10 ms·
English Has a New Preposition, Because Internet
- wubbfindel 13y agoExcellent article, worth the read. Not many comments here, because short attention spans!
- fosap 13y agoI'm not a native speaker. If i add a "of", ("because of short attention spans!") that sounds if it was correct in the past aswell, so I'm confused. For me that seems just leaving out the "of", or is there more?
- swamp40 13y agoThat's pretty much it. The linguists just gave it a fancy technical name. I wouldn't worry too much - this is just a fad. People get bored and do weird things.
- thejteam 13y agoYou're exactly right. This is just leaving out the "of". The article interprets this to mean that the word "because" has become a new preposition used in place of the proposition "of". Another interpretation is that "because" retains its grammatical usage but a new sentence structure has become acceptable. I personally interpret it the second way. Each domain has its own grammatical structure.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- greyfade 13y agoThat's one aspect to it. The article summarizes it well at the end: > "It means something like 'I'm so busy being totally absorbed by X that I don’t need to explain further, and you should know about this because it's a completely valid incredibly important thing to be doing'" Because brevity and wit.
- dnautics 13y agono, there is more. Take "because yay!". Doesn't necessarily make sense if you put an "of" in there. Yet there is something in common between "because yay!" and "because math" that is not there between "because yay!" and "because of math".
- humanrebar 13y agoEven "because of short attention spans" is leaving out information... which (or whose) attention spans are we talking about. There is a qualifier or article missing somewhere. A "his", "their", "some" or something. As I said in another comment, to me it implies the subject is dumb or hasty or something. As in a little bit of caveman speak maybe ("He hit own head because stupid").
- jasonlotito 13y agoDepends on how it's used. "Not many people read the whole thing because HN." Now, you could add the "of" and just leave it at that, and take it literally. But the implication is so much more than just saying "because of HN." "People are so fat here because 'merica."
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- ante_annum 13y agoI thought this was a good article until I re-read it to cite all the sources. It cites a single blog post by one linguist and twitter and image macros. That hardly constitutes linguists. It hardly constitutes linguist. This feature was longer than the original post.
- wubbfindel 13y agoGood point... I guess I just liked the idea a bit too much. (I find the evolution of languages quite interesting, especially when technology seems to be involved.)
- pasquinelli 13y agoi read the prepositional because with a pause, like, because... evolution. as if the ellipsis are placeholders for an actual thought that falls under the umbrella of evolution. so the plural on spans just makes it seem like a typo. maybe, "because ADD" would work better.
- l0gicpath 13y agoI'm here, commenting on this because -HN-Timesink
- ionforce 13y agoThat doesn't seem like a particularly strong example, especially considering the phrase you chose isn't concise. "H N Time Sink". "I forgot to feed my kids because Warcraft." "My server melted because Slashdot." As for Hacker News being a time sink in your life, I don't know that there's a phrase short enough to fit. "I sunk all my time into innernet forums because single."
- Cthulhu_ 13y agoI'm here too because work.
- sjclemmy 13y agoI don't think the article mentions it, Because? Question mark.
- adamnemecek 13y agoCan't wait for lolcat spelling to become alternative spelling.
- axus 13y agoI thought this usage arose from dropping the word "of" after "because". "Because of" wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article.
- code_duck 13y agoIt is, in the beginning: > It can be followed either by a finite clause (I'm reading this because [I saw it on the web]) or by a prepositional phrase (I'm reading this because [of the web]). Seems to me that you are correct, this 'new usage' is merely the latter usage without 'of'.
- powertower 13y agoThat seems to dumb down the language, rather than improve or evolve it. > Skipping lunch today because sleep. What is that supposed to mean? You need to take a nap during lunch; you got too much sleep the night before and are groggy, etc. Why not add a few more words to make the sentence understandable (in this case non-ambiguous).
- HCIdivision17 13y agoIt means sleep was the cause of lunch being missed. No more details are provided or implied. Off the record, one could guess that the speaker didn't want to remark on oversleeping due to the negative connotations, and is instead leaving the answer vague in the hopes of don't-ask-don't-tell. Depending on the audience, this may also be exactly enough information to be unambiguous with the fewest number of words; a friend may have had prior experiences that set the default interpretation and context of mid-day sleep. TL;DR: Don't mistake dumb for compression.
