> but the obvious translation of "ln foo bar" to "link _foo_ to _bar_" doesn't
I see this problem as an inaccuracy of the translation "link _foo_ to _bar_". This seems to
imply that both _foo_ and _bar_ are pre-existing, and somehow a "link" is created between them
as a result of running the command. Obviously not what is done by "ln". It is instead to
"build a link to _foo_ called _bar_". The cp is to "make a copy of _foo_ called _bar_".
Pretty consistent to me.