Aforementioned | Hacker News Reader

Aforementioned

paperstack.com

17 pointsdcminter25 comments

"always intrinsically redundant" can be "always redundant".

"see it in print" can be "see it".

"Or more realistically in online posts" is also covered by "see it".

Or "drives me nuts" alone, because seeing it and where you see it are implied because "drives me nuts" requires you to have interacted with it somehow.

"the only legitimate usage" can be "the only use", since you wouldn't be writing about illegitimate uses.

"to put it into the mouth of a character who you want to sound pompous" can be "it sounds pompous".

"whatever usage we’re talking about" can be "the usage".

"there's no ambiguity in the shorter form" can be "there's no ambiguity".

"Just cut it out" can be "cut it out".

"don’t wedge it into your prose" can be "don't write it".

"you should probably be nicer to your friends" can be "don't".

"In normal conversation [...] in normal conversation" is redundant.

Let's see how that comes out:

> "'Aforementioned' drives me nuts. It sounds pompous; it is redundant. For example “The aforementioned usage is …” becomes “The usage is …” - there’s no ambiguity. Cut it out. If you wouldn’t say “aforementioned” in normal conversation then don’t write it. If you would, don't."

Precisely!

Also, as Kevin from The Office brilliantly put it, “Why waste time say lot word, when few word do trick?”

"'Aforementioned' drives nuts. It pompous; it redundant. “The aforementioned usage is …” becomes “The usage is …” - no ambiguity. Cut it. If not say “aforementioned” in conversation then no write. If no, don't."

"intrinsically" is not redundant in my original because I'm intentionally differentiating mere redundancy (which doesn't bother me one jot) from a word that is never not redundant as used in the wild.

> whatever usage we’re talking about is by definition previously mentioned

Nope, I have to disagree. "The usage" can mean a usage mentioned elsewhere out of the context of the current text or discussion. "ls is used to list files, the usage has various flags to manipulate its behavior", now if you add aforementioend before usage there that means more details about what the usage is and how to find that out might have been mentioned before this sentence. Otherwise you will have to read the whole text or presume you have to search the usage details elsewhere.

This is very useful when talking about a subject that is very new to the audience or when making a case for something. An obvious question about the following phrases can be answered by directing users to already mentioned content that can address their questions or doubts.

I accept this argument in principle, but I'd be interested to see if you can cite an example where it's genuinely used in this way rather than the very common "synonym for 'the'" form.

> The only legitimate usage of “the aforementioned” is to put it into the mouth of a character who you want to sound pompous.

https://paperstack.com/project_fear/

> Here is the précis of a project for a vast multinational

If you're insinuating that I'm pompous then, well, sure. That doesn't particularly refute my point though.

I dunno, it seems like a good linguistic flag for a local variable. Hard to imagine saying it out loud, or rather in conversation, but I think I find it ignorable or helpful as a reader.

Airing your personal linguistic peeves should be considered a shameful act.

When writing emails, I often feel like I have to include redundant stuff, repeat myself, reference "aforementioned" paragraphs, and do other things in order to compensate for the unfortunately usual attention deficit of the reader(s).

I also try to avoid numbered lists of, say, issues I want resolved, in which case I may send a series of emails instead, because people tend to respond to the first item on the list and happily ignore the rest.

>in which case I may send a series of emails instead

I wonder if this is how institutions used to handle IT issues before ticketing systems were common.

I'm dubious that aforementioned will help you in this.

I've found that in mild cases it's best to lean on short pithy words and bullet pointese.

In severe cases go for the "one concept and/or sentence per email" approach.

In pathological cases a length of lead pipe and a stern manner is your only hope :)

I think people use to say "Hey, dumbass! We already told you the answer to that"

Yeah, using it in speech is weird.

B: 'Getting a drink, need anything?'

A: 'Could you bring me a quarter-inch ratchet?'

B: 'Sure, be right back.'

B leaves the room, returns with a glass of water but no ratchet

A: 'Um, where is it?'

B: 'Huh?'

A: 'The aforementioned tool?!'

B: 'Oh, right, spaced it... wait, "aforementioned"?'

Yeah, if I use it (or "previously mentioned" / "previously discussed"), it's because I know there's context from a previous discussion that at least some participants won't read without me calling out to them that they need to.

Well, that's just, like, your opinion man.

~ The Big Lebowsky

One reasonable usage in conversation is bringing focus back to a point made earlier in the conversation:

"Sure, that shaggy dog story about the ninja on the boat in Bermuda who logged into the web server and saved the company is a classic.

Back to the aforementioned point about automation, though..."

Also, as a retired squid, I am PQS-qualified to use words like aloft, athwart, abaft, and aforementioned in conversation at will with zero shame.

I'd say this is a classic example though - what is "aforementioned" doing here that "back to" doesn't already? If you digressed so far that "The point about automation..." doesn't ring any bells why do you think the a-word will do the trick? (I think "back to" is fine as it acknowledges the context switch)

I won't stop using it on rare occasions. It helps in reconnecting to a focus point after a lot of other things have since been discussed.

"yeah this thing I was talking about earlier in the conversation is relevant to this stuff I'm gonna talk about now."

That's a lot of syllables and letters compared to just "aforementioned."

On a similar note: respectively. Stop using it. "To variables a and b assign values 1 and 2, respectively".

Who ever is getting confused here if "respectively" is left out?

It's suppose to be clarifying between a=1 b=2 and a = [1,2] b = [1,2]

For example "Give the cookies and brownies to Angie and Bob" could mean both Angie and Bob get both cookies and brownies. "Give the cookies and brownies to Angie and Bob, respectively" clarifies that the cookies go to Angie, and the brownies go to Bob.

Thanks, I learned something new.

hahaha I used to use 'aforementioned' on my papers and documentation but a few years ago I read a post almost verbatim OPs and felt like "oh, OK... maybe I should stop aformentioning stuff in my writings"...

Somehow I still think it's an OK word, personally I don't mind it at all but since English is not my first language I just rather play it safe. =)

Most of this stuff - like using "literally" as an intensifier or "disinterested" as a synonym for uninterested I'll just wave past. Language changes (or changes back in the case of "disinterested") and fighting it isn't really going to achieve anything except frustration.

This one bugs me just because it's so pointless. It seems to come from people trying to adopt a sort of intellectual voice with (in my opinion) rather the opposite effect.

Regardless of my personal dislike for it I think you can assume that the typical reader won't think twice about it though so keep it or jettison it as you personally choose.

If you only write how you speak, your readers will suffer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com