Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday July 13 2020, @11:53AM   Printer-friendly
from the First-to-Fall dept.

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/06/887540598/the-debate-over-the-word-irregardless-is-it-a-word

All right. Let's settle something here. The word irregardless - is it a word or is it not a word? Well, this is a debate that Merriam-Webster is now weighing in on in a tweet saying that it is, in fact, a word. And that has led to a whole lot of reaction online.

Merriam-Webster has confirmed that "irregardless" is a word in the dictionary, despite concerns from teachers that it is not.

So fellow Soylentils, irregardless of my opinion, what do your think?

See Also:
Is 'Irregardless' a Real Word?
Definition of irregardless


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) 2
  • (Score: 4, Funny) by RandomFactor on Monday July 13 2020, @12:02PM (8 children)

    by RandomFactor (3682) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @12:02PM (#1020245) Journal

    regardless of the outcome.

    --
    В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @01:37PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @01:37PM (#1020285)

      If the argument is irreverent, it might be relevant

    • (Score: 2, Funny) by nitehawk214 on Monday July 13 2020, @01:50PM (1 child)

      by nitehawk214 (1304) on Monday July 13 2020, @01:50PM (#1020295)

      Your ear is without regard.

      It is irregardless.

      --
      "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2020, @02:12AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2020, @02:12AM (#1026402)

        irregardless, earregardless. A homophone. Is there such thing as a straight phone?

    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 13 2020, @01:51PM (4 children)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @01:51PM (#1020296) Journal

      regardless of the outcome.

      Irregardless of that, I was taut/tot that sarcasm is always irreverent.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 1) by taylormc on Monday July 13 2020, @04:04PM (3 children)

        by taylormc (5751) on Monday July 13 2020, @04:04PM (#1020409)

        Sarcasm is always irreverent, irrespective of how effective it is.

        • (Score: 4, Funny) by aristarchus on Monday July 13 2020, @07:58PM (2 children)

          by aristarchus (2645) on Monday July 13 2020, @07:58PM (#1020620) Journal

          Obviously, we need to "refudiate" this word. For all intensive purposes, in order to pass mustard, a word my not flustrate anyone in the mist of things, for it would then be a mute point. Best to nip it in the butt, and not take language for granite, and seize to be ostenspacious. "Condemnant quo non intellegunt."

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Monday July 13 2020, @12:18PM (22 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday July 13 2020, @12:18PM (#1020248)

    Webster observes usage patterns. Irregardless of the idiocy of covfete, if enough people use it with a commonly understood meaning - it, too will become a word.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @12:59PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @12:59PM (#1020273)

      Indeed. If there's one thing that history has demonstrated again and again, it's that lazyness and ignorance always triumph in the end.

      • (Score: 4, Funny) by PaperNoodle on Monday July 13 2020, @01:43PM

        by PaperNoodle (10908) on Monday July 13 2020, @01:43PM (#1020290)

        Dang youngster hooligans bastardizing the pure essence of language with short hand hodgepodge gobbledygook!

        What will the youth corrupt next? Kpop? Twerking? Fortnite? Memes!?!?! The future is bleak.

        --
        B3
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Monday July 13 2020, @07:46PM (2 children)

        by maxwell demon (1608) on Monday July 13 2020, @07:46PM (#1020608) Journal

        Forsooth, people nay longer knoweth how to speaketh correctly.

        --
        The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
        • (Score: 3, Touché) by Thexalon on Monday July 13 2020, @09:37PM (1 child)

          by Thexalon (636) on Monday July 13 2020, @09:37PM (#1020726)

          Stulti non intelligere bona verba.

          --
          The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
          • (Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday July 14 2020, @11:35AM

            by Bot (3902) on Tuesday July 14 2020, @11:35AM (#1021159) Journal

            "NON POSSVNT INTELLIGERE"
            AUT
            "NON INTELLIGVNT"

            --
            Account abandoned.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:05PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:05PM (#1020688)

        So, I take it you would prefer to refer to oranges as those orange colored things that grow on trees and are generally green on the outside with orange on the inside and can be juiced, rather than orange.

        Interesting, but I think I'll stick to using the word orange.

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by richtopia on Monday July 13 2020, @03:03PM (8 children)

      by richtopia (3160) on Monday July 13 2020, @03:03PM (#1020336) Homepage Journal

      English is a living language for better or worse. On the whole, I hope new rules and relaxing of grammar rules lets the language become more accessible.

