# Another misused word usage thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 29, 2005, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751 "2005-03-29T10:05:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/61 "2005-03-30T03:44:56Z")
Hell, Yoda was 900 years old and after all those years… _Learned to talk right, he did not…_😛 ---
**Author:** ![Charlie\_Tan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/charlie_tan/32/12582_2.png) [@Charlie\_Tan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Charlie_Tan)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/62 "2005-03-30T04:59:30Z")
Nah. He talks the same way he did when he was young, and refuses to change with the times, saying: _My language, degrading it is._ ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/63 "2005-03-30T08:39:29Z")
> [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > And in case you haven’t groked it yet, I happen to be one of these so called “authorities” you want to defer to. Yeah, I grok_k_ed it. Hard as it may be to believe, I’m able to recognize sarcasm in writing, sometimes even without the help of retarded smilies. > [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > A dollar is worth what you can get for it. A word means what people understand it to mean. It is literally impossible for “most people” to use a word incorrectly. If most people use word X to mean Y, then Y is necessarily one of the meanings of X. Period. Look: if everywhere I go for coffee they tell me it’s $0.25 a cup and they then tell me that my quarter is the wrong currency and say a quarter is my $1 bill, does that mean my dollar bill is actually a quarter? Even though it says “One Dollar” all over it and my quarter says “one quarter”? In other words, what authority am I supposed to trust: the currency itself, which states on it its worth, or the person(s) trying to take my money? Just because a lot of people are deluded or believe something to mistakenly be the case doesn’t make it so. And yes, I understand language isn’t as rigid, but you’re the one who brought up the analogy. Are you honestly saying words cannot be misused? > [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > What gets my goat here is that you feel you have the right to call someone else an “uninformed jackass” for using a word in a different way from the way you prefer to use it, even though you and everyone else understands exactly what they mean when they use it, and even though a widely published and perfectly respectable unabridged dictionary notes that it’s perfectly fine to use it that way. As I thought I already said, _my_ unabridged dictionary (as well as several usage/reference books) noted that it was commonly used but _not_ perfectly fine to use in that way. Admittedly, my dictionary is a bit old - from the late '60s, I think - but as I also noted, Bill Bryson’s **Dictionary of Troublesome Words** (2002) also made the same case. So, fine, I’ll give up on “disinterested”; I’ll even grant that you’re much, much smarter than I could ever hope to be and have a comprehension of English that substantially dwarfs mine. How about “fortuitous”? I have yet to see a cite anywhere that doesn’t claim its meaning of “fortunate” was anything but the result of uninformed people using the word incorrectly. > [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > You think people who speak differently from you are lazy and willfully ignorant. Too lazy to consult you on how they should speak? Too lazy to ask you which particular dictionary they should use? Willfully ignorant of your particular dialect? Was Shakespeare lazy and ignorant? Was Swift? They were not overly concerned with linguistic dogma. I recall one critic, who generally liked Swift, taking him to task for using the phrase “rowing for all he was worth”. Vulgar stuff, that. No, I think people who use words without knowing what they mean are lazy and willfully ignorant. If I was talking to you and said I was interested in hermeneutics, and on further conversing you found I thought it meant the study of hermits because the first four letters were similar, would you figure it was just my dialect, or would you figure I was fucking ignorant? Similarly, if I were to tell you that I was extremely “disfortunate”, I’m fairly sure you’d understand what I meant, but would you congratulate me on my ability to mix-and-match roots to form startling new words a la Koko the gorilla or would you tell me I was using the incorrect term? > [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > There are plenty of “books on language” where you’ll find people claiming to know what words “really mean” despite how people actually use them. To my mind, that’s just plain old fashioned elitism. What, you mean like dictionaries? If I’m interested in enriching my vocabulary, I’m going to use language reference books so that I can find the right words to use to express what I mean to say, and hence hopefully speak clearly. If these books state a certain word is often misused, I’m going to pay attention to it so I don’t make that mistake and come off sounding like I’m putting on airs. Take such claims with a grain of salt? Fine. I’ll try to do that. > [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > It’s easy to dig up crackpot arguments from certain widely published authors, like how “I ain’t got no money” is “illogical” because it means that “no