3 ms·

> This is how words work, so I don't know why the author says "let's say". I say that specifically because this word was coined in 1965 by Calvin Mooers with a

> This is how words work, so I don't know why the author says "let's say". I say that specifically because this word was coined in 1965 by Calvin Mooers with a particular specific definition; I'm saying that even though it's a (relative) neologism, the word has already shifted in meaning. > maybe we should stop getting articles like this, and maybe we should instead > tell people to abandon their search for the One True Meaning I actually agree... the article (and the previous one) are mostly consequences of starting out in the belief that homoiconicity is something to strive for, and then failing to understand what homoiconicity would really be -- but discovering the things to strive for in the process.

DonaldPShimoda 6y ago
> I say that specifically because this word was coined in 1965 by Calvin Mooers with a particular specific definition; I'm saying that even though it's a (relative) neologism, the word has already shifted in meaning. Mm what I meant to get at was that you give a definition of "meaning", which is that "a word means what the people who use it mean by it", and your use of the phrase "let's say" makes it sound like this is a charitable admission on your part. And my point is that this is what it means for a word to "mean" something — it's entirely based on what people who use it mean by it, so the way you say "let's say" was rubbing me the wrong way, so to speak. > I actually agree... the article (and the previous one) are mostly consequences of starting out in the belief that homoiconicity is something to strive for, and then failing to understand what homoiconicity would really be -- but discovering the things to strive for in the process. I did not take the time to read the previous article, but I regret that now. I will go back and read it. :) I don't think I did a good enough job saying that I think this is among the best articles on homoiconicity that I've read! I meant for my lament to be more general and not specifically directed at you, but more just at those people striving for homoiconicity without a clear idea of what that means. I think, rereading parts of this article again now, we're more aligned than I had previously though. I'm sorry for not realizing that earlier!

DonaldPShimoda 6y ago

> I say that specifically because this word was coined in 1965 by Calvin Mooers with a particular specific definition; I'm saying that even though it's a (relative) neologism, the word has already shifted in meaning. Mm what I meant to get at was that you give a definition of "meaning", which is that "a word means what the people who use it mean by it", and your use of the phrase "let's say" makes it sound like this is a charitable admission on your part. And my point is that this is what it means for a word to "mean" something — it's entirely based on what people who use it mean by it, so the way you say "let's say" was rubbing me the wrong way, so to speak. > I actually agree... the article (and the previous one) are mostly consequences of starting out in the belief that homoiconicity is something to strive for, and then failing to understand what homoiconicity would really be -- but discovering the things to strive for in the process. I did not take the time to read the previous article, but I regret that now. I will go back and read it. :) I don't think I did a good enough job saying that I think this is among the best articles on homoiconicity that I've read! I meant for my lament to be more general and not specifically directed at you, but more just at those people striving for homoiconicity without a clear idea of what that means. I think, rereading parts of this article again now, we're more aligned than I had previously though. I'm sorry for not realizing that earlier!