3 ms·

You're not wrong, but it's a real shame that the English language keeps deteriorating this way. Most of the time, it's obvious from context what one means by 'l

You're not wrong, but it's a real shame that the English language keeps deteriorating this way. Most of the time, it's obvious from context what one means by 'literally' but not always. Why create extra ambiguity when there already exists other functional language constructs to express the same thought with clarity? It does make me wonder how much this happens in other languages, especially ones like French where there is an effort to keep the language from morphing too much, too quickly.

giraffe_lady 4y ago
It's not "deterioration" just change. Deterioration implies deviation from a natural, ideal, or perfect state, which languages simply do not have. This belief that the language is in decline and losing some ineffable beauty or value is older than english, in fact some of our oldest historical documents at all are versions of this lament. The language we speak now is the result of millennia of such "deterioration." Those language-control bodies that some countries have are somewhat a relic of before we had our current understanding of the mechanics of language use and how languages change over time. They can also be understood as a leftover tool from the european bootstrapping-nationstates era. Either way, those bodies may (but it's debatable) have some influence on the rate the language change, or what specific changes occur. But nowhere near as much as they purport to, maybe close to none at all.
knodi123 4y ago
Eh. It's not a deterioration, it's just language. It's not like there was a carefully designed "one true language" in the past and this is a fallen world speaking only inferior pidgins. Even in the bible, we can see Jesus starting a lot of stories with "truly, truly I say unto you..." followed by a parable.
BeetleB 4y ago
> but it's a real shame that the English language keeps deteriorating this way English is not Latin. It was born deteriorated.

giraffe_lady 4y ago

It's not "deterioration" just change. Deterioration implies deviation from a natural, ideal, or perfect state, which languages simply do not have. This belief that the language is in decline and losing some ineffable beauty or value is older than english, in fact some of our oldest historical documents at all are versions of this lament. The language we speak now is the result of millennia of such "deterioration." Those language-control bodies that some countries have are somewhat a relic of before we had our current understanding of the mechanics of language use and how languages change over time. They can also be understood as a leftover tool from the european bootstrapping-nationstates era. Either way, those bodies may (but it's debatable) have some influence on the rate the language change, or what specific changes occur. But nowhere near as much as they purport to, maybe close to none at all.

knodi123 4y ago

Eh. It's not a deterioration, it's just language. It's not like there was a carefully designed "one true language" in the past and this is a fallen world speaking only inferior pidgins. Even in the bible, we can see Jesus starting a lot of stories with "truly, truly I say unto you..." followed by a parable.

BeetleB 4y ago

> but it's a real shame that the English language keeps deteriorating this way English is not Latin. It was born deteriorated.