Linguistic as in ‘of language’ not as in the university department that studies language.
Saying ‘you’re wrong,’ but not providing an explanation as to why, has the same ring to it as ‘If you’d just do your own research, you’d agree with me on vaccines.’ If you don’t want to take the time to explain, it’s worse than nothing to merely say ‘you’re wrong,’ and serves only to let you feel superior for a moment.
Thank you for at least not being a prick about how your time is too valuable to spend explaining.
As for those examples, I’d class them a bit differently, not even similar to each other. Movie was a new word for a new thing. I wouldn’t class that as slang so much as naming something that didn’t have a name. Motion picture isn’t a name, it’s a descriptive phrase standing in the place of one.
TV, on the other hand, I would class as abbreviation, basically an initialism. It’s closer, but I wouldn’t say the OECD was a slang term. Slang has at least the distinction of not being the ‘official’ name of a thing. ‘Pie’ cannot be slang for ‘pie.’
Telly, on some other hand I’ll have to borrow, I would probably class as slang, but just a piece that entered the common lexicon. It’s so ubiquitous that I don’t expect there’s any way to tell who first coined it, but you could make a pretty safe bet it was some clever dick who made the choice to not use the established word for the thing, either putting the cognitive load on the listener rather than bear even the tiny load of just saying the word, or being intentionally obscurant to feel clever. I don’t know what you would call someone who puts a load on others to make their own life better, but it wouldn’t be ‘nice.’
You have an incorrect understanding of linguistics
Linguistic as in ‘of language’ not as in the university department that studies language.
Saying ‘you’re wrong,’ but not providing an explanation as to why, has the same ring to it as ‘If you’d just do your own research, you’d agree with me on vaccines.’ If you don’t want to take the time to explain, it’s worse than nothing to merely say ‘you’re wrong,’ and serves only to let you feel superior for a moment.
short hand is used because it is shorter, if it’s used enough it becomes slang
Nothing about being in the in group
See telly or tv for television or movie for motion picture as examples
Thank you for at least not being a prick about how your time is too valuable to spend explaining.
As for those examples, I’d class them a bit differently, not even similar to each other. Movie was a new word for a new thing. I wouldn’t class that as slang so much as naming something that didn’t have a name. Motion picture isn’t a name, it’s a descriptive phrase standing in the place of one.
TV, on the other hand, I would class as abbreviation, basically an initialism. It’s closer, but I wouldn’t say the OECD was a slang term. Slang has at least the distinction of not being the ‘official’ name of a thing. ‘Pie’ cannot be slang for ‘pie.’
Telly, on some other hand I’ll have to borrow, I would probably class as slang, but just a piece that entered the common lexicon. It’s so ubiquitous that I don’t expect there’s any way to tell who first coined it, but you could make a pretty safe bet it was some clever dick who made the choice to not use the established word for the thing, either putting the cognitive load on the listener rather than bear even the tiny load of just saying the word, or being intentionally obscurant to feel clever. I don’t know what you would call someone who puts a load on others to make their own life better, but it wouldn’t be ‘nice.’