3 ms·
Right back at you with the citation needed. Humanoid is not a taxonomic term anymore. All Homo are humans. Never said modern, which it obviously isn't.
by tokai 3y ago
Right back at you with the citation needed. Humanoid is not a taxonomic term anymore. All Homo are humans. Never said modern, which it obviously isn't.
- iopq 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human > Although some scientists equate the term "humans" with all members of the genus Homo, in common usage it generally refers to Homo sapiens, the only extant member.
- swatcoder 3y agoThere's no citation for that claim and it would be unlikely for there to be one. It's just some dude's personal impression about a subjective matter (a word in transition), and carries no more weight than any other comment being made here. A more meaningful source would be a usage guide like Garner's Modern English.
- iopq 3y agoOkay, link to your source
- denton-scratch 3y agoActually, it is cited. The fragment you quoted is from the lede, which is supposed to summarize the rest of the material. So if you read on to the section "Etymology and definition", you find that the same claim is cited to Merriam Webster. As it happens, this citation is useless, because it doesn't support the claim. Basically, I think it's fraudulent to cite that claim to that MW article.
- DonHopkins 3y agoI don't wanna classify you like an animal in the zoo, but it seems good to me to know that you're Homosapien too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HwmO_GZfzI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HwmO_GZfzI