3 ms·
English definitely has not only numerous footguns in spelling, but there are also the words that it seems nearly everyone thinks they know the meaning of, but d
by dhosek 3y ago
English definitely has not only numerous footguns in spelling, but there are also the words that it seems nearly everyone thinks they know the meaning of, but do not. The two that leap to mind being nauseous¹ and bemused.²
⸻
1. The New Oxford Dictionary has given up, and offers the common, but technically incorrect definition as its first definition, while the American Heritage Dictionary places that definition at number 2.
2. Here, the dictionaries are holding firm on the correct definition and do not acknowledge the common misapprehension of the word’s meaning.
- jpc0 3y agoCould you please let us know what the misunderstood meanings for those words are. I legitimately only know one meaning for each of those and from a quick look in a dictionary my understanding of those words seem to stem from the original meaning.
- dhosek 3y agoAs mentioned elsewhere, “nauseous” is often used where “nauseated” would be correct. Likewise, “bemused” is often used where “amused” is meant. A recent example (published in a national magazine): ”Everyone was confused and then bemused when the runner-up, who had written under a pseudonym, turned out to be…Graham Greene.“ I would also like to add “to sanction” being used to meant to punish, although according to the OED, this meaning (in legal contexts) dates to the early 19th century, but every time I encounter it, I always have to stop and puzzle over the context since the verb meaning of “sanction” also means to give approval to.
- jamiek88 3y agoSame here! I can’t think of alternate meanings either.
- eterm 3y agoFor the first, pedants like to point out that a statement like: "I was feeling nauseous" is incorrect and should be "I was feeling nauseated", as nauseous is "causing nausea" but that's just pedantry and dictionaries now reflect that and now also list it as "affected by nausea".
- mrguyorama 3y agoIt's pedantic yes, but more importantly it's prescriptive. It's taking as a given that language has a "correct" way to do things and pushing back on natural language evolution. It's eugenics for language lol
- jpc0 3y agoI figured that but agree with you. I generally wouldn't use that meaning but it's not like I'm going to fight about it being used.