money” is something you don’t have. However, no one has ever understood it to mean that in the real world, and agreement for negation is a feature of many languages, and (obviously) of certain dialects of English. That kind of argument stems from ignorance of (or disregard for) how the brain processes language and how English has developed and continues to evolve over time. Or it’s just outright snobbery against people who use that construction. > > To those people, I would say, you better start saying “a friend of me” rather than “a friend of mine” because the latter is certainly illogical. :rolleyes: Yeah, it would be great if we lived in a utopia, but surely you must realize people judge you on how you speak. You may be a genius, but if you (the generic you)can only offer simplistic, monosyllabic responses or mindless cliches or assloads of slang, I (and, I’m betting, you [the specific you]) am going to conclude you’re none too bright. I’m betting again that you aren’t so lax with your students - if a word is misused, I’d assume you correct them on it. Or is written English different than spoken? If so, why? If all that’s really important is whether or not you can grasp what’s being said? Maybe because English has elitist rules that should be followed? > [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > I actually logged on to apologize for being so sharp earlier. I could have gotten my point across without the sarcasm and profanity. But when I’m in the wrong mood, this kind of thing can really set me off. > > When I read the “uninformed jackass” bit, though, that tore it. Oh, is that what it was? Well, at the risk of sounding like even more of an asshole to you, let me say: I can only hope that someday I’ll know as much about tolerance as you, Sample. Maybe I’ll grow up to be a priest, or a psychologist, or a relief aid worker, or even a teacher. Wouldn’t that be swell! Maybe one day I’ll stop using value judgement slurs against people I don’t know for trivial matters like cutting me off in traffic or making misogynistic remarks even when there are no women around to hear them. Just like all the _good_ people. > [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > Do what you will, talk however you like, but pitting people who don’t believe in your narrow view of what’s correct – to hell with that. Thanks for allowing me my freedoms, O Swami, despite the fact that you disagree with me. Believe it or not, I actually (hope I’m using that correctly) listen to what you have to say; I just think you’re being disingenuous on a few points. I’ll give you “disinterested”, even, like I said. But, once again, I’m pitting people who USE WORDS WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THEY MEAN IN AN EFFORT TO SOUND “SMARTER”. Your trying to make this about my “narrow view” of what’s acceptable makes _you_ seem sanctimonious, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Charlie\_Tan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/charlie_tan/32/12582_2.png) [@Charlie\_Tan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Charlie_Tan)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 9:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/64 "2005-03-30T09:06:53Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > I’m pitting people who USE WORDS WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THEY MEAN IN AN EFFORT TO SOUND “SMARTER”. There are people like that. But has it ever occured to you that someone might use a word the wrong way, simply because they believe it to be the right way. There are words with ambigous meanings or the speaker might have heard someone they thought was an authority use a word in the wrong way. I think it’s rude to correct people you don’t know and if you think you actually have the high ground here, you might set an example, by using the language in a way to inspire poeple you do know. Pitting a nameless “you” is just grandstanding. ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 9:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/65 "2005-03-30T09:33:59Z")
> [@SHAKES](#): > > I’m wondering if some of you folks need a translater to talk to small children. > > “Ma ma, I want ba-dool.” > > [translation] > > “Mother, may I please have a bottle as I’m feeling a bit parched.” > > :rolleyes: times infinity. Children learn what they are taught. If their parents baby talk to them “do my widdow sweedum deedums wants hims BA BA…???” then that’s what the child will learn. This shoujldn’t even have to be said, but for crying out loud. Comparing a baby just learning how to speak to adults who should know lose from loose and so on is ridiculous and illogical. ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 9:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/66 "2005-03-30T09:42:39Z")
