4 ms·

The colloquial usage doesn't erase the technical usage. They can coexist. I dare you to construct a normal sentence in which the particular usage of "begs the q

The colloquial usage doesn't erase the technical usage. They can coexist. I dare you to construct a normal sentence in which the particular usage of "begs the question" is not entirely clear from context. (This, by the way, is my personal test for whether a language rule is useful or not.)

pessimizer 11y ago
> I dare you to construct a normal sentence in which the particular usage of "begs the question" is not completely clear from context. I'd say that in every case that it is used in its classical sense when heard by person who uses it to mean "raises the question." Using "begs the question" that way is an actual mistake. One can have only heard "begs the question" used properly, but if you weren't familiar with the phrase, easily and understandably take it to mean "a question is begging to be asked", then go on to use it incorrectly. Using the phrase "begs the question" incorrectly is probably only an hour younger than the phrase itself. Correcting someone about it without completely explaining its actual meaning (because you'd have to, at the least, explain the difference between formal and informal fallacies) is about a minute younger than that. It's hard to make a case for it being language evolution if the incorrect usage is as old as the correct usage, and isn't growing any more than proportionally with it. People being upset about being corrected about it isn't new either. People who use it correctly will continue to use it correctly, and people who use it incorrectly will use it correctly after they learn formal fallacies and can't think of a better, pithier way to describe that particular one. Using it incorrectly, of course, is a sin akin to using an eggcorn (http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/ http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/) : everybody has misheard or misunderstood many things, and then misuses them. The problem with finding them is that one has to use them in a conversation with someone nice enough or brave enough to correct one.
- sparky_z 11y ago
  >One can have only heard "begs the question" used properly, but if you weren't familiar with the phrase, easily and understandably take it to mean "a question is begging to be asked", then go on to use it incorrectly. I'm not saying this is impossible, but I don't find it convincing. The formal usage is something that a person does, and is usually the end of a statement. ("You're begging the question.") The colloquial (not "incorrect") usage is something that a situation does. It is nearly always rendered in the third-person present tense and directly followed by the question it is introducing. ("Well, that begs the question: what do we do about it?"). I don't see how somebody could hear only the first version, and end up saying only the second version. I can see how someone could be confused the first time they hear the first version (i.e., "Wait, what question is he referring to?") and would need to have the term defined for them. But that's pretty much the definition of "jargon".
rayiner 11y ago
That's the problem--you have to look to the context (the other person's argument) to figure out what "begs the question" means. That may be burdensome if, e.g., you're writing to someone about the flaws in a third person's argument.
dllthomas 11y ago
I recently encountered a sentence where "begs the question" was accurate in both interpretations...

pessimizer 11y ago

> I dare you to construct a normal sentence in which the particular usage of "begs the question" is not completely clear from context. I'd say that in every case that it is used in its classical sense when heard by person who uses it to mean "raises the question." Using "begs the question" that way is an actual mistake. One can have only heard "begs the question" used properly, but if you weren't familiar with the phrase, easily and understandably take it to mean "a question is begging to be asked", then go on to use it incorrectly. Using the phrase "begs the question" incorrectly is probably only an hour younger than the phrase itself. Correcting someone about it without completely explaining its actual meaning (because you'd have to, at the least, explain the difference between formal and informal fallacies) is about a minute younger than that. It's hard to make a case for it being language evolution if the incorrect usage is as old as the correct usage, and isn't growing any more than proportionally with it. People being upset about being corrected about it isn't new either. People who use it correctly will continue to use it correctly, and people who use it incorrectly will use it correctly after they learn formal fallacies and can't think of a better, pithier way to describe that particular one. Using it incorrectly, of course, is a sin akin to using an eggcorn (http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/ http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/) : everybody has misheard or misunderstood many things, and then misuses them. The problem with finding them is that one has to use them in a conversation with someone nice enough or brave enough to correct one.

sparky_z 11y ago
>One can have only heard "begs the question" used properly, but if you weren't familiar with the phrase, easily and understandably take it to mean "a question is begging to be asked", then go on to use it incorrectly. I'm not saying this is impossible, but I don't find it convincing. The formal usage is something that a person does, and is usually the end of a statement. ("You're begging the question.") The colloquial (not "incorrect") usage is something that a situation does. It is nearly always rendered in the third-person present tense and directly followed by the question it is introducing. ("Well, that begs the question: what do we do about it?"). I don't see how somebody could hear only the first version, and end up saying only the second version. I can see how someone could be confused the first time they hear the first version (i.e., "Wait, what question is he referring to?") and would need to have the term defined for them. But that's pretty much the definition of "jargon".

rayiner 11y ago

That's the problem--you have to look to the context (the other person's argument) to figure out what "begs the question" means. That may be burdensome if, e.g., you're writing to someone about the flaws in a third person's argument.

dllthomas 11y ago

I recently encountered a sentence where "begs the question" was accurate in both interpretations...