- powertower 13y agoHow are you pulling original data out of a lossy compression method?
- a-priori 13y agoLossy compression always uses heuristics to guide compression and decompression. In this case, the heuristic is 'my brain works similarly; why would I have written this?'
- blader 13y agoSame way you do when you look at a jpg.
- vidarh 13y agoHow do you interpret any spoken or written sentence? It is all lossy.
- humanrebar 13y ago
- alex_c 13y agoWhat's fascinating to me is that, unlike so many other language "changes", this isn't caused by laziness or carelessness. This seems to be a rare case where removing words adds information, rather than removing it: "The talks failed because of politics" means roughly what it says, while "The talks failed because politics" means roughly "The talks failed because of politics, which is the kind of thing that always happens when politics are involved". Any linguists care to comment whether there's a term for this kind of meaning compression? "Idiom" doesn't quite seem to cover it.
- vezzy-fnord 13y agoNot a linguist, but wouldn't this fall under "pithiness"? I think generic brevity and succinctness would also describe this adequately.
- Alex_Jiang 13y agoThe added inference I get is "that's just the way it is." "Because politics" is like saying "because politics are just crazy like that." It's a flippant way of saying something is simply absurd. Or an issue is pretty much binary.
- minikomi 13y agoYeah, it has an "do you even have to ask?" flavor to it for me.
- humanrebar 13y ago> this isn't caused by laziness or carelessness Some of this might be caused by increased use of smartphones for posting on the Facebook, tweeting, and texting. I'm not sure laziness is the right word, but conservation of characters is certainly a goal. As far as laziness, I'll disagree with you. Hardly ever is a "because X" clause well thought out or witty. I think it's safe to assume there is some serious mental laziness happening when you see a "prepositional because" being used.
- colinwd 13y ago
- vezzy-fnord 13y agoInteresting how language can evolve (devolve?) in the face of character limits for online comments. A very memetic fashion, as well.
- humanrebar 13y agoMaybe it's just me, but the "prepositional because" is usually deprecative of the subject. The article details the implications of the prepositional because: "It conveys focus... It conveys brevity... But it also conveys a certain universality." People use it when they're busy, drunk, or absent-minded to be self-deprecative. As in: "Maxed out my credit card because too much beer!" But people also use it to disparage someone else: "Uptown a*&%$# voted against prop B because racism." The article briefly hints at this when it says, "So we get comments like these, with people using 'because' not just to explain, but also to criticize, and sensationalize, and ironize...". In fact, I'm having a hard time coming up with an example of a "because X" clause that has complimentary implications. However, it's possible that the implications of this preposition has softened recently and I'm out of the loop. Or maybe I'm just overthinking it. EDIT: Maybe it's just me but "because bacon" and "because awesome" do not imply that the subject of the sentence is a person with qualities worth aspiring to. Not that bacon isn't awesome.
- maccam94 13y ago> In fact, I'm having a hard time coming up with an example of a "because X" clause that has complimentary implications. "Now put x with y, because awesome!"
- saraid216 13y ago> In fact, I'm having a hard time coming up with an example of a "because X" clause that has complimentary implications. "I have breakfast for all three meals because bacon."
- jrochkind1 13y ago> In fact, I'm having a hard time coming up with an example of a "because X" clause that has complimentary implications. I added bacon to my milkshake because delicious. I don't normally like superhero movies, but I went to see the Avengers, because Joss Whedon.
- humanrebar 13y agoThis is close to being complimentary, but it comes across as more of a compliment to Joss Whedon than the subject. At best, it's a neutral expression of fandom. At worst, it's an admission of fanboy (or fangirl) proclivities. Some sort of context is needed to clarify which one.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- smickie 13y agoGreat article, because journalism.
- dnautics 13y agoMy suspicion is that this evolved from the phrase "because f-ck you, that's why", which is pretty old (~5-10 years). Edit: Oldest usage, as found by google: http://www.dkvine.com/games/dkl3/ http://www.dkvine.com/games/dkl3/ (2001), line 807 in the source; this is probably not the first usage in all of english.
