Archived Discussion

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.

Kendra Kirai: Sounds like you're talking about me and my tendency to....ramble.

Seth: Because i am too ignorant/lazy to remember how to spell this entry there is now a redirect at Really Long Word. Thank you :)

Ununnilium: Haha, awesome.

Space Ace: I was reading my textbook and immediately had to think of this trope. Therefore I have added a small sentence about Williams Syndrome. Now I'm going to wait until someone subverts this trope in a similar manner :)

Micah: There are probably too many wicks to actually change this, but IMO it really ought to be "loquacity".

((Rhiow)): I'd like to point Hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia comes from a giant list of phobias, true and... not so true. This one is an extension of a phobia name played for laughs. I'm not even sure that the original 'sesquipedaliophobia' is real, though there is a real phobia for such things as chins.

Maarvarq: Re: "The Other Wiki" example, I can't see how "Fictional trans-Neptunian planets" could be rephrased using smaller and fewer words. "Fictional planets described as orbiting further out from the Sun than Neptune" is a bit long for an article title.

Condensed these:
  • There is a reason for this in certain academic areas, especially the sciences. Namely the closer you get to layman's terms the less true your description becomes (unless you're willing to expand single words into paragraphs).
  • This arises all the time when you've to translate between technical jargon of a legal nature in another language to English. You wind up translating a few words of key information into a sentence's worth of clarification.
  • Try explaining nuclear physics. It doesn't help that along with a lot of the science-speak 'in' jargon, there is quite a fair amount of jargon that doesn't mean what you think it means. Having to explain what a barn is was entertaining the first time, but after a while you kind of wish they would have just picked another word when naming these sorts of things.
  • Encyclopediae and advanced text-books like to do this, if only because the more complicated terms DON'T have a synonym for anyone to fall back on.
  • When you're knowledgeable about certain sciences where there's a large amount of "in" vocabulary, explaining just about anything about it to a layman can become a series of never ending clarifications and definitions if you're not careful. Especially frustrating if you're used to speaking with other experts and don't realize your audience's limited reference pool. For example this troper found trying to explain how Kidney's work without using the prefix "Renal" or any other anatomy terms lead to LOTS Of uses of the word "filteryish"

Into this: Certain sciences have extensive "in" jargon and vocabulary that have no synonym that can be properly explained in simple terms. Worse, some terms mean completely different things when used accurately than when used by laymen. As a result sesquipedialian loquaciousness can sometimes be the only way of saying something because saying it "in simple English" makes it considerably less true.

Dogtanian: I don't think the Order of the Stick cartoon used as the trope's main image is particularly suitable - none of the words would have a typical reader reaching for the dictionary. My instincts want a Calvin and Hobbes example to be there, but there's probably all kinds of copyright reasons why that can't happen. Any suggestions for alternatives?