10 ms·
Would you then say that your use of guess is incorrect because the Old English gessen meant estimate and not suppose? That you are literally compelled in the se
by evincarofautumn 14y ago
Would you then say that your use of guess is incorrect because the Old English gessen meant estimate and not suppose? That you are literally compelled in the sense that cattle are driven together, like the Latin word compellere? Or that you’re literally calling out the title to fight?
I won’t go past your first sentence because I already sound like an ass. But you see what I mean: language changes over time. Meanings are lost or transformed or extended by analogy and, though it may pain us, “incorrect” uses abound and eventually become the norm. You don’t have to like it or agree with it, but it does happen, and prescriptivism gets you nowhere in discussions of language.
- reitzensteinm 14y agoSometimes when arguing on HN, I feel like I've brought a knife to a gunfight.
- evincarofautumn 14y agoHah, I feel the same way a lot, actually. But occasionally we find ourselves in our element, and it’s like “Wait a minute, I do know things!” Or at least know where to look them up and how to present them intelligently. ;)
- nnnnnnnn 14y agoI try to phrase things in terms of sharing or helping instead of arguing. Not everything must be an argument! The less adversarial the phrasing, the easier it is to accept correction from a peer.
- biot 14y agoWith respect to "guess" instead of "suppose", I'm essentially being sloppy in my writing and I really would like to improve that. I know you were just making a point, but it is fair criticism. As I wrote in another reply, I think I just really like the original meaning of decimated and I feel it's a shame to lose that due to popular [mis]use, even if that's just how language works. [Edited to remove logical argument and replace it with sentimental one.]
- evincarofautumn 14y agoWell, no, guess does mean suppose in modern English. Your use is perfectly correct. Googling “define:decimate” gave me: 1. Kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage of 2. Drastically reduce the strength or effectiveness of Which is in line with most people’s understanding of the term, and makes no mention of the original meaning. The problem with prescriptivism is that the rabbit-hole goes back to the very beginning of language itself. You could start saying an ekename (from eek meaning other) instead of a nickname, or a napron instead of an apron because these words arose from misdivision. You could revert to pronouncing fir, fur, and verse with different vowels. You could bring back the eo diphthong and say seolfor for silver and geolu for yellow. But you wouldn’t, because that’s absurd, and I contend that dragging our heels against any language change is equally absurd.
- biot 14y ago> I contend that dragging our heels against any language change > is equally absurd. If by "any" you mean "all", then I agree. With "decimated", the meaning "one-tenth" is still an accepted current definition rather than an anachronism. So I choose to selectively drag my heels and cherry-pick definitions when it comes to words I enjoy.