Originally Posted By: bexter
I have seen vid. used occaisionally...what always confused me was the use of viz a viz...


Ha! Here is an excerpt from an obscure, unpublished work, with corrected spelling of Defoe, who was a writer but probably not an actor:

Shocking as this may be, I will admit that I once made a faulty assumption from not looking something up. In reading Defoe, I had always taken his viz. to mean vis-à-vis. One day while looking something else up somewhere in the V’s, on a whim I looked for viz. To my surprise, Defoe’s term turned out to be an abbreviation for videlicet, which means ‘that is to say’ or ‘namely’, [and thus very much like id est]. My interpretation of vis-à-vis was reasonably useful by one of its three definitions, but not what Defoe wrote. So, even a literary snob can stumble on a forehead-smacking discovery.

ÅΓª╥┐↕§