> [@The Gaspode](#): > > I think it’s rude to correct people you don’t know and if you think you actually have the high ground here, you might set an example, by using the language in a way to inspire poeple you do know. Pitting a nameless “you” is just grandstanding. He’s ranting. That’s what the pit is for. Unless it’s passed into common usage to be a different forum. As to the “use language in a way to inspire people you do know” it doens’t seem to work that way. That is, using words correctly, such as the loose/lose or mute/moot example doesn’t seem to work. A real sweetheart in a fitness group to which I belong is very active in the group. She is one of the worst abusers of teh whole “loose weight” thing I’ve ever seen. This group gets thousands of posts in a week. With the correct use of the word “lose” being used in the majority of cases. She reads and responds to many of these posts and STILL uses “loose” for 'lose". I’ve never seen anyone correct her. As I said, she’s a total gem, the sweetest nicest person. But I’ve seen lots of posts where it was fairly clear that the word was used correctly SEVERAL times more than it needed to be in an effort to “guide” our resident darling. She had several other misuses and misspellings as well, but in a fitness page, that seemed to be just the worst. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/67 "2005-03-30T10:03:17Z")
> [@The Gaspode](#): > > There are people like that. But has it ever occured to you that someone might use a word the wrong way, simply because they believe it to be the right way. There are words with ambigous meanings or the speaker might have heard someone they thought was an authority use a word in the wrong way. Yeah. Apparently I’ve done it myself in this very thread. And people corrected me. What’s the problem? Oh, wait: > [@The Gaspode](#): > > I think it’s rude to correct people you don’t know and if you think you actually have the high ground here, you might set an example, by using the language in a way to inspire poeple you do know. Pitting a nameless “you” is just grandstanding. You think it’s rude, I think it’s helpful. There was a new guy at work, first day on the job, who had a huge booger hanging out of his nose. I told him, “You’ve got a huge booger hanging out of your nose.” A couple of co-workers had seen him before I had, and none had said anything - in fact, most expressed surprise that I was so blunt about it. But what’s worse: him going through the whole day like that, with countless customers and co-workers noticing it (they wouldn’t have been able to miss it, trust me) and feeling highly embarrassed at the end of the day when he went home and noticed it in the mirror, or the more minor embarrassment of knowing just I (and two other co-workers) had seen it? He thanked me (and seemed sincere), BTW. I don’t think “high ground” applies here. If there’s a correct and an incorrect meaning, and I inform you of the correct meaning, does that make me morally superior? No, it means I know the meaning and you don’t. Same thing applies when I misuse a word. And the fact that there are fucking idiots in the world who misuse words doesn’t equate to everybody who misuses words being a fucking idiot. I never meant to imply that was my position. If “pitting a nameless “you” is grandstanding”, then I’ll use the examples in the OP: I pit The Faint and Eric Bogosian. Is that OK with you? And for “fortuitous”, I’ll pit, let’s say, my friend Jerry and my old boss. There. I hope we all feel that we’ve grown because of this. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Kobayashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Mr.Kobayashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Kobayashi)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 10:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/68 "2005-03-30T10:21:05Z")
My sentimonies exactly, this sort of thing really aggravazes me. [/Simpsons ref] ---
**Author:** ![jabiru](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/bbce88/32.png) [@jabiru](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jabiru)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/69 "2005-03-30T10:47:54Z")
> [@Dooku](#): > > … well they deserve their just desserts. I always wanted some just desserts. With ice cream, please. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/70 "2005-03-30T11:19:16Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > I will close with a quote from one of the greatest writers of American English, Mark Twain. > > _“Yes, I know what you mean. I also know that is not what you said.”_ That’s a great quote. And thanks for the support. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 11:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/71 "2005-03-30T11:33:39Z")
> [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > I should’ve known not to read this thread in the first place. > > First, I do want to apologize for my bad form, even if this is the Pit. > > Seems every time someone complains about usage, I feel I have to run through the thread like a bull in a china shop, criticizing people for being intolerant of others while at the same time implicitly insisting that everyone else see things the way I do. > > I’ve said all this stuff many times before, no need to repeat myself. I’m just being a jerk. > > So I hereby recuse myself from all further “I hate it when people say” threads. > > One of my New Year’s resolutions was to become a less critical, more compassionate person, and when I do things like this, I fail miserably at that. > > Over and out. And hey, no need to apologize, either. I certainly don’t take any insults here personally. When arguing, people get passionate about shit, and sometimes end up feeling like they’re being a jerk when they’re more calm and reflective. I don’t count that as points off on the coolness meter, unless what they’re saying is blatantly hateful and offensive. Which I don’t think you were. I still disagree with you, but fuck it, that’s what makes this all fun. There’s no reason I can see why you can’t be critical and still be compassionate. I mean, compassion’s a worthy goal, but it doesn’t mean everything everybody does is immune to criticism, right? ---
