az				new usage of the word 'safe'
...!ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!uucs1!gaf		I was previously unaware of."
...!sun!sunburn!gtx!uucs1!gaf