      Alternatively, we could have a council of old folks dressed up in fancy uniforms to formally decide how the language is to be defined. Kinda sounds eliteist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Académie_Française [wikipedia.org]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @08:44PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @08:44PM (#1020669)

        council of old folks dressed up in fancy uniforms

        I assumed that was hyperbole, but checked the link:

        Uniform

        The official uniform of a member is known as l'habit vert, or green clothing. The habit vert, worn at the Académie's formal ceremonies, was first adopted during Napoleon Bonaparte's reorganization of the Institut de France. It consists of a long black coat and black-feathered bicorne, both richly embroidered with green leafy motifs, together with black trousers or skirt. Further, members other than clergy carry a ceremonial sword (l'épée).

        The members bear the cost of their uniform themselves. The robes cost around $50,000, and Amin Maalouf said that his induction cost him some $230,000 overall.

        So the only nit a can pick, is you could have said:

        council of old rich folks dressed up in fancy uniforms

      • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday July 13 2020, @09:48PM (5 children)

        by Thexalon (636) on Monday July 13 2020, @09:48PM (#1020741)

        What grammar rules are we even talking about? The allegedly unbreakable rules some people think exist for English grammar stem from British academics trying to make English more like Latin, when most English speakers and writers who have ever lived have broken most of those rules at least occasionally. Seriously, I want you to imagine your grade-school English teacher evaluating the grammar of, say, Mark Twain or James Joyce or Walt Whitman, and tell me what kind of grade you think either of them would get.

        And that's also why it's ridiculous to claim that some dialects of English are "wrong": They fulfill all the functions of language perfectly well (clear communication between humans), and the only problem is that some stuffy guys in Oxford and Cambridge about 150 years ago decided to declare those forms of language didn't match what they thought was "proper" English.

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @10:32PM (4 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @10:32PM (#1020783)

          You say that, but what passes for acceptable grammar for children, now, is vastly inferior to Twain. No teachers are marking "He drank quickly" to "He quickly drank", literally none, as a trivial and easy to verify example.

          Communication is streamlined by standards - standards of vocabulary, grammar, and style, at least - and disregarding those standards, when not for artistic power, reduces available power in that channel.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @12:12AM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @12:12AM (#1020847)

            Different. The word you were looking for was different.

            As an aside, has there ever been an example (prior to modern times), where a language has degraded and ended up unfit for purpose?

            • (Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday July 14 2020, @11:44AM

              by Bot (3902) on Tuesday July 14 2020, @11:44AM (#1021164) Journal

              systemd's DSL, hopefully.

              --
              Account abandoned.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:22AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:22AM (#1020897)

            He drank quickly is the preferable form if you don't want to sound ignorant. It's acceptable, but not normal. Subject + verb + adverb has been with English since English was German.

            People don't normally say he quickly drank unless they're going to add an object, in which case it would probably be he quickly drank water. But even then you can say, "He drank the water quickly." and still have proper grammar. Most of the "correct grammar" you were taught was never required, not even when communicating in a formal setting. Literally all the best writers break those rules regularly with no ill-effect.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @11:06PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @11:06PM (#1021543)

            Grammar is, and always has been, bullshit. English is incredibly flexible, and nearly any sentence structure can be used for effective communication. All the idioms, borrowings from other languages, inconsistencies, and dialects just add flavor.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @07:01PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @07:01PM (#1021422)

        Alternatively, we could have a council of old folks dressed up in fancy uniforms to formally decide how the language is to be defined. Kinda sounds eliteist

        I commented here that irregardless becoming a word was gay and seems my comment was removed...

        Seems like someone here has decided how language is to be defined? I'm sure my usage of gay was not obscure[1] ;)

        [1] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=That%27s%20Gay [urbandictionary.com]

    • (Score: 5, Funny) by hemocyanin on Monday July 13 2020, @03:20PM (4 children)

      by hemocyanin (186) on Monday July 13 2020, @03:20PM (#1020358) Journal

      Typical grammar nazi -- you spelled covfefe wrong.

      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday July 13 2020, @03:40PM (3 children)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday July 13 2020, @03:40PM (#1020390)

        Are you attributing the "proper" spelling to a senile old man's fumble-finger tweet? I hope it takes more than that to coin a new word.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Monday July 13 2020, @06:34PM (2 children)

          by hemocyanin (186) on Monday July 13 2020, @06:34PM (#1020560) Journal

          Apparently it does not. I'd bet at least half the population has heard of covfefe by now. Problem is definition though.