- benched 13y ago"Cause fuck him, that's why" is from Good Will Hunting. 1997.
- dnautics 13y agogreat catch, although I wouldn't be surprised if the phrase preceded that, even.
- __pThrow 13y agoYes, and instead of claiming it to be "explicitly ironic" as the author does, I had actually thought as I read it, it's mostly "implicitly fuck you."
- dnautics 13y agoit's usually used in non-sequitur situations where a rational explanation for an individual or entity in power is lacking. For example. "Q: why does the TSA allow me to 20 miniature scope bottles but not one big scope bottle to get past security? A: Because, f-you, that's why." It seems like in most of these "because, X" constructs, there is an appeal to an agent that has a higher authority or extremely potent, or surprising effect: Eg, "because, MATH" or, "because, yay!", or "because, tiny subatomic particles!" but you probably wouldn't use it for the mundane. "because, that's what I do every day" doesn't feel like the same cotstruct even though it has roughly the same form, unless you put a strong emphasis on it, e.g. "because, THAT'S WHAT I DO EVERY DAY". Which elevates the mundane to something omnipresent. Anyways, I'm not sure what constitutes "explicitly ironic", but in the situations where "because, fuck you" are called for seem pretty explicitly ironic to me.
- erbo 13y agoThere's other ways of expanding the "because-noun" construction. I've occasionally posted a link to Facebook with a comment like "This is incredibly awesome and you should read this, because SPACE." In this case, the construct expands to something like "...because it has to do with space, which I consider to be inherently awesome." "Because-noun," it would appear, can be construed multiple ways, and a lot of the meaning is contextual.
- pferde 13y agoOr it could expand to something like "because it has to do with space, which I find boring, but I remember that you're a space nut, therefore you might find it interesting". Or even "because it will help with your school project which is about space". It's too fickle, too context dependent.
- Mindless2112 13y agoOn one hand, this doesn't bother me much because it's mostly just a mutation of "because of" which I already avoid using. You can usually rework "because of <noun>" into "because <phrase>" and produce a sentence that, in my experience, better expresses what the speaker actually intends. On the other hand, "because <noun>" is extremely inexact: > English Has a New Preposition, Because Internet What about the Internet caused English to gain a new preposition? Unless you already understand, "because <noun>" adds little, if any, explanation. I can see its use as a handy short-hand when your audience does already understand though.
- saraid216 13y agoYes. It's an invocation, rather than an explanation. That's one of the interesting things about it; it's effectively a reversal of the original meaning of the word "because".
- epochwolf 13y agoIt has a different meaning than because of though. Two examples: Bacon milkshake because bacon. Bacon milkshake because of bacon. The second one doesn't carry the flippant implication of the unquestionable awesomeness of bacon. You don't get to argue the point with the first one. The second one might be up to debate. There's far more to communication that just facts. There's emotional content that gets captured as well.
- Aardwolf 13y agoIn Dutch this one already exists: "vanwege".
- Cthulhu_ 13y agoWhich is actually a merger of two words (van wege), which roughly translates to 'because of'. Lots of words are pronounced as if they are one (or always together), and in this case they were eventually written as one.
- chc 13y agoIt's not really a new preposition, per se. It's a type of joke. Every occurrence cited here is using it in a jokey fashion. It seems to me you may as well say potatoes are a common topic of conversation on the Internet because of Latvian jokes.
- jamesbritt 13y agoEvery occurrence cited here is using it in a jokey fashion. That's how it feels to me, too. It works because people are in on the deliberate "misuse" of language. Sort of like when people say (or said) the single-word sentence "Sadness." Should it become common parlance then that cool "in-joke" feel goes away, and while it would still have some meaning it wouldn't be the same meaning it has right now. It might simply become another way to say "because of." Or, articles like this one might lead people to make more of it than it was every intended, thereby becoming correct by virtue of asserting a claim that people then follow as if it already true.
- rangibaby 13y agoThis is how the word "OK" started out; it was a joke abbreviation of "all correct": Oll Korrect. You never know when a joke is going to take over the world... [0] http://www.amazon.com/OK-Improbable-Story-Americas-Greatest/dp/0199892539 http://www.amazon.com/OK-Improbable-Story-Americas-Greatest/...
