• Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re trying to be a prescriptivist. Never try to be a prescriptivist. The correct way to use language is the way people are using language.

    • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is how you get “socialism is when the government does stuff.” Descriptivism is just a way of determining what a word means. It has no say in what a word ought to mean.

      • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I agree that there should be a boundary between “words can only mean this one thing forever” and “don’t tell me what to doooooooooo I am now literally a PhD and MD in literal linguistics because I literally decided that I am and you literally can’t tell me what literal words mean, also socialism is literally when the government does stuff.”

      • kot [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I mean, groups of people can deliberately the meaning of words or other parts of language. Socialism coming to mean things that have no relation to marxism was probably a deliberate campaign. That’s also what the neutral language movement is about. But also linguistic derivation is just a fact of life, as described by sociolinguistics. And being mad that gay doesn’t mean happy anymore or that a certain word should always mean the same thing just makes you pedantic weirdo, if it’s not attached to a cause that actually matters.