          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday July 13 2020, @06:37PM

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday July 13 2020, @06:37PM (#1020563)

            If I were Webster, I'd wait for both definition to emerge, and for the Great Cheeto to get out of the headline cycle before deciding that the word has "stuck." Otherwise, they'd be off chasing Urban Dictionary trends...

            --
            🌻🌻 [google.com]
          • (Score: 2) by http on Monday July 13 2020, @10:38PM

            by http (1920) on Monday July 13 2020, @10:38PM (#1020790)

            "I'm running low on adderall"

            --
            I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
    • (Score: 5, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 13 2020, @04:42PM (1 child)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @04:42PM (#1020435) Journal

      Someone should investigate that covfefe again. Was it a precursor to covid19? What did the president know, and when did he know it?

      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @11:53PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @11:53PM (#1020838)

        It's clearly a chemical formula for the antidote. Carbon, oxygen and 2 iron atoms. 'V' had me stumped remembering the periodic table.

        * Vanadium sounds like some pretty toxic stuff - don't be swallowing that based on the trolling on an internets.

  • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by VLM on Monday July 13 2020, @12:23PM (3 children)

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @12:23PM (#1020251)

    Merriam-Webster

    They can TRY an authoritarian flex either for or against, but if they have no actual influence or power....

    • (Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Monday July 13 2020, @01:52PM (2 children)

      by nitehawk214 (1304) on Monday July 13 2020, @01:52PM (#1020298)

      This "confirmation" is a reaction to the public using the word as if it is real, thus making it real.

      --
      "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
      • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:31AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:31AM (#1020901)

        Right, but depending upon where the definition falls in the list of uses and whether it's flagged as informal or not will affect where you're allowed to use it. This is mostly important for people who are writing in a formal register.

        • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday July 14 2020, @12:39PM

          by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 14 2020, @12:39PM (#1021196)

          formal register

          I guess that's the answer I was looking for. If you operate under some weird regulation where you can only use "Merriam-Webster words" to document something, then they are by definition authoritative.

          Outside of highly regulated environments I imagine the reaction is a big "meh"

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Subsentient on Monday July 13 2020, @12:27PM (21 children)

    by Subsentient (1111) on Monday July 13 2020, @12:27PM (#1020253) Homepage Journal

    Regardless of its utility, I won't use it, because there's always that one guy who will point out that I used it, and that annoys me.

    --
    "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @02:01PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @02:01PM (#1020301)

      Disregard that one guy!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @08:04PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @08:04PM (#1020632)

        Disregard that one guy!

        But, if you did not, that would be not -not(dis)- regarding him, or making him irregardlessed, and you irregardless?

      • (Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Tuesday July 14 2020, @09:55AM

        by fido_dogstoyevsky (131) <axehandleNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday July 14 2020, @09:55AM (#1021130)

        Dis^v^v^v Irregard that one guy!

        FTFY

        --
        It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Monday July 13 2020, @03:00PM

      by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday July 13 2020, @03:00PM (#1020334) Homepage
      Congratulations, you now have a tiny pop-gun of a weapon to use against him to wind him up. To what he does in response to that wind-up, pay no regard.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @03:53PM (16 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @03:53PM (#1020404)

      But that begs the question whether they are right or not.

      (Aha! Did I use that correctly here or not? Mwuaa-haa-haa-ha!)

      • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday July 13 2020, @08:06PM (15 children)

        by aristarchus (2645) on Monday July 13 2020, @08:06PM (#1020635) Journal

        NO! You did not. And, it's not funny. Get help [begthequestion.info], irregarless of how you feel about it.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:09PM (14 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:09PM (#1020694)

          More Aristarchus bullshit. If there's ever a contest around here for most retarded poster, you've got a great shot at taking home the title.

          As far as begging the question goes, the GP is right. The fact that there's a logical fallacy of the same name, doesn't change the fact that it's widely understood by the non-retarded to mean raises the question.

          • (Score: 2, Insightful) by aristarchus on Monday July 13 2020, @09:34PM (13 children)

            by aristarchus (2645) on Monday July 13 2020, @09:34PM (#1020721) Journal

            doesn't change the fact that it's widely understood by the non-retarded to mean raises the question.