**Author:** ![Licentious\_Ectomorph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/5e9695/32.png) [@Licentious\_Ectomorph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Licentious_Ectomorph)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/72 "2005-03-30T13:55:30Z")
Ayn Rand was fluent in several languages, but she chose to write in English because of its elegant precision, the shades of meaning, the subtle concepts for which other languages don’t even have words. This allowed her to convey _exactly_ the meaning she intended. I maintain that the language is poorer when those shades and subtleties are lost. If you apologists for bad grammar say you _don’t_ make assessments of a person’s intelligence by his use of language, I won’t believe you. Maybe you feel guilty about it, but I think it’s perfectly reasonable to value intelligence and education over lack of same. No one is saying the less educated don’t deserve to live, or anything extreme like that, but certainly education and the ability to understand and convey concepts accurately are to be valued. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/73 "2005-03-30T14:00:06Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > Look: if everywhere I go for coffee they tell me it’s $0.25 a cup and they then tell me that my quarter is the wrong currency and say a quarter is my $1 bill, does that mean my dollar bill is actually a quarter? Even though it says “One Dollar” all over it and my quarter says “one quarter”? In other words, what authority am I supposed to trust: the currency itself, which states on it its worth, or the person(s) trying to take my money? Just because a lot of people are deluded or believe something to mistakenly be the case doesn’t make it so. And yes, I understand language isn’t as rigid, but you’re the one who brought up the analogy. Are you honestly saying words cannot be misused? Here’s the problem. The name of currency is set by a governmental authority. The existence of authority is in this case unquestioned. What you can BUY with the currency–its value–is set by the marketplace. There’s no authority in the marketplace. Or, rather, there’s millions of authorities. The meaning of a word is analogous to the value of currency, not to the name of currency. We use currency to exchange goods and services; we use words to exchange meaning. The value of our currency is determined **solely** by what we can get for it; the value of our language is determined **solely** by what we can communicate with it. > [@](#): > > As I thought I already said, _my_ unabridged dictionary (as well as several usage/reference books) noted that it was commonly used but _not_ perfectly fine to use in that way. What does that even mean? I don’t understand in what way it’s not “perfectly fine.” Is it unethical? Is it contrary to observed fact? If you’re saying it’s poor business English, I’ll accept that, but I’ll mock you for wanting business English to appear on the Internet. Otherwise, I don’t know what “perfectly fine” means. > [@](#): > > No, I think people who use words without knowing what they mean are lazy and willfully ignorant. If I was talking to you and said I was interested in hermeneutics, and on further conversing you found I thought it meant the study of hermits because the first four letters were similar, would you figure it was just my dialect, or would you figure I was fucking ignorant? In this case, you’d be communicating ineffectively, because you were unaware of how people would interpret your use of the word. That’s poor communication. However, if you said you were disinterested in hermits, I would understand what you meant: you would use a word in a way that accurately conveyed your meaning to me. That’d be good communication. See the difference? > [@](#): > > Similarly, if I were to tell you that I was extremely “disfortunate”, I’m fairly sure you’d understand what I meant, but would you congratulate me on my ability to mix-and-match roots to form startling new words a la Koko the gorilla or would you tell me I was using the incorrect term? No. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Dung\_Beetle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dung_beetle/32/7945_2.png) [@Dung\_Beetle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dung_Beetle)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/74 "2005-03-30T14:05:01Z")
[hijack! hijack!] **Nordic** , allow me to take this opportunity to welcome you to the boards. I first noticed you over in one of the cat-killer threads, and you seem like an intelligent, articulate poster. Glad to have you here! (Also, you have agreed with my POV in both cases. 🙂 ) [/hijack] ---
