3 ms·

You're confusing language and orthography. The posters above didn't use an incorrect word in place of the usual one, they used the correct word and spelled it w

by fenomas 11y ago

You're confusing language and orthography. The posters above didn't use an incorrect word in place of the usual one, they used the correct word and spelled it wrong. As such, the only way language could change to accommodate this usage would be if "loose" became an alternate spelling for "lose". Whether the verb "loose" makes sense in context is neither here not there - it's not what the speakers were trying to say.

intopieces 11y ago
>"As such, the only way language could change to accommodate this usage would be if "loose" became an alternate spelling for "lose" The comment I replied to mentioned that the mistake had been made "consistently upstream" -- I took this to mean that he has seen this mistake made multiple times by multiple people, which would indicate an alternate spelling has emerged, or that the two words have come to be spelled the same way. And the comment about loose as a verb was a reference to the fact that the correction was not even necessary -- we can all get by with each other's occasional errors in typing. In this case, the error was so minor it didn't even affect the meaning of the sentence. I'm a firm believer in avoiding any correction to adult speech, typing or spoken. People will use/abuse/misspell words no matter what, and pointing them out is merely an exercise in self-superiority.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- scrollaway 11y ago
  > I took this to mean that he has seen this mistake made multiple times by multiple people, which would indicate an alternate spelling has emerged "I've seen this happen many times" doesn't mean a new spelling has emerged, by several orders of magnitude. If my pals and I decided to go wander around online forums, spelling "fish" with -sch, that wouldn't make it magically correct.
  - krotton 11y ago
    An entire nation has long ago decided to go with this spelling, so I'd say it's quite correct in some circles ;).
  - intopieces 11y ago
    >"that wouldn't make it magically correct" It wouldn't make it standard, but I argue that if the person you mean to receive the message recieves it using that combination of letters, what's considered "correct" by x number of people is irrelevant. Hence "correcting" someone when you knew what they meant is absurd.
- fenomas 11y ago
  > In this case, the error was so minor it didn't even affect the meaning of the sentence. "Loose loose situation" doesn't mean anything. People understood the meaning because they could guess what error had been made, not because the two words are so similar as to be interchangeable.

by fenomas 11y ago

intopieces 11y ago

>"As such, the only way language could change to accommodate this usage would be if "loose" became an alternate spelling for "lose" The comment I replied to mentioned that the mistake had been made "consistently upstream" -- I took this to mean that he has seen this mistake made multiple times by multiple people, which would indicate an alternate spelling has emerged, or that the two words have come to be spelled the same way. And the comment about loose as a verb was a reference to the fact that the correction was not even necessary -- we can all get by with each other's occasional errors in typing. In this case, the error was so minor it didn't even affect the meaning of the sentence. I'm a firm believer in avoiding any correction to adult speech, typing or spoken. People will use/abuse/misspell words no matter what, and pointing them out is merely an exercise in self-superiority.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
scrollaway 11y ago
> I took this to mean that he has seen this mistake made multiple times by multiple people, which would indicate an alternate spelling has emerged "I've seen this happen many times" doesn't mean a new spelling has emerged, by several orders of magnitude. If my pals and I decided to go wander around online forums, spelling "fish" with -sch, that wouldn't make it magically correct.
- krotton 11y ago
  An entire nation has long ago decided to go with this spelling, so I'd say it's quite correct in some circles ;).
- intopieces 11y ago
  >"that wouldn't make it magically correct" It wouldn't make it standard, but I argue that if the person you mean to receive the message recieves it using that combination of letters, what's considered "correct" by x number of people is irrelevant. Hence "correcting" someone when you knew what they meant is absurd.
fenomas 11y ago
> In this case, the error was so minor it didn't even affect the meaning of the sentence. "Loose loose situation" doesn't mean anything. People understood the meaning because they could guess what error had been made, not because the two words are so similar as to be interchangeable.