Skip to main content

punctuation - Why is there a slash within "n/a"


not available is not not/available, and not applicable is not not/applicable.


Why is it n/a?



Answer



The important thing to note is that these abbreviations are much more common in handwritten correspondence than they are online. c/o is often used when addressing post to someone via a third party, and w/ and w/o are common written shorthand for with and without.


It was quite common in older written texts to abbreviate words using some identifying letters and a line, for example:



  • w— for with

  • D—r for Doctor, which eventually became just Dr.

  • Rev—d for Reverend, which became Revd or Rev.


These are part of a long history of written abbreviations that are just a bit awkward in print. I would guess that printing a slash in these abbreviations arose simply as a way of representing the shorthand that people had already been using in writing for ages. Using a diagonal slash-like mark (c/o) is just narrower and faster to write than something like c—o—, which looks awkward.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.