3 ms·

Actually - "redefine" means to change the definition for political or arbitrary reasons. Language naturally evolves. All languages do and have. The fact that ou

Actually - "redefine" means to change the definition for political or arbitrary reasons. Language naturally evolves. All languages do and have. The fact that our language continues to evolve is unremarkable - that's not "redefining" anything. Recession means two quarters of negative GDP growth while a Republican is President and basically always has. It doesn't apply here!

DuskStar 4y ago
Absolutely fantastic. I bet that first paragraph gets said seriously within the year.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  He didn't pull it out of nowhere. The reason it seems so spot on is because we've seen so many people on HN (and other places) say lightly paraphrased versions of that first paragraph so many times over the past several years.
niknoble 4y ago
The tone of the first paragraph is spot on and had me fully convinced. I wasn't even surprised when I read it. I just felt the usual low-level disappointment that I've felt whenever reading any mainstream news, art, advertising, etc over the last 2 years.
sethjr5rtfgh 4y ago
> Actually - "redefine" means to change the definition for political or arbitrary reasons. Language naturally evolves. All languages do and have. The fact that our language continues to evolve is unremarkable - that's not "redefining" anything. Actually, "redefine" means to change the definition regardless of the motive.
- tpoacher 4y ago
  For suitable definitions of define and redefine that are not redefined definitions of the original definitions as defined by definition, yes.
tpoacher 4y ago
I accept your redefinition for the definition of redefine, but you still haven't defined what you mean by define in the context of redefine to the extent that you redefined its definition. Is define in your redefinition redefined to mean something other than the traditional definition of define as encountered in a redefine context? Or are you defining define within the redifinition of redefine as defined outside of the definition of your redefined redefine definition?
- coding123 4y ago
  At least one persons head exploded reading that.
the_third_wave 4y ago
> Language naturally evolves. All languages do and have. The fact that our language continues to evolve is unremarkable - that's not "redefining" anything. Language evolves, this is true. It is a slow and uncoordinated process which usually starts in a specific geographical location after which the changed words spread. This is not what is happening here. The type of intentional and coordinated redefinitions of terms is not language evolution but language revolution - or revolutionary language, viz. Merriam Webster's recent redefinition of terms like 'female' [1], 'sexual preference' [2], 'anti-vaxxer' [3] and more. [1] 'female' now includes the term 'having a gender identity that is the opposite of male' in a bid to appease transgender activists to allow them to answer the question 'what is a woman' with 'an adult human female' [2] during the hearings for Supreme Court justice Amy Coney Barrett she (Barrett) used the term 'sexual preference' upon which the dictionary quickly modified the definition of the word 'preference' to include a claim that 'The term preference as used to refer to sexual orientation is widely considered offensive in its implied suggestion that a person can choose who they are sexually or romantically attracted to' [3] this term was amended during the COVID vaccine mandate discussion by adding the claim that anyone who opposed vaccine mandates is an anti-vaxxer

DuskStar 4y ago

Absolutely fantastic. I bet that first paragraph gets said seriously within the year.

throwaway0a5e 4y ago
He didn't pull it out of nowhere. The reason it seems so spot on is because we've seen so many people on HN (and other places) say lightly paraphrased versions of that first paragraph so many times over the past several years.

niknoble 4y ago

The tone of the first paragraph is spot on and had me fully convinced. I wasn't even surprised when I read it. I just felt the usual low-level disappointment that I've felt whenever reading any mainstream news, art, advertising, etc over the last 2 years.

sethjr5rtfgh 4y ago

> Actually - "redefine" means to change the definition for political or arbitrary reasons. Language naturally evolves. All languages do and have. The fact that our language continues to evolve is unremarkable - that's not "redefining" anything. Actually, "redefine" means to change the definition regardless of the motive.

tpoacher 4y ago
For suitable definitions of define and redefine that are not redefined definitions of the original definitions as defined by definition, yes.

tpoacher 4y ago

I accept your redefinition for the definition of redefine, but you still haven't defined what you mean by define in the context of redefine to the extent that you redefined its definition. Is define in your redefinition redefined to mean something other than the traditional definition of define as encountered in a redefine context? Or are you defining define within the redifinition of redefine as defined outside of the definition of your redefined redefine definition?

coding123 4y ago
At least one persons head exploded reading that.

the_third_wave 4y ago

> Language naturally evolves. All languages do and have. The fact that our language continues to evolve is unremarkable - that's not "redefining" anything. Language evolves, this is true. It is a slow and uncoordinated process which usually starts in a specific geographical location after which the changed words spread. This is not what is happening here. The type of intentional and coordinated redefinitions of terms is not language evolution but language revolution - or revolutionary language, viz. Merriam Webster's recent redefinition of terms like 'female' [1], 'sexual preference' [2], 'anti-vaxxer' [3] and more. [1] 'female' now includes the term 'having a gender identity that is the opposite of male' in a bid to appease transgender activists to allow them to answer the question 'what is a woman' with 'an adult human female' [2] during the hearings for Supreme Court justice Amy Coney Barrett she (Barrett) used the term 'sexual preference' upon which the dictionary quickly modified the definition of the word 'preference' to include a claim that 'The term preference as used to refer to sexual orientation is widely considered offensive in its implied suggestion that a person can choose who they are sexually or romantically attracted to' [3] this term was amended during the COVID vaccine mandate discussion by adding the claim that anyone who opposed vaccine mandates is an anti-vaxxer