- teddyh 13y agoThat is one possible origin of the word; its actual origin is unknown and disputed.
- namenotrequired 13y agoThere are many other hypotheses about where the word OK comes from.
- vorg 13y ago> It seems to me you may as well say potatoes are a common topic of conversation on the Internet because of Latvian jokes. Potatoes are a common talk topic on the net because, like, Latvian jokes.
- ozataman 13y agoHuh. This new form of "because" in an actual, intended-to-be-grammatically-correct sentence sounds weird to me and I don't think I personally use it at all. Isn't it just "because of" without the "of" when people are in a rush, typing on a tiny keyboard or just plain lazy? Or when the intent is to construct a witty, purposefully broken sentence?
- elwell 13y agoexactly. the whole thing is being blown out of proportion... why did I just read that anyway?
- nhebb 13y ago... fluffy, sensational article because The Atlantic.
- tedunangst 13y agoYou know they're hurting when The Atlantic is reporting on trends in Wonkette, Daily Kos, and Jezebel. At least Slate, in their ridiculous "where's the journalism now?" pieces, aims up at the NY Times.
- tedunangst 13y agoThe intent is often to construct a purposefully broken sentence, mirroring the broken logic that comes next. The word after because would only satisfy the question "why?" if you're a moron. I put bacon in my salad. [why?] Because bacon. That explains absolutely nothing, the implication being that if you're asking why, you're a moron and nothing more can be explained to you because bacon is so overwhelmingly and obviously self-justifying. Other interpretations abound as well.
- slug_MORE_slug 13y agoSlug is so much light than snail who have shell to copy slug technology. The snail use the shell beacause is a fucking faget. snail got crush so easy, and you can give the slug to ur dog chew and it ll still eat lettuce. shell is MORE heavy than no shell. some slug have internal shell because more evolved Your cousin will not want to stay on your house to play slug. If you trow the slug on the wall, the wall will go up. Trow both on water and watch which will come up first. slug at mate will make a slimecord. The snail will show dribble. All slug are hermaphrodite. Snail is too but because faget slug is the name of a bullet. Snail means it is slow. Slug will eat carrion, slug don't give a fuck slug didn't needed an upgrade. Slug is perfect
- contextual 13y agoMy favorite word that's picked up a new meaning (for me, anyway) is trespass, as in "trespassers will be trespassed"[1]. Apparently, using the word trespass as a intransitive verb is correct (albeit archaic) and was used as such in the New Testament, as in forgive those who trespass against us. [1]http://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/dictionary/trespassers-will-be-trespassed/ http://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/dictionary/trespassers-wil...
- ChristianMarks 13y agoThis is trending on HN because Hacker News.
- anakanemison 13y agoThe grammatical class of prepositions changes considerably more slowly than other classes. We need new nouns and new verbs all the time, because what occupies and what occurs in our environment changes so fast. Interestingly, despite that rapid change, the set of prepositions, the set of conceptual relationships we've chosen to concisely express, stays pretty steady. It's fascinating to read about a new preposition entering into common usage, because it makes me wonder what new pressures we're collectively facing in describing conceptual relationships. Certainly it could just be Twitter's character limits causing people to drop the "of" in "because of", but maybe other forces caused this construction to have utility now. My bet would be on an increased expectation that our conversational partners share our context, and our models for understanding why things happen the way they do, because internet.
- c0achmcguirk 13y agoI first heard this construct in a Deep Thought by Jack Handey, from the mid-nineties I believe: "After I die, wherever my spirit goes, I'm going to try to get back and visit my skeleton at least once a year, because, 'Hey, old buddy, how's it going?'." I still laugh about it, and the main reason it was funny to me was the odd (but humorously apropos) use of the word "because."
- lutusp 13y ago"I rationalize endlessly, because because."
- mtdewcmu 13y agoYou still run a risk of sounding like an idiot if you use this construction. Personally, I would wait a few more years before adopting it in all situations.
