3 ms·
I take the completely opposite stance: things like the dual usage of "literally" are less symptoms of a hobbled language and more symptoms of hobbled language s
by filleduchaos 6y ago
I take the completely opposite stance: things like the dual usage of "literally" are less symptoms of a hobbled language and more symptoms of hobbled language skills in those that complain about them.
And I mean that literally; rigid educational systems have stamped the fluidity of language out of far too many people.
- qubex 6y agoThen you’re entirely willing to concede that “Quack quack quack, quack quack, quack quack. Quack quack quack quack.” is entirely intelligible because you can easily ascribe multiple meanings to various instances of ‘quack’ so that it makes sense? The point being that there’s definitely a threshold beyond which ambiguity of meaning makes parsing a sentence and resolving its meaning impossible. The more specific (and distinguishable) terms are, the less risk there is of a misunderstanding. This is Information Theory 101.