I’ve always said the dictionary is a follower not a leader, by the time a word gets added to the dictionary it’s already established widespread usage
The same rules apply to gods, according to Terry Pratchet
“That’s not a word” only applies to scrabble and boggle. Fuck any other context.
And Wordle
I’m old enough to have noticed that a huge amount of language has changed in American English in the Westcoast at least. It’s pretty remarkable even myself and other middle aged people I know have changed their word use and slang.
It has changed a lot! But I’m bound and determined to keep “hella” alive, even if no one understands what I’m saying.
I noticed rad has made a resurgence in the past decade or so
'cause it’s a tubular word, doy. (and for a brief moment, I was a kid in the '80s again)
I think we used gnarly a lot back then too
It later made its way to the ski/snowboard communities, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it came back, i.e., “Shreddin’ the gnar.”
I’ve always been a big advocate of the idea that the only part of communication that matters is communication. If people understand you then congrats you’ve successfully languaged
What if people understand you, but they think you’re stupid?
Congratulations! You did the best you could…
That’s their problem. I always assume the stupid people are the ones that are so inflexible and uncreative, that they don’t understand that language is entirely an amorphous flexible human creation.
A Elbereth Gilthoniel,
silivren penna míriel
o mendel aglar elenath!
Na-chaered palan-díriel
o galadhremmin ennorath,
Fanuilos, le linnathon
nef aear, sí nef aearon!
This text is a poem in Sindarin, one of the languages created by J.R.R. Tolkien for his Middle-earth legendarium. It is a hymn to Varda (Elbereth), a revered figure among the Elves. Here’s a translation and analysis:
Translation:
A Elbereth Gilthoniel, (Oh Elbereth Star-kindler,)
silivren penna míriel (white-glittering, slanting down sparkling like jewels)
o menel aglar elenath! (from heaven the glory of the star-host!)
Na-chaered palan-díriel (To-remote distance far-having gazed)
o galadhremmin ennorath, (from tree-woven Middle-earth,)
Fanuilos, le linnathon (Fanuilos [Ever-white], to thee I will chant)
nef aear, sí nef aearon! (on this side of the ocean, here on this side of the Great Ocean!)
Analysis:
Elbereth Gilthoniel: Elbereth is another name for Varda, the Queen of the Stars, one of the Valar. Gilthoniel means "Star-kindler." silivren penna míriel: Describes the shining and glittering quality of the stars. o menel aglar elenath: Refers to the glory of the star-host (elenath) in the heavens (menel). Na-chaered palan-díriel: Indicates gazing into the remote distance. o galadhremmin ennorath: Mentions Middle-earth (Ennorath) being tree-woven. Fanuilos, le linnathon: Pledges to sing to Fanuilos (another name for Elbereth) forever. nef aear, sí nef aearon: A vow made on this side of the ocean (referring to the Great Ocean that separates Middle-earth from the Undying Lands).The poem reflects the deep reverence and love the Elves have for Elbereth, highlighting her connection to the stars and the distant heavens.
Ok ChatGPT.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
My ex-wife was a word snob. I wish I’d seen this when I was married to her.
One thing I learned as an information technology engineer: language is a tool for communication. As long as the sender can send its message unobstructed and as long as the receiver receives and understands the message as intended, the information transmission can be considered a successs.
No, snuffles005, that doesn’t mean “yzax” is a valid word for Scrabble.
My favourite part of Scrabble rules as written is that if another player challenges the existence of a played word the player who is wrong skips their turn, be they challengee or challenger.
It’s a worm found in New Guinea, everyone knows that!
As a l33+ |><|@z0r, I’m here to criticize your command of the English language.
You just described 90% of Lemmy users.
When you read texts of an ancient language than span several centuries, and the language itself stays the same, it’s a strong indicator the language was no longer spoken.
Living languages always change. Only dead languages stay the same.
Gonna go on Countdown with the line “Dictionaries aren’t rule books, they’re record books” and fight Susie Dent.
The problem is that people frequently use this type of argument when they are unable to spell or follow the basic rules of syntax and grammar instead of simply admitting they’re wrong.