- EGreg 13y agoI am not so sure internet idioms are of the same class as professionally written English structure. Otherwise UrbanDictionary and RapGenius should serve as the sources for today's written English. These are two different genres. It's interesting to ask when something becomes so widely accepted that it is considered fine to use in "proper" english writing. If "because X" is, then so is LOL. Incorporate ALL THE THINGS!
- sparky_z 13y agoLOL was added to the OED a couple of years ago [1]. The point of this article is that there have been enough sighting of "because [noun]" in the wild in enough different contexts that it is starting to make that leap into the mainstream, beyond just UrbanDuctionary and it's ilk. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12893416 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12893416
- apendleton 13y agoSee also another relatively recent grammatical innovation in English, the evolution of "slash" into a conjunction: http://chronicle.com/blogs/linguafranca/2013/04/24/slash-not-just-a-punctuation-mark-anymore/ http://chronicle.com/blogs/linguafranca/2013/04/24/slash-not... (Someone elsewhere in the thread said the "because" construction was unusual because prepositions evolve more slowly than words of other parts of speech in English; this is true, but conjunctions typically move slowest of all. Such times we live in...)
- bglazer 13y agoAh that's really cool to see a relatively rare phenomenon like that happening in real time. Also fascinating that the author used Facebook feeds as a source. That seems like it could be a very, very powerful tool for linguistics. The privacy issues are obvious, but imagine being able to trace the spread of new language construction as it propagates through a population.
- marincounty 13y agoBeing brief is great. I have always felt most people are overly wordy--especially in the technicial fields(600 page programming books go right in my recycling bin), but what I find irratitating is peope who use the constraints of the internet to be cute--too tired to exemplify, but Hip Chicks seem to gravitate towards this way communicating.
- triplenineteen 13y agoThis seems somewhat related to "not sure if serious" or the general form "not sure if [adjective]".
- rurounijones 13y agoI have always seen "Because noun" as being a dismissive "Don't think to hard about it; that is just the way it is" reason. Or for a situation where there is no rational explanation. e.g. A: "Why do some people have such a fetich for eating tiger penis" B: "Because china" Am I alone in this?
- epochwolf 13y agoThat's one use of it. Roughly equivalent to the "Aliens" guy meme. The other meaning is "I don't need to explain why, because it should be obvious". Example: Bacon milkshake, because bacon.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- cenhyperion 13y agoI've always used it in a dismissive sense. As if to say "it is the way it is, let's not investigate further" So "Why do you look so distraught?" "Because PHP" "I am so sorry."
- fallingOff 13y agoI added bacon to my milkshake because delicious/awesome. In the sentence above, "because" is followed by an adjective phrase. Prepositions are never followed by adjective phrases, so "prepositional because" is a misnomer for this new construction and does not fully describe its range of uses. I have no suggestions for a better name though... I've never heard this construction in speech, but maybe I don't hang out with enough nerdy internet types.
- jrockway 13y agoI'm not yet convinced that this is something one can use and not get laughed at for quite yet. It's fine for informal communications because your readers are probably not too literate, but I fear that this might still confuse an older generation used to more formal grammatical constructions. All of the examples are just social media wanking, as far as I can tell, so probably not indicative of any actual shift in how people are using English to tell a story. "Skipping lunch because sleep." OK. Who the fuck cares? Ultimately, the human brain can error-correct over gross misuse of language; plenty of people speak without using articles, mess up "his" and "her" and "he" or "she", spell the world "you" as "u", choose the wrong word when their are homonyms, or wr173 411 7h31r s3n73n(3s l1|<3 7h15. That doesn't mean it's a good idea to invoke the error correction machinery when the message isn't actually corrupted; it would be pretty fatiguing to read Neal Stephenson in l337 speak. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Because humans.
- eru 13y ago> [..] an older generation used to more formal grammatical constructions. They didn't start out as formal constructions, just pick up any lament about the decline of language from, say, the 19th century.
- masklinn 13y agoOr the third. Before common era too.
- eru 13y agoYes. But some 19th century laments are now accepted as formal usage.
- vidarh 13y agoMy favourite "decline of language" issue, because it still riles up certain people while it seems clear that the accepted usage will inevitably change, is "begs the question". As a non-native English speaker, I had never even seen or heard the "correct" usage until I saw people complaining about the horrors of the decline of language caused by people using it synonymous with "raises the question". The only reason I've seen the "correct" usage now is because people complaining about the change occasionally points it out.
