Does Calling it a "Cell Phone" Make you Seem Stupid?
May 6, 2008
So I call my mobile device a cell phone, a lot of the time. I’m kind of in the biz (mobile and Web development), so maybe it matters, my jargon.
Cameron Moll, in his book “Mobile Web Design” decries this habit as podunk and indicative of a culture ignorant of the impact (or potential impact) of mobile devices. Stop, he urges us, calling them “cell phones.” It marks you as techtards. This is very much my paraphrasing. The rest of the book is fairly valuable. I read it last September, in the sun, in the Okanagan Valley in Canada, but the cell phone terminology argument sticks in my craw.
I guess what I think is that it’s not terribly relevant. Do we insist on knocking down the doors of our British friends and demanding that they stop calling it the “telly?” Or that pluralizing the Internet is the end of the world? Perhaps more than other words, technical ones tend to be consistent across geographies. But I still think there’s a bit of room for regionalism. People still know what I’m talking about.
Or maybe it’s just that Moll has called me out, and my contrary nature now makes me extra recalcitrant to change my ways. What do you think?
7 Comments
Leave a Reply
Related Posts
- Mobile The Heck out of it
February 14, 2008 - Technical Notes
March 11, 2009 - iPhone: Nope
July 3, 2007 - iPhone Follow Up
July 2, 2007 - Lyza's Week in Books, Part II: Or, How much I Hate Dave Eggers
August 24, 2006
Recent Comments
My Ongoing Narrow-Rule Obsession
Newest comments regarding this post:
Carol Barber said For those of you hunting unruled composition books. I found a website that sells them in packs of six or by the single book and a decent price.... (More)
Today’s the day (stab stab stab)
Newest comments regarding this post:
Brett said What, no photos? :) (More)
Photos: Your Vote! Best photo of my goddaughter
Newest comments regarding this post:
Margaret Joss said I’m the very fond, very far away “Greek” (Portlander) great-Godmother (Aileen’s “Nona” (godmother)) Lovely and fun... (More)
Kathleen Doyle-White said I would print all three… and put the colored one in the middle. You can get three framed frames… when I did this for my grandkids... (More)
Grandma Pippa said How can I love (currently — I’ve loved others, like my daughters!) any child more than this one. Thank you, Lyza, for capturing her... (More)
Book Review: “King, Queen, Knave” by Vladimir Nabokov
Newest comments regarding this post:
Mikhail Emelianov said I don’t think Martha thinks Dreyer is an idiot – that’s precisely her problem in the novel, that is, she doesn’t really know... (More)
The linguist in me (correction: the student in me who took two linguistics classes and now refers to himself, parenthetically, as a linguist) sees both a descriptive and a prescriptive take on this.
The descriptivist in me says that people will call it what they will, so complaining about it is largely pointless. All it does is antagonize the people and make the complainer out to be an elitist with too much free time. Lots of things have foolish names, especially in English. Whaddya gonna do?
The prescriptivist in me usually wins this particular battle, though, because I consider myself technologically informed. I call it a “mobile phone”, which it is, regardless of technology — though I won’t correct people if they say “cell phone”. The argument from this side is similar to complaining about calling a tsunami a “tidal wave” — it’s not remotely related to tides.
Nothing wrong with calling a television a “telly”. Or a mobile phone a “handy” (as they do in Germany, I’m told). And I’m pretty sure “the Internets” is a phrase used by snarky bloggers to mock technological rubes, along with “the Google” — it may not be the “end of the world”, but it’s not an argument in favor of “cell phones”.
P.S. As you may have realized by now, it is my attempt to eventually take over your blog by writing more than you do. This is because I don’t actually want to write on my own blog anymore.
Am I missing something here? Now, granted, my expertise here is a little dated, but seeing as of, oh, say circa 2002 I was publishing papers on these sorts of things and meeting the architects of these, uh, architectures, you’d think at one point I knew what I was talking about. Having said all of that, I believe it’s perfectly fucking fine to call them “cell” phones as long as they’re based on a “cellular” architecture. And, again, unless AT&T has been up to some stuff I’m not privy to, it is my understanding that your “mobile freakin’ telecommunications device” is still entirely predicated on connecting to “base station” which covers a “cell”.
You know, as in “cellular”.
So what is the problem here, again?
i have no opinion on this subject except that i like that you used “recalcitrant” which is an awesome word.
Both Todd and Jeremy have nice, relevant responses. Todd, I too took linguistics in college. I tend to be a descriptivist except when it comes to written grammar in English, and even then it’s something I like to do but don’t really force on others. Mostly I think I’m smarting because I feel like I’ve been told I suck for using the wrong term.
It’s obvious Cameron never gets laid.
P.S. Though I must admit he’s kinda cute.
http://flickr.com/photos/ribot/1544342183/