            FTFY

            The ignorant and illiterate do not get to define language, irregarbleness of common usuage. Your protest is something of a damp squid [telegraph.co.uk], and cast to die [thefreedictionary.com].

            Your problem is, I am more educated than you, and I do not use developmental progress as an insult. I am sorry you do not understand language, even your own patria lingua. But you should respect those who know more than you do, lest you accidentally end up with an functionally illiterate reality TV idiot as Precedent, or dead from a novo-corona virus.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:53PM (12 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:53PM (#1020746)

              This is a textbook example of Dunning-Kruger in effect. The phrase means "to raise the question" in most contexts and most people recognize it to mean that. The fact that it matches up with a fallacy does not change that reality. It means that in one context and the toher meaning is usually the correct one to go with. People who are educated and actually literate can handle a phrase or word having more than one meaning. As opposed to those that got their degree from a diploma mill.

              And BTW, as somebody who speaks multiple languages, I would never be so arrogant as to pretend like I know more about the usage of words and phrases than a native speaker living someplace where the language is being used. It just demonstrates that you're so ignorant that you don't even realize that you're ignorant.

              • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Monday July 13 2020, @10:28PM (7 children)

                by aristarchus (2645) on Monday July 13 2020, @10:28PM (#1020782) Journal

                Sorry, you are still an idiot. "Begs the question" is not a change in language, like slang "Bad" meaning "Good", or "Cool" meaning "hot", or someone 6'4" being nicknamed "Tiny". Instead it is an illiterate mistake based on a superficial phonetic similarity, much like how the British English phrase, "damp squib", for a disappointing outcome as with damp explosives, became "damp squid", which makes no sense, since squid are nearly always wet, and hardly a disappointment. So the common (incorrect) usage is derivative, and wrong, since the fallacy precedes it by millennium.

                And, native speakers, especially Americans, are no authorities on English, especially with recent Republican cuts to education and insistence that stupidity is just as valid as knowledge. I have been speaking English for many lifetimes longer than these native speakers, having hung out with the Scald who composed Beowulf, and assisted King Alfred in his translation of Boethius. Your problem is the more classic version of the Dunning-Kruger effect, in that you are incapable of understanding when someone does actually have more knowledge and experience than you, and have the audacity to be so arrogant as to accuse another of Dunning-Kruger. I say, "Good Day, Sirrah!"

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:08AM (5 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:08AM (#1020882)

                  You're pretty much proving my point here. There's a certain irony that you make these racist claims about all Americans when you took umbrage at me calling you in particular developmentally delayed. And yes, you're proving my point in every post.

                  It's not an illiterate mistake to use begs the question in that fashion. Or would you say that "This demands an answer" is improper English because it's more or less the exact same phrase and exact same meaning. It's perfectly acceptable English whether you're in an informal setting or at a board room meeting. The fact that your English is so poor that you don't know that changes nothing. The phrase will continue to be used and you'll continue to incorrectly claim that it's inappropriate. Fortunately, you're not a native speaker, so nobody is going to give two shits what you think.

                  As far as Dunning Kruger goes, you assume without any evidence that you know more about me. I used to teach English and I've already successfully completed a graduate level program to do so. I think I know a thing or two about how languages work, especially English. You can make racist accusations and lie about your proficiency, but at the end of the day, we both know that you are talking out of your ass. It's well established that language follows the usage of the native speakers and that the native speakers. It's also well-established that when the powerful use language in a certain way that that use has a degree of legitimacy.

                  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:50AM (4 children)

                    by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:50AM (#1020916) Journal

                    You're pretty much proving my point here.

                    Tu quoque, amicus meus.

                    I used to teach English and I've already successfully completed a graduate level program to do so. I think I know a thing or two about how languages work, especially English.

                    Congrats. But, you got the qualifications, after you taught? Unusual.

                    It's well established that language follows the usage of the native speakers and that the native speakers.

                    "And that the native speakers . . . .?" Yes? Incomplete sentences do you bolster you case for being a language expert. Perhaps you would like a bugger from Buttruckers? (ref: Idiocracy [youtube.com])

                    It's also well-established that when the powerful use language in a certain way that that use has a degree of legitimacy.

                    Oh, is this the Humpty Dumpty defense, or the Trump covfefe? Not true, because with great power does not come great literacy, though we philosophers have been suggesting this might actually be a good idea.

