Dictionary.com is dumb and dishonest

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16302
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Dictionary.com is dumb and dishonest

Post by mikenz66 » Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:31 am

I'm sure some people are still outraged by the modern usage of gay and decimate... :jumping:

Ironically, some of the annoying pedantry one hears is quite modern, silly, and now out of date:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive


:heart:
Mike

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4968
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Dictionary.com is dumb and dishonest

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:16 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:31 am
I'm sure some people are still outraged by the modern usage of gay and decimate... :jumping:
The first of these is actually a real problem for any primary-school teacher wanting to introduce students to older fiction - even from Enid Blyton's era - and it's an example of a constant churn of words moving from use as a euphemism to primary use in the new meaning. Think, for instance, of the words we have used for the smallest room in the house.
Ironically, some of the annoying pedantry one hears is quite modern, silly, and now out of date:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive
All good fun, especially -
As a result, the debate took on a degree of passion which the bare facts of the matter never warranted. There was frequent skirmishing between the splitters and anti-splitters until the 1960s. George Bernard Shaw wrote letters to newspapers supporting writers who used the split infinitive and Raymond Chandler complained to the editor of The Atlantic about a proofreader who interfered with Chandler's split infinitives:

"By the way, would you convey my compliments to the purist who reads your proofs and tell him or her that I write in a sort of broken-down patois which is something like the way a Swiss-waiter talks, and that when I split an infinitive, God damn it, I split it so it will remain split, and when I interrupt the velvety smoothness of my more or less literate syntax with a few sudden words of barroom vernacular, this is done with the eyes wide open and the mind relaxed and attentive. The method may not be perfect, but it is all I have."[34]
:coffee:
Kim

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 19968
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Dictionary.com is dumb and dishonest

Post by retrofuturist » Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:10 am

Greetings Kim,
Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:06 am
I've just shared that to word-conscious friends and I'm looking forward to some outraged responses. :tongue:
I think why this re-definition irks me most, is that the new definition is literally the antonym of itself.

So in effect, the word now simultaneously means [A] and NOT [A].

... and this degeneracy degrades the word to the point of post-modern ridiculousness.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4968
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Dictionary.com is dumb and dishonest

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:22 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:10 am
Greetings Kim,
Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:06 am
I've just shared that to word-conscious friends and I'm looking forward to some outraged responses. :tongue:
I think why this re-definition irks me most, is that the new definition is literally the antonym of itself.

So in effect, the word now simultaneously means [A] and NOT [A].

... and this degeneracy degrades the word to the point of post-modern ridiculousness.

Metta,
Paul. :)
I don't know whether to say, "I could care less," or, "I couldn't care less." :tongue:
.
.
.
.
.
.

Neither is true, actually, but I couldn't resist a chance to :stirthepot:
Really, I share your irritation.

:coffee:
Kim

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3994
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Dictionary.com is dumb and dishonest

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:27 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:10 am
Greetings Kim,
Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:06 am
I've just shared that to word-conscious friends and I'm looking forward to some outraged responses. :tongue:
I think why this re-definition irks me most, is that the new definition is literally the antonym of itself.

So in effect, the word now simultaneously means [A] and NOT [A].

... and this degeneracy degrades the word to the point of post-modern ridiculousness.

Metta,
Paul. :)
There's a lot of it about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-antonym

http://mentalfloss.com/article/57032/25 ... -opposites

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16302
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Dictionary.com is dumb and dishonest

Post by mikenz66 » Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:08 am

Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:22 am
I don't know whether to say, "I could care less," or, "I couldn't care less." :tongue:
Is this thread flammable or inflammable? :tongue:

:jumping:
Mike

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests