this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2024
59 points (94.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43393 readers
1469 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Using a word incorrectly 1,000,001 times shouldn't change the actual dictionary definition of the word.
Must be embarrassing to not understand that living languages evolve.
"Literally" officially meaning "figuratively" radicalized me.
But if everyone is using it to mean something new then we need to record that.
But that is literally why we have many of the definitions accepted as standard today.
That's so fetch.
Lear Welsh or French. They're both Prescriptive languages where that is (officially) true. English, however, is a descriptive language which means the dictionary is there to record how language is used not to define how it should be used
I think that's polarising because using a weird incorrectly does not change its meaning; it's far more subtle than that