4 ms·

No, that’s not really what I’m saying at all. Human language is not simply a series of control paths that branch the way you’ve described. That’s exactly how pe

No, that’s not really what I’m saying at all. Human language is not simply a series of control paths that branch the way you’ve described. That’s exactly how people tried to program computers to understand language 50 years ago, and what resulted is toy things like Eliza. What I said is that the two uses are entirely different words, because they’re pronounced differently. You’re right that it’s bizarre — that’s why no one knows how language works yet. Taking the stance that people speak English ‘wrong’ is not a simple interpretation, because it leads to the following question: please define what ‘wrong’ means.

tome 17y ago
I agree that the study of linguistic phenomena is a deep and interesting subject which humanity has only scraped the surface of. However, I'm more inclined to have a pratically based discussion than a philosophically based one, where we risk infinite regress by asking each other to define the words that we use. Can you give me another example where the utterance "I could X" means "It's not possible for me to X"? If not then I argue that the change in usage adds unnecessary complexity to the language that makes it harder to understand. It doesn't matter how this phenomenon is to be understood in terms of sophisticated linguistic theories; at a basic and practical level it impedes understanding. Simply put, we may or may not be going through a period of transition in the language; it will be impossible to tell until much later. However I do know that during the transition those speakers who are used to the traditional form "I couldn't care less" have to work harder to understand when "I could care less" is used to express the same meaning.
- codyrobbins 17y ago
  It’s funny, because you’re not inclined to have a practical discussion rather than a philosophical one — my entire point is that by declaring that people are speaking the language ‘wrong’, you are yourself introducing the entire philosophical question of what ‘wrong’ means. You can’t say people are speaking the language wrong unless you’re ready to define what ‘wrong’ means. And I think you’ve realized that there’s no good way to answer that question. Can you give me another example of where we use the word board in English to mean food? If not, I could ask you never use the phrase room and board again. But that would be silly. It does not matter whether could care less is a one-off instance — it is an idiom and that is the entire point. It does not matter whether you argue that the phrase adds unnecessary complexity to the language: it is already in the language despite your objections, because people use it. There’s nothing you can do to change that. Language is what people say; if they say it, it’s language. It does not impede understanding because the idiomatic usage is pronounced differently. There is no confusion and no ambiguity. What you are saying simply isn’t the case. Finally, it’s not the case that we ‘may or may not’ be going through a period of transition in the language. Language change is always happening. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_change http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_change
  - tome 17y ago
    Finally, it’s not the case that we ‘may or may not’ be going through a period of transition in the language. Language change is always happening. I mean with respect to this specific observation. If in five years time nobody ever says "I could care less" then I don't believe people's current use of "I could care less" constitutes a transition in the language, I believe it constitutes incorrectness. My point is that transition in language is only observable after the fact. If I start calling apples "coconuts", and it doesn't catch on, then that's just mean speaking incorrectly. If it does catch on then it's the start of a transition. But which of the two it is is impossible to say until much later.
  - tome 17y ago
    It’s funny, because you’re not inclined to have a practical discussion rather than a philosophical one — my entire point is that by declaring that people are speaking the language ‘wrong’, you are yourself introducing the entire philosophical question of what ‘wrong’ means. By declaring anything I'm introducing the entire philosophical question of what any word I use means. We generally omit details of relative unimportance. In this case I suppose you think that the definition of "wrong" is very important to the discussion, whilst I think that the people I generally want to communicate with have a shared understanding of that concept. We don't really have enough agreement over basic principles to continue the discussion.
  - tome 17y ago
    It does not impede understanding because the idiomatic usage is pronounced differently. There is no confusion and no ambiguity. I've never heard it pronounced because we don't use that phrase in Britain. It's always "I couldn't care less". It does lead to confusion when it's seen written. Could you describe the difference in pronunciation of "I could care less" used under the two different meanings?
    - roundsquare 17y ago
      I'm from the US, and I don't think there is a difference in pronunciation. In fact, its gotten to the point where when someone says "I could care less" I generally ask them to clarify unless the meaning is made obvious by context. That being said, there is usually sufficient context (in my experience, admittetly anecdotal) to figure out the meaning.

tome 17y ago

I agree that the study of linguistic phenomena is a deep and interesting subject which humanity has only scraped the surface of. However, I'm more inclined to have a pratically based discussion than a philosophically based one, where we risk infinite regress by asking each other to define the words that we use. Can you give me another example where the utterance "I could X" means "It's not possible for me to X"? If not then I argue that the change in usage adds unnecessary complexity to the language that makes it harder to understand. It doesn't matter how this phenomenon is to be understood in terms of sophisticated linguistic theories; at a basic and practical level it impedes understanding. Simply put, we may or may not be going through a period of transition in the language; it will be impossible to tell until much later. However I do know that during the transition those speakers who are used to the traditional form "I couldn't care less" have to work harder to understand when "I could care less" is used to express the same meaning.

codyrobbins 17y ago
It’s funny, because you’re not inclined to have a practical discussion rather than a philosophical one — my entire point is that by declaring that people are speaking the language ‘wrong’, you are yourself introducing the entire philosophical question of what ‘wrong’ means. You can’t say people are speaking the language wrong unless you’re ready to define what ‘wrong’ means. And I think you’ve realized that there’s no good way to answer that question. Can you give me another example of where we use the word board in English to mean food? If not, I could ask you never use the phrase room and board again. But that would be silly. It does not matter whether could care less is a one-off instance — it is an idiom and that is the entire point. It does not matter whether you argue that the phrase adds unnecessary complexity to the language: it is already in the language despite your objections, because people use it. There’s nothing you can do to change that. Language is what people say; if they say it, it’s language. It does not impede understanding because the idiomatic usage is pronounced differently. There is no confusion and no ambiguity. What you are saying simply isn’t the case. Finally, it’s not the case that we ‘may or may not’ be going through a period of transition in the language. Language change is always happening. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_change http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_change
- tome 17y ago
  Finally, it’s not the case that we ‘may or may not’ be going through a period of transition in the language. Language change is always happening. I mean with respect to this specific observation. If in five years time nobody ever says "I could care less" then I don't believe people's current use of "I could care less" constitutes a transition in the language, I believe it constitutes incorrectness. My point is that transition in language is only observable after the fact. If I start calling apples "coconuts", and it doesn't catch on, then that's just mean speaking incorrectly. If it does catch on then it's the start of a transition. But which of the two it is is impossible to say until much later.
- tome 17y ago
  It’s funny, because you’re not inclined to have a practical discussion rather than a philosophical one — my entire point is that by declaring that people are speaking the language ‘wrong’, you are yourself introducing the entire philosophical question of what ‘wrong’ means. By declaring anything I'm introducing the entire philosophical question of what any word I use means. We generally omit details of relative unimportance. In this case I suppose you think that the definition of "wrong" is very important to the discussion, whilst I think that the people I generally want to communicate with have a shared understanding of that concept. We don't really have enough agreement over basic principles to continue the discussion.
- tome 17y ago
  It does not impede understanding because the idiomatic usage is pronounced differently. There is no confusion and no ambiguity. I've never heard it pronounced because we don't use that phrase in Britain. It's always "I couldn't care less". It does lead to confusion when it's seen written. Could you describe the difference in pronunciation of "I could care less" used under the two different meanings?
  - roundsquare 17y ago
    I'm from the US, and I don't think there is a difference in pronunciation. In fact, its gotten to the point where when someone says "I could care less" I generally ask them to clarify unless the meaning is made obvious by context. That being said, there is usually sufficient context (in my experience, admittetly anecdotal) to figure out the meaning.