42 ms·
"decimate" != "devastate" To "decimate" is to reduce by only 10%.
by pklausler 11y ago
"decimate" != "devastate"
To "decimate" is to reduce by only 10%.
- dmoy 11y agoNot in modern usage.
- zeveb 11y agoThe modern usage is wrong, and the correct usage is useful. Rage, rage against the dying of the light!
- placeybordeaux 11y agoUseful is very subjective. Do you mean precise?
- mtviewdave 11y ago"To reduce by 10%" is, in English, the novel usage. It was apparently invented by essayist Richard Grant White in 1870. The original meaning of the word, "to destroy", is attested to 1663: https://arnoldzwicky.org/2009/06/03/the-decimators/ https://arnoldzwicky.org/2009/06/03/the-decimators/
- pklausler 11y agoCaesar was 1900 years ahead of his time when he threatened to decimate the 9th Legion, then. The meaning may be obscure and obsolete, but the word does mean something specific.
- mtviewdave 11y agoUnless Caesar spoke English, he didn't threaten "to decimate" anybody. Because "to decimate" is an English verb. Rather, I'm sure Caesar used the appropriate conjugation of the Latin verb "decimō". Two separate, but related, words. With two separate, but related, meanings.
- adrusi 11y agoIt's hard to say that the majority of native speakers' usage is wrong, since right/wrong, to the extent that it's meaningful at all, is defined by popular usage. The argument that's the traditional usage is more useful is stronger, but not obviously correct. It's more specific, and doesn't have tons of synonyms, but in the age of clickbait headlines, maybe another version of "destroy" is more useful than an oddly specific "eliminate 10% of".
- dmoy 11y agoRight this mentality of human language always loses out (I guess unless you're France?). Literally now also literally means figuratively/virtually. Etc etc...