                    No, I think we are done here. You are the one who resorted to insult, and I never said anything racist about Americans! It is more a critique of recent American Culture. Americans are more and more perversely and proudly ignorant, what with an idiot fundie Christian as Secretary of Education, Secretary of HUD (a physcian?) shilling for snake oil, and a real estate developer as President? Idiocracy is more than halfway achieved! I, and any educated person in the world, have a duty to call America on its decline. Let it start by not begging the question of whether America is great.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @02:09AM (1 child)

                      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @02:09AM (#1020936)

                      First off, nothing in that sentence indicates which event happened first. Both of them are relative to today. Logic, that thing you suck at, would indicate which item happened before the other. The internet is an informal register and there's no obligation to spend a lot of time grammar checking things to see if there absolutely perfect in everyway

                      Secondly, that's a really bad example. That was a single use one time and as far as I know, he never used the word covfefe again. When they start using that word in boardrooms and during job interviews, then we'll consider that a valid example. At present, I'm not away of anybody significant that uses the word on a regular basis.

                      As for the insulting, you've really gone out of your way to demonstrate what I'm talking about. This post and myriad other ones I've seen over the years are that of somebody that's developmentally delayed.

                      And, native speakers, especially Americans, are no authorities on English, especially with recent Republican cuts to education and insistence that stupidity is just as valid as knowledge. I have been speaking English for many lifetimes longer than these native speakers, having hung out with the Scald who composed Beowulf, and assisted King Alfred in his translation of Boethius. Your problem is the more classic version of the Dunning-Kruger effect, in that you are incapable of understanding when someone does actually have more knowledge and experience than you, and have the audacity to be so arrogant as to accuse another of Dunning-Kruger. I say, "Good Day, Sirrah!"

                      Right, nothing at all racist about that. BTW, you're inability to actually understand any of what you're talking about is not appropriate for somebody that claims to be an adult and certainly not an educated one. Sure, I've got a few typos because this isn't my fucking job, but let's be honest, at least I know what I'm talking about. You just pull it out of your ass and aren't even close to being right.

                      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Tuesday July 14 2020, @03:04AM

                        by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday July 14 2020, @03:04AM (#1020995) Journal

                        First off, nothing in that sentence indicates which event happened first. Both of them are relative to today.

                        So, your problem is more syntactical than lexical? And you have a job fucking? Sex industry worker? (keep up on current parlance, please).

                    • (Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday July 14 2020, @11:50AM (1 child)

                      by Bot (3902) on Tuesday July 14 2020, @11:50AM (#1021168) Journal

                      > Tu quoque, amicus meus.

                      Vocative exists for a reason, aristarche.

                      --
                      Account abandoned.
                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 15 2020, @06:54AM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 15 2020, @06:54AM (#1021754)

                        Touché , bot! A hit, a most palpable hit! Meum Culpam!

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:49AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:49AM (#1020914)

                  https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/beg-the-question [merriam-webster.com] , if you don't like that, you can just suck it. Nobody around here thinks you're smart or clever for being too stupid to know when you've lost.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:16AM (3 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:16AM (#1020892)

                When someone says 'begs the question', I interpret it differently based on their level of ignorance and education. Since most people are idiots it stands to reason that I'll interpret as 'raises the question'. Every now and then I'm pleasantly surprised to hear it used correctly in context, and when that happens, it's always by someone who is educated and intelligent.

                Using 'irregardless', or 'begs the question' incorrectly is best summed up by the saying: "It's better to remain silent and have people think you're stupid, than to speak up and remove any doubt."

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:54AM (2 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:54AM (#1020923)

                  But, strictly speaking, you've got that backwards. "Begging the question" as a fallacy is the result of a bad translation and it's led to beg gaining the definition of evade. Begging the question as in demanding one ask is much more in keeping with the actual words which is why that's the meaning that people use in most cases.

                  https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/beg-the-question [merriam-webster.com]

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 15 2020, @07:00AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 15 2020, @07:00AM (#1021758)

                    So there is no doubt that you actually are an idiot, then?

                    and it's led to beg gaining the definition of evade

                    Um, what? Your interpretation beggars belief! I think you have buggered the question.

                    "He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." ― Groucho Marx

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16 2020, @12:48AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16 2020, @12:48AM (#1022179)

                    No, not really a matter of bad translation. Of course, used to be that any European who was literate or logical did so in Latin. But times change. As a test, ask yourself whether someone who is "question begging" is begging for questions to be asked. No, "questions begging" is presuming the very thing in question, a form of circular reasoning, and not a request for information at all. Irregardless of what you and other "common usage" idiots may believe.

