Originally posted by: Allio
Soft drink - New Zealand
I could tolerate soda but pop just sounds retarded. What are you, 6?
:thumbsup:
Australia
SpunkyJones
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2004
- 5,090
- 1
- 81
Twofootputt
Senior member
- Jan 2, 2004
- 676
- 0
- 76
Every time this topic comes up, there are a certain amount of people who refuse to accept that "coke" can be an acceptable term for carbonated soft drinks. Therefore, I'm going to clear this up once and for all, so listen carefully and try to follow me. The argument against the usage of "coke" as a generality is usually two-fold, I'll address each point separately.
1) Argument 1: "Coke" is a specific brand name, it cannot be applied to the general case. American popular culture has proven time and time again that this argument is incorrect. In certain instances, a specific brand name of product, usually the first of its type on the market or one that has captured an overwhelming market share, becomes synonymous with the type of product itself. Obviously this will differ from person to person and region to region, but it does happen. For example, "Kleenex" is commonly used instead of the more general "facial tissue". I also typically hear "Lysol" instead of "disinfectant spray". IBM's brand name used to have this status ("Is your new computer a Mac or an IBM?") and I believe that Google's brand name is quickly gaining it ("I need to check Google for some information for my research paper"). The application of "coke" as a generality is certainly not an isolated idiosyncracy.
2) Argument 2: The usage of "coke" as a general causes confusion. This is my favorite argument, since it's so incredibly easy to deflate. It's my belief that soda/pop drinkers who argue this point are either trolling or have missed the point of the discussion entirely. They are correct to assume that the usage of "coke" in specific situations would cause confusions, but the debate here is about the general term used for carbonated beverages. Soda/pop drinkers like to imagine a scene in a restaurant in which a coke drinker orders a "coke" and the waiter then follows up with a second question. However, this scenario is both ridiculous and unrealistic. To demonstrate, let's change the setting. Suppose a soda/pop drinker walks into a restaurant and sits down. The waiter comes over and asks for the drink order. Now, at this point, consider what the soda/pop drinker would say. Would they answer with their general term for a carbonated beverage (namely, "a soda" or "a pop")? Absolutely not. If a waiter asks to take your drink order and you answer that way, you will get nothing but a blank stare. In this situation, you would either reply with a specific ("I'll have a Sprite" or "I'll have a Pepsi", etc.) or ask for a list of available choices. The situation is exactly the same in areas where "coke" is the general term. If you walk into a restaurant in the south and order a Coke, you will get a Coca-Cola, no confusion, just as you would in soda/pop areas. If you want a Dr. Pepper in the restaurant, you would ask for such immediately, and skip the general term - "coke" - just as a soda/pop drinker would skip theirs.
"Coke" is, however, perfectly acceptable as a general term where one is needed. For example, a typical conversation between myself and one of my roommates might be as follows:
Me: "Man, I'm thirsty. Want to go over to the store with me and grab a Coke?"
Roommate: "Sure, let's go."
In this situation, I have no a priori knowledge of my roommate's potential choice once we get to the store. In fact, I may not even know what sort of carbonated beverage I want, until I actually get to the store and see the choices. Therefore, I employ a general term. There is no obligation on the part of either myself or my roommate to actually purchase a Coca-Cola. No confusion. This is obviously a different situation than the one in the restaurant.
Cliff's Notes
1.) There is no reason why "coke" is inherently flawed as a general term.
</thread>
1) Argument 1: "Coke" is a specific brand name, it cannot be applied to the general case. American popular culture has proven time and time again that this argument is incorrect. In certain instances, a specific brand name of product, usually the first of its type on the market or one that has captured an overwhelming market share, becomes synonymous with the type of product itself. Obviously this will differ from person to person and region to region, but it does happen. For example, "Kleenex" is commonly used instead of the more general "facial tissue". I also typically hear "Lysol" instead of "disinfectant spray". IBM's brand name used to have this status ("Is your new computer a Mac or an IBM?") and I believe that Google's brand name is quickly gaining it ("I need to check Google for some information for my research paper"). The application of "coke" as a generality is certainly not an isolated idiosyncracy.
2) Argument 2: The usage of "coke" as a general causes confusion. This is my favorite argument, since it's so incredibly easy to deflate. It's my belief that soda/pop drinkers who argue this point are either trolling or have missed the point of the discussion entirely. They are correct to assume that the usage of "coke" in specific situations would cause confusions, but the debate here is about the general term used for carbonated beverages. Soda/pop drinkers like to imagine a scene in a restaurant in which a coke drinker orders a "coke" and the waiter then follows up with a second question. However, this scenario is both ridiculous and unrealistic. To demonstrate, let's change the setting. Suppose a soda/pop drinker walks into a restaurant and sits down. The waiter comes over and asks for the drink order. Now, at this point, consider what the soda/pop drinker would say. Would they answer with their general term for a carbonated beverage (namely, "a soda" or "a pop")? Absolutely not. If a waiter asks to take your drink order and you answer that way, you will get nothing but a blank stare. In this situation, you would either reply with a specific ("I'll have a Sprite" or "I'll have a Pepsi", etc.) or ask for a list of available choices. The situation is exactly the same in areas where "coke" is the general term. If you walk into a restaurant in the south and order a Coke, you will get a Coca-Cola, no confusion, just as you would in soda/pop areas. If you want a Dr. Pepper in the restaurant, you would ask for such immediately, and skip the general term - "coke" - just as a soda/pop drinker would skip theirs.
"Coke" is, however, perfectly acceptable as a general term where one is needed. For example, a typical conversation between myself and one of my roommates might be as follows:
Me: "Man, I'm thirsty. Want to go over to the store with me and grab a Coke?"
Roommate: "Sure, let's go."
In this situation, I have no a priori knowledge of my roommate's potential choice once we get to the store. In fact, I may not even know what sort of carbonated beverage I want, until I actually get to the store and see the choices. Therefore, I employ a general term. There is no obligation on the part of either myself or my roommate to actually purchase a Coca-Cola. No confusion. This is obviously a different situation than the one in the restaurant.
Cliff's Notes
1.) There is no reason why "coke" is inherently flawed as a general term.
</thread>
quakefiend420
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2004
- 14,685
- 1
- 76
YOyoYOhowsDAjello
Moderator<br>A/V & Home Theater<br>Elite member
- Aug 6, 2001
- 31,204
- 45
- 91
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter