4 ms·

It's the wrong word then. The etymology of privilege: Middle English: via Old French from Latin privilegium ‘bill or law affecting an individual’, from privus

by pnako 6y ago

It's the wrong word then. The etymology of privilege: Middle English: via Old French from Latin privilegium ‘bill or law affecting an individual’, from privus ‘private’ + lex, leg- ‘law’. In fact, in France privilèges have been abolished during the revolution. And it's not just the wrong word, it's kind of opposite; privilege generally meant the benefit of a minority, but here it's used to describe when the majority benefits, because they are the majority.

Pfhreak 6y ago
Unfortunately, that's not how language works. Words get adopted to mean things independent of their etymology all the time. I find it confusing a lot of the time. (eg "literally" used to mean "figuratively").
- pnako 6y ago
  That's actually how language works. We use the common, dictionary definition of words, not whatever some academic with an agenda made up.
  - yokaze 6y ago
    Is a tomato a fruit or a vegetable? Whose made up agenda is behind this and what is it? Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1576/ https://xkcd.com/1576/ And at least according to makers of the OED, it does not define words, it describes them: https://languages.oup.com/about-us/how-we-create-language-content/ https://languages.oup.com/about-us/how-we-create-language-co...
  - Pfhreak 6y ago
    You believe that language is prescriptive -- that there are 'correct' usages of words. [1] I believe that language is descriptive -- that dictionaries follow common usage rather than define the usage. Depending on your cultural heritage, one or the other may be more common. Descriptivism allows for expressions like, "To boldly go where no man has gone before!" which is a split infinitive, and an 'incorrect' use of language. If a native speaker would say a thing in speaking, then it's valid. Native English speakers use language in all sorts of ways that would be 'incorrect' -- from jive to rhyming slang to 1337 sp34k to adoptions from queer culture like 'shade' or 'yass'. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription

by pnako 6y ago

Pfhreak 6y ago

Unfortunately, that's not how language works. Words get adopted to mean things independent of their etymology all the time. I find it confusing a lot of the time. (eg "literally" used to mean "figuratively").

pnako 6y ago
That's actually how language works. We use the common, dictionary definition of words, not whatever some academic with an agenda made up.
- yokaze 6y ago
  Is a tomato a fruit or a vegetable? Whose made up agenda is behind this and what is it? Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1576/ https://xkcd.com/1576/ And at least according to makers of the OED, it does not define words, it describes them: https://languages.oup.com/about-us/how-we-create-language-content/ https://languages.oup.com/about-us/how-we-create-language-co...
- Pfhreak 6y ago
  You believe that language is prescriptive -- that there are 'correct' usages of words. [1] I believe that language is descriptive -- that dictionaries follow common usage rather than define the usage. Depending on your cultural heritage, one or the other may be more common. Descriptivism allows for expressions like, "To boldly go where no man has gone before!" which is a split infinitive, and an 'incorrect' use of language. If a native speaker would say a thing in speaking, then it's valid. Native English speakers use language in all sorts of ways that would be 'incorrect' -- from jive to rhyming slang to 1337 sp34k to adoptions from queer culture like 'shade' or 'yass'. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription