Jargon, or No?

Is "functionality" really a viable word? One text for my last required library school class ("Information Systems in Library and Information Centers") uses it quite freely. Example: "Library applications software includes some of the functionality that we mentioned earlier, including circulation control, . . . ." Why not "perform some of the functions"? I know "does stuff like" is no good, but for the moment, it's how I explain it to myself.

I know that jargon is called for when it elicits or represents a very specific, maybe new, meaning; I know that it is no good when we use it to set ourselves apart and seem to know more than others. (Douglas Adams even suggested that without jargon, "the man in the street would have said 'Oh, yes, I could have told you that.' [So] some phrases like 'Interactive Subjectivity Frameworks' were invented and everybody was able to relax and get on with it.") Stay tuned until the end of the semester to see how often I use "functionality," to learn if I decide it has a real meaning; if I relax and get on with it.

Feel free to discuss "utilize," too.

Capital City weather: cold and clear, again, after a sunny day well into the 40s.
Muzak in Ukrops: "Hotel California"