**Author:** ![Licentious\_Ectomorph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/5e9695/32.png) [@Licentious\_Ectomorph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Licentious_Ectomorph)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/75 "2005-03-30T14:21:22Z")
> [@Dung Beetle](#): > > [hijack! hijack!] > **Nordic** , allow me to take this opportunity to welcome you to the boards. I first noticed you over in one of the cat-killer threads, and you seem like an intelligent, articulate poster. Glad to have you here! (Also, you have agreed with my POV in both cases. 🙂 ) > [/hijack] Thanks, **Dung Beetle**! That makes me feel good. Although…in the cat killer thread I was cursing like a drunken truck driver, so if that was your first impression of me, I’m a little embarassed.:o Still, your assessment was favorable, so I’ll take it. That subject touched a nerve, is all. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/76 "2005-03-30T17:35:30Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > What does that even mean? I don’t understand in what way it’s not “perfectly fine.” Is it unethical? Is it contrary to observed fact? > > If you’re saying it’s poor business English, I’ll accept that, but I’ll mock you for wanting business English to appear on the Internet. Otherwise, I don’t know what “perfectly fine” means. Well, “perfectly fine” was his terminology; I just echoed it in my response to him. Check post #28 in this thread for a cite I gave of the usage being deemed incorrect (or not perfectly fine) by the dictionary’s Usage Panel. > [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > In this case, you’d be communicating ineffectively, because you were unaware of how people would interpret your use of the word. That’s poor communication. > > However, if you said you were disinterested in hermits, I would understand what you meant: you would use a word in a way that accurately conveyed your meaning to me. That’d be good communication. > > See the difference? Yeah, I do; if you’d read my posts here - or even just post #22 - you’d notice that I said I’d be willing to give in on “disinterested”, but “fortuitous” can still lead to misunderstanding. I even gave an example. You want to know another problem I have with language? Peope who don’t pay attention to what’s been said. > [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > No. > > Daniel Ah, an example of usage as the model of clarity. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/77 "2005-03-30T17:45:30Z")
> [@BayleDomon](#): > > Steven Pinker then goes on to note that when disinterested first came into usage, it did indeed mean the second definition. OK, one more small rebuttal, then I’m off to bed. Yes, when it first came into usage, it did. And if this was the 1600s, I wouldn’t have pitted such a usage (and not just because I wouldn’t have been alive and the internet didn’t exist). As things are, in the modern world, if I told you I was gay, I imagine you’d think, at the very least, I was ignorant if I told you I only understood the term to mean “happy”. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/78 "2005-03-30T17:57:19Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > Well, “perfectly fine” was his terminology; I just echoed it in my response to him. Check post #28 in this thread for a cite I gave of the usage being deemed incorrect (or not perfectly fine) by the dictionary’s Usage Panel. My point, however, is that if something IS in common usage, then there’s no sense in which it’s NOT perfectly fine to use it (outside of the business-English usage, which I’ve already covered). So the distinction you’re making between “common usage” and “perfectly fine” is nonexistent. > [@](#): > > Yeah, I do; if you’d read my posts here - or even just post #22 - you’d notice that I said I’d be willing to give in on “disinterested”, but “fortuitous” can still lead to misunderstanding. I even gave an example. You want to know another problem I have with language? Peope who don’t pay attention to what’s been said. Look, your lack of consistency isn’t my problem. If you’ve given up on disinterested, then stop arguing it. > [@](#): > > Ah, an example of usage as the model of clarity. Hey, if you gave me something besides two stupid choices, I wouldn’t have to reject them both. I mean, I coulda said “Mu!” but that would probably not communicate well with you. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/79 "2005-03-30T20:02:27Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > OK, one more small rebuttal, then I’m off to bed. > > Yes, when it first came into usage, it did. And if this was the 1600s, I wouldn’t have pitted such a usage (and not just because I wouldn’t have been alive and the internet didn’t exist). As things are, in the modern world, if I told you I was gay, I imagine you’d think, at the very least, I was ignorant if I told you I only understood the term to mean “happy”. So let’s see. Word A originally had meaning X, but over the course of time it accrued meaning Y. You acknowledge this can and has happened. Why, then, can word A not shift back to meaning X now? Why _must_ it be locked into meaning Y? Is acceptable language shift something that only happened in the past, and any shifts now are simply degradation of the language? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2005, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751/80 "2005-03-30T20:42:23Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Just so I am clear on this, are you saying that there are in fact rules concerning language? Of course there are rules concerning language. There are also rules concerning physics. If a physicist observes something that contradicts one of his rules, what does he try to change? The rule, or the thing being observed? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-misused-word-usage-thread/296751.md?page=5)