Leafiara (prime)/Mechanical Musings/Unarmed Combat: The Great Debate
Preamble
How should we refer to the type of combat in this game that gets stronger via the Brawling skill? This seemingly simple question has presented us with a classic linguistic dilemma that has created intense back-and-forth discussion between players and even staff members for years. Unlike the question of how to pronounce "Wyrom," this is far less settled; you might even think of it as akin to GemStone's Oxford comma. Let's dig into some possible options.
The Player-Initiated Option
What Is It?
As noted on the unarmed combat system page, sometimes players refer to "unarmed combat" as "UAC."
How Did It Happen?
It seems to have been an emergent development rooted in the game's very name of GemStone IV being an instance of camel case. Camel case is so commonly abbreviated with each capital letter that players would instinctively abbreviate GemStone as "GS" and not "G." From this, it's easy to see how abbreviations such as "UAC," "DR" (Duskruin, not DragonRealms), "BS" (bloodscrip), or "MBP" (metal breastplate) would follow, as they seem similar on a surface level.
Why Is It Right?
The large majority of players understand what it means, giving it descriptivist value.
Why Is It Wrong?
In this instance, "unarmed" is neither camel case nor even a proper noun, so its abbreviation should use a single letter. (For consistency's sake, if one holds a prescriptivist view of language, then bloodscrip should likewise be abbreviated as B, metal breastplate should be abbreviated as MB, and Duskruin should be either abbreviated as D or extended to DA as Duskruin Arena.)
The Official Option
What Is It?
As noted on the unarmed combat system page, the unarmed combat system is officially abbreviated "UCS."
How Did It Happen?
It was designated as such from its inception, as saved posts indicate.
Why Is It Right?
Most players understand what it means, giving it descriptivist value. It's the official abbreviation, giving it prescriptivist value.
Why Is It Wrong?
"UCS" is an initialism, meaning that each individual letter is pronounced when spoken aloud. Furthermore, it's an initialism of a proper noun which includes the definite article "the" in front of it ("the Unarmed Combat System"), which means that when the initialism is used as a noun rather than an adjective, it likewise needs to be preceded by "the." (In the previously linked posts, former GM Finros always says "the UCS" or "the new UCS" when using it as a noun.) Players frequently eschew the definite article regardless of whether they're using the initialism as a noun or adjective, resulting in an abundance of grammatically incorrect sentences.
All of the above is not a problem with the initialism itself, but merely misapplication that could be resolved through proper grammar. That said, even if there were no misapplications, a different problem rears its head. The purpose of abbreviations is to save time on the part of reader and writer alike. "UCS" can do that as an adjective, but its noun form of "the UCS" is unwieldy shorthand at seven letters long counting the space. It hardly saves anything over using the eight-letter word "brawling" in reference to the primary skill that bolsters unarmed combat--and saves exactly nothing over using the seven-letter word "unarmed." (This is almost definitely a major contributor to why people further shorten "the UCS" to "UCS" even when doing so would be incorrect.)
Perhaps more noticeably, "UCS" referencing a system is incongruous with how other GS combat is described in common parlance. Sentences like "the RCS is a fun gameplay style" or "the MWCS seems stronger than the MBCS" would be indecipherable to players at first because nobody references systems with forms of combat that aren't unarmed. However, even if "ranged combat system," "magic warding combat system," and "magic bolting combat system" were spelled out, people would look askance at the sentences, regarding them as unnecessarily wordy when "ranged," "warding," and "bolting" would have sufficed.
(As an aside, the above example uses "the MWCS" to be consistent with "the MBCS," which couldn't be "the BCS" because that initialism is already taken for the Basic Creature Script. An alternative example could have been "the MWS" and "the "MBS," but that would have been inconsistent with "the UCS" unless "the UCS" was the only initialism to incorporate the word "combat," in which case archery would have been either "the RWS" (ranged weapons system) or "the RS" (ranged system). (It could also have been "the AS" (archery system), but that's already taken by Attack Strength and Arcane Symbols.))
A Third Option
What Is It?
I've concluded that another possible abbreviation for unarmed combat is "UC."
How Did It Happen?
After reflecting on the other two abbreviations, it occurred to me that "UC" would resolve their primary issues. There's no incorrectly attributed camel case, nor is it a proper noun that ever needs to be preceded by a definite article.
Why Is It Right?
It allows referring to unarmed combat via a small number of keystrokes while also doing so in a fashion that's grammatically correct. Furthermore, the usage of "UC" in sentences has flexibility and simplicity that will tend to make its usage comparable to how other GS combat is described. While "should I use the melee system or the unarmed combat system?" is excessively long and "should I use melee or the UCS?" is inconsistent in two ways (one references a system and is an initialism while the other is neither), "should I use melee or UC?" is brief and only inconsistent in one way (it's an initialism and "melee" isn't).
Why Is It Wrong?
Most players will not understand what it means, thus defeating the purpose of language. (They might even misunderstand what it means since, among other things, "UC" could refer to a large number of universities.)
An Opt-Out Option
What Is It?
Don't abbreviate anything.
How Did It Happen?
Not abbreviating any given phrase is a linguistic default that necessarily precedes abbreviating it.
Why Is It Right?
Correct application of grammar while not abbreviating is easier and more intuitive than correct application of grammar while abbreviating. Furthermore, not abbreviating leaves no room for ambiguity or inconsistency.
Why Is It Wrong?
Strictly speaking, it isn't. Nonetheless, due to the sheer number of keystrokes to spell out "unarmed combat," it's also not a perfect and universal solution.
"Unarmed" would resolve the keystroke problem, but runs into a different issue not yet raised: "unarmed" is neither a noun like "unarmed combat" nor a verb like "bolting," so it risks further convoluting conversation with inconsistent applications in which people would treat adjectives as if they're nouns in some cases ("I'm debating between using edged, ranged, or unarmed") while altering other adjectives--or sometimes-adjectives--into nouns in other cases ("should I train blunt weapons or polearm weapons" might be shorthanded as "should I train blunts or polearms?" rather than "should I train blunt or polearm?").
Conclusion
Inconsistency and imperfection aren't foreign to GS, the English language, language, or people. The debate will carry on because people will either view one approach as more intuitive or view the problems with one approach as less egregious than the problems with the others.