6 ms·
> > It's completely unnecessary. There are many other ways to say what the writer means by "comprised of". It adds nothing to the language. I wonder if the edi
by soraminazuki 3y ago
> > It's completely unnecessary. There are many other ways to say what the writer means by "comprised of". It adds nothing to the language.
I wonder if the editor read "1984" and straight up copied its ideas. In the novel, the totalitarian state of Oceania uses that exact same justification to promote the use of the Newspeak language:
> After all, what justification is there for a word which is simply the opposite of some other word? ... Take ‘good’, for instance. If you have a word like ‘good’, what need is there for a word like ‘bad’? ‘Ungood’ will do just as well—better, because it’s an exact opposite, which the other is not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak
- logicchains 3y ago>I wonder if the editor read "1984" and straight up copied its ideas Maybe George Orwell copied the idea from Esperanto. For instance, "dark" in Esperanto is "notlight", and left is "notright".
- robswc 3y agoI can get behind the "notlight" but "notright"... feels like something my brain would never get used to haha.
- Izkata 3y agoBecause based on the words it's composed of, it's different from "left" - it would include "forward" and "backward". Similarly for "notlight" implying including twilight, which "dark" does not.
- robocat 3y ago> twilight Perhaps that is lightandnotlight. We almost have notlight in English: unlit. An unlit room feels twilighty to me. > notright Left in Esperanto: maldekstra I can’t imagine why a language designer would choose “mal” as the prefix for “not”. In English and Spanish (two common languages), mal has some bad connotations (malodour, malady, malfeasance, malo, malformed). Let’s try the opposite: “not left” is definitely something different from “right” - urrrgggh. “Do not go left” doesn’t mean to go right. However it looks like Esperanto also has “liva”. Turnu liven tuj post la angulo ~= Turn left immediately after the corner.
- Izkata 3y ago> I can’t imagine why a language designer would choose “mal” as the prefix for “not”. In English and Spanish (two common languages), mal has some bad connotations (malodour, malady, malfeasance, malo, malformed). Well, there's also the Latin word "sinister" which has a very different meaning in English... Kinda seems like a common theme.
- robocat 3y agoLiterally see maladroit
- malicka 3y ago> Let’s try the opposite: “not left” is definitely something different from “right” - urrrgggh. “Do not go left” doesn’t mean to go right. “maldekstra” doesn't actually mean “not right” — mal in Esperanto more precisely means “opposite.” Left is opposite of right, and so malmaldekstra (opposite of the opposite of right) is still right (dekstra). “Not right” in Esperanto doesn't exactly mean left, either, just like in in English. That'd be ne + dekstra = nedesktra.
- robocat 3y agoSure. It just feels like a malicious choice for left. No soy maleducado. !Tengo mucho mano izquirdo, y es derecho mio a decir la palabra “maldekstra” es «malappropriate»¡ http://www.anmal.uma.es/Numero9/Forment.htm http://www.anmal.uma.es/Numero9/Forment.htm Joan Bastardas habla de la extrañeza de la existencia de la palabra ensinistrar del catalán, puesto que tiene un significado claramente positivo a pesar de ser derivado de siniestro-a. «... ensinistrar que no deixa de sorprendre els qui s´acosten al català des d´altres llengües romàniques, en què les idees d´habilitat i aptesa s´associen amb la mà dreta i no amb la mà esquerra, el castellà adiestrar, l´italià addestrare; en francès hi ha dexterité, però també en català hi ha destresa i destre-a 'hàbil', 'expert', i també maldestre, com el francès maladroit». (Bastardas 1996: 26) la contraposición entre la bondad y la justicia — simbolizados por la derecha — y la maldad, el egoísmo —relacionados con la izquierda—.
- 3y ago
- thomastjeffery 3y agoThe word "notright" is as clear of an example as you can get: does it mean straight or left? Up? The most confoundingly powerful feature of language is ambiguity: on one hand, you can't take it literally; on the other hand, you don't have to.
- joseda-hg 3y agoI think the example doesn't quite do it justice, a better interpretation would be antiright, which would be unambiguous
- TrapLord_Rhodo 3y agoin orwellian newspeak, the whole point is to be ambigious so you can't point at harm.
- bdg 3y agoIf you like that you're gonna love TokiPona. So few words that even basic objects might take a paragraph to explain.
- taejo 3y agoEsperanto dekstra only means right, the direction/side, though, and so maldekstra only means left, the direction/side.
- samirillian 3y agoI don't agree with your 1984 analogy at all. A better source might be George Orwell's actual, explicit opinions on politics and the English language: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/politics-and-the-english-language/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel... Orwell certainly did not take an "anything goes" approach to language, which is essentially what you and others argue for, in the mistaken belief that you're somehow striking a blow at totalitarianism. From my perspective, your position is much closer to the Newspeak ethos than that of someone who actually cares about correct usage.
- giraffe_lady 3y agohey qq who decides what correct is
- hgsgm 3y agoThe marketplace of ideas.
- samirillian 3y agoWell this guy on Wikipedia, who clearly cares more then you do, for one. Dictionaries, style guides, people like Orwell, the French do have a ministry to maintain the language. I've answered your question, now I have one for you: Did you even glance at the link? I'm sorry, these epistemologically relativist arguments lead to utterly absurd conclusions. How does wikipedia work at all? How can we ever make judgements about anything? It's bad Cartesianism. Just because we can't know something absolutely doesn't mean we can't know anything. Just because language changes doesn't mean there's no such thing as correct and incorrect usage.
- tonnydourado 3y agoI don't think anyone is saying that "anything goes" and there's no right or wrong ways of writing, they're just arguing that your narrow definition of "correct" is too narrow to be useful for anything other than gatekeeping.