- mindcrime 13y agoLanguage is weird. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffalo_buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffalo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffal... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_linguistic_example_sentences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_linguistic_example_sen... Because Wikipedia.
- return0 13y agoIt's just "because of" ironically replaced with "because ..." , with the ellipsis omitted
- ollymorgs 13y agoMaybe we should consult the Queen before attempting to ruin her language?
- bestest 13y agoI hate theatlantic.com for their sliding down ad at the top.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- ithkuil 13y agoWe are educated to speak well our language (english, german, french, ....) and most western languages require the speaker to be fully specific. The extent of this varies from language to language, for example, in italian it's grammatical and accepted to say "chi sono?" [who am?] while in english it's not, despite the fact that the "am" means only first person singular. Similar rules are governing the use of articles. However, there are many languages in the world, especially in east Asia, which take this even further and it's perfectly fine for you to omit large parts of discourse. And it's not only because they are implied, but because the lack of specification means something. IANAL but I think here we are witnessing a similar a similar development. Probably these things happen often in any language, but education tends to punish "bad language" usage whenever it doesn't fit some established grammatical rules. Split infinitives are another example of that.
- djKianoosh 13y agoI guess it all depends on the meaning of of?
- BackerHopez 13y agoKids are too cool for grammar, that's how this came about. Adults want to be cool too, so they are copying them. I find it hilarious how many man hours are wasted by people leaving comments and comments and comments on the Internet, like it matters. I like to leave comments sometimes, but some people do it like they are getting paid.
- jheriko 13y agoi'm always torn about this sort of thing. its clearly a case of adopting common and (previously?) incorrect usage because it has become popular - this is characteristic of many differences between 'us' and 'uk' english. i'm partly torn because it seems fruitless in this particular case. losing the of is surely an optimisation, but i struggle to see the difference in intent. despite the examples by others in comments and such they all work equally well by using the 'correct' grammar including 'of'. if this does take off i'm sure it will be recommended against heavily in style guides. i recently opened up a copy of that 'famous' ap style book - the defacto style guide for the us press - and was shocked to see how much of the content about grammar and punctuation is stuff that my generation of brits were taught as 'the rules' from quite an early age. again, i'm not really sure if its good or bad... on the one hand its not hard to just learn the rules and use them... on the other its more convenient to be lazy. the advantage of the latter is ease of use, but the advantage of the former is consistency and clarity. since we write and speak for other people i am inclined to lean towards the former... but when mistakes are common enough that argument is void and i'm inclined to think the other way. its certainly an interesting area to say the least... i just hope it never gets so far that 'there' is accepted as an alternate spelling for 'their' or 'they're'. :)
- jimzvz 13y agoIt makes my skin crawl when I see it. I really hope this "because noun" thing doesn't become anything more than the irritating form of humour that it started out as. It is almost as irritating as "on accident".
- spicerguy 13y agoThe xkcd comic referenced in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6768540 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6768540 helped me to realise that there is a counter proposition to "because" - "but" - "but minecraft!"
- dameyawn 13y agoI don't think preposition is correct. It's still being used as a subordinating conjunction with the second clause being an implied complete sentence. Take the current top comment example. "because politics" actually implies a sentence something like "The talks failed because of politics, which is the kind of thing that always happens when politics are involved." It's a common rule-check for grammar to substitute these complete sentences in order to understand the short-hand rule applications.
- axilmar 13y agoIn Greek, there exists the exact same construct from ancient times: "ΛΟΓΩ FOO", i.e. "BECAUSE OF foo". It's fascinating how languages converge.
- cafard 13y agoIn 1914, W.B. Yeats published the book Responsibilities. The first poem, "Pardon Old Fathers" included the lines "And you, silent and fierce old man/Because the daily spectacle that stirred/My fancy...". Anyway, that's the way it reads in the Collected Poems I bought long ago. To be sure, if you Google for "Pardon Old Fathers", the versions you find will say "Because of the spectacle". Is that on account of the Internet's (because the Internet's) jealousy?