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @12:31PM (16 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @12:31PM (#1020254)

    We simply need more words because of all the ones recently dropped from the language

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by DannyB on Monday July 13 2020, @02:01PM (15 children)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @02:01PM (#1020300) Journal

      What if English could move to a more RISC style set of words. With orthogonal parameters and modifiers of the word.

      And simpler pronunciation of the letters of the alphabet. The letter C would never make the sound of the letter S or the letter K, and thus be unused. The letter G would make the soft Graphic Interchange Format (GIF) sound instead of the hard Jif peanut butter sound just as Santa Claws intended.

      Sentences could all fit into one of a small number of syntax forms, rigidly enforced by the state.

      An alternate proposal is to convert all of the world's languages into a new Emoji standard and extend Unicode to have enough Emoji and modifiers for humans to communicate only happy thoughts.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Monday July 13 2020, @02:56PM (8 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @02:56PM (#1020330) Journal

        extend Unicode to have enough Emoji and modifiers for humans to communicate only happy thoughts.

        I can't tell you the sadness this idea makes me feel.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 13 2020, @03:28PM (7 children)

          by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @03:28PM (#1020370) Journal

          There should be no emojis for that.

          Oh nooooes!

          My code that fixes all "irregardless" to be "regardless" also fixes all "irrigation" to be "rigation".

          --
          People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
          • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday July 13 2020, @07:53PM (6 children)

            by maxwell demon (1608) on Monday July 13 2020, @07:53PM (#1020614) Journal

            Does it also change “irrational” to “rational”? Because that might explain why people seem no longer to be able to distinguish those two. :-)

            --
            The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
            • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 13 2020, @07:58PM (5 children)

              by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @07:58PM (#1020621) Journal

              Once you realize that 64 bit floating point can represent every possible rational and irrational number, it no longer matters.

              Then you can look forward to 128 bit floating point which can actually represent all possible rational and irrational numbers that did not have an exact representation under 64 bit floating point.

              Then you can look forward to 256 bit floating point, etc.

              --
              People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
              • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday July 13 2020, @08:12PM (3 children)

                by maxwell demon (1608) on Monday July 13 2020, @08:12PM (#1020641) Journal

                Once you realize that 64 bit floating point can represent every possible rational and irrational number, it no longer matters.

                Wrong. Indeed, it cannot even represent one third. It only can represent dyadic fractions, and even there only a finite subset of them.

                Then you can look forward to 128 bit floating point which can actually represent all possible rational and irrational numbers that did not have an exact representation under 64 bit floating point.

                If your previous sentence had been true, then this would say that a 128 bit floating point can represent exactly the same numbers as a 64 bit floating point.

                Of course in reality this sentence is as wrong as the previous one. Also a 128 bit floating point only can represent a subset of the dyadic fractions, but a larger subset of them.

                --
                The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
                • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 13 2020, @08:59PM (2 children)

                  by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @08:59PM (#1020681) Journal

                  Shirley with 256 bit floating point we could represent every conceivable rational and irrational number that can possibly exist.

                  Until 512 bit floating point comes along.

                  Maybe you detect a pattern here. If 32 bit floating point could represent every possible number, then why would we need 64 bit floats, 128 bit, etc.

                  --
                  People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
                  • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday July 14 2020, @05:46AM (1 child)

                    by maxwell demon (1608) on Tuesday July 14 2020, @05:46AM (#1021069) Journal

                    Shirley with 256 bit floating point we could represent every conceivable rational and irrational number that can possibly exist.

                    No. But that was exactly what you claimed.

                    To quote your post I replied to:

                    Once you realize that 64 bit floating point can represent every possible rational and irrational number, it no longer matters.

                    --
                    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
                    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday July 14 2020, @02:02PM

                      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 14 2020, @02:02PM (#1021231) Journal

                      I did not use any <no-sarcasm> tags.

                      --
                      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
              • (Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Monday July 13 2020, @08:41PM

                by Dr Spin (5239) on Monday July 13 2020, @08:41PM (#1020665)

                Then you can look forward to 256 bit floating point, etc.

                With 256 bits of floating point, I would expect to be able to represent inconceivable and incomprehensible numbers as well
                as the irrational ones.

