Subject:
|
Re: autoFAQpost /general/~u.can_i_use_lugnet_name_or_logo.en.faq
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.faq
|
Date:
|
Fri, 16 Jul 1999 19:13:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2195 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.faq, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman) writes:
> In lugnet.faq, mattdm@mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) writes:
>
> > So how do you feel about "LUGnet"?
>
> It does place the syllabic emphasis correctly, [...]
Whoops, I should clarify that...
The problem with it is that although it places the syllabic emphasis on
"lug," it still gives "net" its own prominence by its being a different
type-case. That is, it greatly separates the two halves of the word, and
that's the part I don't like. It's not supposed to sound like two words
pasted together or an acronym, but rather one word that rolls nicely off the
tongue.
Hence:
LUGNET
lugnet
Lugnet
all help emphasize the fact that it is an easy-to-say name, while:
LugNet
LUGNet
LUGnet
LugNET
all sound stilted and overly emphasize the fact that it is also a
pseudo-acronym. Consider:
[LE]g [GO]dt --> LEGO --> Lego
[AL]uminum [C]ompany [O]f [A]merica --> ALCOA --> Alcoa
[N]ew [E]ngland [C]onfectionary [CO]mpany --> NECCO --> Necco
[N]orth [A]merican [BIS]cuit [CO]mpany --> NABISCO --> Nabisco
[MINNE]sota [GAS] [CO]mpany --> MINNEGASCO --> Minnegasco
[L]EGO [U]sers [G]roup [NET]work --> LUGNET --> Lugnet
So think of it as a branding issue...
You never write LeGo or AlCOA or NECCo or NABisCo or MinneGasCo because they
ruin the pronunciation by making the name look more like an acronym than a
word.
(FedEx is a different story; they want to keep the capital E there because
they're in danger of "fedex" becoming a verb by popular misuse.)
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
17 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