Language does change, over time and across many cultures. It doesn’t mean that anything you write is automatically correct.
I’m a descriptivist but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t rules and that we can’t point out things still being wrong.
Descriptivism still describes rules as they’re used in the real world. Breaking those rules still subjects the speaker/writer to the consequences: being misunderstood, having the spoken or written sentence to simply be rejected or disregarded, etc.
“Colour” and “color” are both correct spellings of the word, because we are able to describe entire communities who spell things that way. “Culler” is not, because anyone who does spell it that way is immediately corrected, and their written spelling is rejected by the person who receives it. We can describe these rules of that interaction as descriptivists, and still conclude that something is wrong or incorrect.
“Culler” is not, because anyone who does spell it that way is immediately corrected, and their written spelling is rejected by the person who receives it. We can describe these rules of that interaction as descriptivists, and still conclude that something is wrong or incorrect.
Orthography isn’t really a part of grammar, so it’s easily possible for natives to make mistakes when writing that might make a word difficult to understand. It’s much harder for spoken language to be misunderstood among the population that a native grew up in, because the words they use don’t come out of nowhere (despite the old prescriptivist argument that you can even see in this thread saying “I’m just gonna call houses xytuis because any words are ok!”) Obviously now with mass communication people pick up language from all sorts of places, so you might have words be unrecognizable even within a locality.
Even so, an individual’s (native) idiolect can’t really be “wrong” to descriptivists in the way orthography can. It’d just be chalked up to differences from the local language or dialect.
It’s funny because a ton of these common errors are due in a huge part to the fact that we don’t use the native alphabet for English. Lots of stuff has to be transposed in creative ways to deal with the romanization of English.
Native alphabet?
The Latin alphabet is not the original alphabet system used for English. There are modern alternatives that have been suggested to help eliminate some of the confusion created by using a non native alphabet, the Shavian alphabet for instance would theoretically solve much of the issue.
It’s kind of what happens in other languages as well… English speakers like to quip that there are x number of dozens of ways to spell Mohammed. And for sure, in English, it probably feels that way. But there is actually only one proper way to spell it you just have to use the Arabic alphabet to do so.
Wrong according to… who? Who is the authority? Who granted them that power? By what mechanism can one appeal their decision?
What is “correct”?
There are standards, but you can only really say something is “wrong” or “incorrect” in relation to a particular standard. You typically wouldn’t write “senator yeeted his hat lol fr” as a newspaper headline. That doesn’t follow the standards for that context. But that doesn’t mean it’s “wrong” in some universal sense.
Correct according to who? You? Lol
Fortunately, you are not the arbiter of the English language.
That’s what I was just saying to you, so I’m confused why you think that’s a rebuttal.
You said things people write aren’t automatically “correct” without defining what correct means.
You’ll be corrected by someone with enough education to believe they are correct. English speakers police the English language in a very unorganised way.
There are no appeals. Accept that you were wrong or find a reputable style guide or dictionary that supports your position and tell the person who corrected you to get lost.
New words happen, but if you can’t get the right spelling of “they’re” or “their”, “your”, “you’re” or “yaw”, “its” or “it’s”, etc or use a unique spelling of a word I can point out in a dictionary how you’re wrong
If you mismatch brackets or do odd punctuation I can point out how it looks bad or reads wrong
I’m not surprised that you’re confused
You seem to be trying to be smug after you’ve communicated badly. Additionally, your understanding of how language works is not widely accepted.
The fact that you don’t understand your argument is facile and easily undermined only highlights your lack of understanding and maturity.
Your personal opinion doesn’t count as something being “widely accepted”.
I just like to point out that umami is a terrible word to import into English. Why? Because we already have a word for savory. It’s savory. Worse, umami doesn’t completely just mean savory. It also means meaty or deliciousness. In English, savory ≠ meaty, and deliciousness is subjective. The word just doesn’t translate cleanly. So when anybody uses umami to describe savory food, all they’re really doing is sounding like an imprecise, pretentious jackass.
counterpoint: umami sounds cool
