3 ms·
> a simplistic definition which ignores all the history and cultural context of a term I feel the need to point out if you were to not ignore history, then the
by jhgb 4y ago
> a simplistic definition which ignores all the history and cultural context of a term
I feel the need to point out if you were to not ignore history, then the word "wine" itself having been derived from the very Indo-European word used for grapevine thousands of years ago makes the connection between "wine" and "grapevine" way stronger than any similar connection one could find for beer.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- goto11 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy The meaning of words change over time as culture change and evolve. The meaning of a word is how it is used, and "wine" have been used for ages to refer to cherry wine, dandelion wine, apple wine, etc. I haven't even heard beer called wine though.
- jhgb 4y agoI'm not committing that fallacy as defined because I'm not making "a claim about the present meaning of a word based exclusively on that word's etymology". > and "wine" have been used for ages to refer to cherry wine, dandelion wine, apple wine, etc. The possible problem with that argument is that compounds are often not the same thing as the intersection of their components. One famous example from my native language is that "pietní akt" refers to a memorial act for the dead (for example, fallen soldiers), whereas merely "akt" refers to a nude painting or sculpture (as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nude_(art) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nude_(art)). "Pietní akt" is not a subtype of "akt"; it's an idiom/colocation with its own peculiar meaning.
- goto11 4y agoYou have to make the argument to the good people of Merriam-Webster then. I'm just the messenger here.