                What happens with sinking point numbers? (only available on Pentiums)

                --
                Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @03:29PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @03:29PM (#1020374)

        Spoken languages are evolved, not engineered. Which is to say they favor deception and strategy over utility. Language is the expression of biological entropy at the user level. For example Chinese has way more entropy than English, which should make it MORE concise. But typically it isn't.

        Which is the same as English. Just make shit up and wait for the advertisers to decide what is or isn't important. The English department always sides with the market definition, even if that definition is completely intransigent to the engineered definition. Case in point "Internet v. internet". There was a great debate back in the 90's. It was settle among the industry that "Internet" was the public network, and that "internet" just meant interconnected networks, which were not neccessarily public. The retards that came after never looked it up, and the English department cowtowed to the retards. So now most people use it wrong. Same with "cable modems" that don't modulate. etc. etc. etc.

        Language is defined by advertising. Not the other way around.

        • (Score: 3, Touché) by DannyB on Monday July 13 2020, @03:37PM

          by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @03:37PM (#1020384) Journal

          Language is defined by advertising. Not the other way around.

          By law, new words should only be crafted (A) if they are brand names, and (B) by licensed advertising and marketing people.

          --
          People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by kazzie on Monday July 13 2020, @06:16PM (1 child)

        by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @06:16PM (#1020545)

        What if English could move to a more RISC style set of words. With orthogonal parameters and modifiers of the word.

        That would be doubleplusgood.

        • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 13 2020, @06:22PM

          by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @06:22PM (#1020549) Journal

          Doubleplus like:

          English++

          But I think they would call it Newspeak.

          --
          People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 2) by Booga1 on Monday July 13 2020, @11:09PM

        by Booga1 (6333) on Monday July 13 2020, @11:09PM (#1020809)

        Aside from the rest of the comment, the hard versus soft G is backwards. Abridged from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_G [wikipedia.org]

        The sound of a hard ⟨g⟩ is usually the voiced velar plosive [ɡ] (as in gangrene or golf). In English, the sound of soft ⟨g⟩ is heard in general, giant, and gym. A (g) at the end of a word usually renders a hard (g) (as in “dog”), while if a soft rendition is intended it would be followed by a silent (e) (as in “change”).

      • (Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Tuesday July 14 2020, @10:11AM

        by fido_dogstoyevsky (131) <axehandleNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday July 14 2020, @10:11AM (#1021136)

        What if English could move to a more RISC style set of words.

        It might be double plus good.

        --
        It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
  • (Score: 2) by MostCynical on Monday July 13 2020, @12:34PM (13 children)

    by MostCynical (2589) on Monday July 13 2020, @12:34PM (#1020258) Journal

    Betteridge's law applies here.

    --
    "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @12:47PM (10 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @12:47PM (#1020269)

      Godwin's applies.

      Of course it's a fucking word! Or it was until bored dictionary-Nazis with nothing better to do during COVID came along.

      These are the same morons that ban the passive voice and split infinitives on the basis of some abitrary rule their teachers made up for 3rd grade English. Or delete the 'malamanteau' Wikipedia article.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @02:07PM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @02:07PM (#1020303)

        If it's a word, then what does it mean? The opposite of what it actually says? A pretty poor word.

        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 13 2020, @03:19PM (2 children)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @03:19PM (#1020357) Journal

          The opposite of what it actually says? A pretty poor word.

          I don't want to hear no more whining, you ain't have no rights [verbling.com] to exclude minorities that use dialects [businessinsider.com.au]

          (shout-out to Wootery [soylentnews.org] for the second link above)

          (also... grin. A sad one)

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @08:11PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @08:11PM (#1020640)

            ♫♪"Can't get no! ♫♪ Satifaction!"♫♪ You're in good company.

            • (Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday July 14 2020, @12:27PM

              by Bot (3902) on Tuesday July 14 2020, @12:27PM (#1021190) Journal

              WE DON'T NEED NO EDUCATION
              (BASS AND FUNKY GUITAR)
              WE DON'T NEED NO THOUGHT CONTROL
              (BASS AND FUNKY GUITAR)
              NO PLEXIGLASS SHEETS IN THE CLASSROOM
              (BASS AND FUNKY GUITAR)
              COVID, LEAVE THEM KIDS ALONE
              (CHANGE OF KEY)
              HEY COVID, LEAVE THEM KIDS AL...
              (OH WAIT THEY DON'T GET INFECTED UNLESS MURIBUND)

              --
              Account abandoned.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:22PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:22PM (#1021216)

          To be fair, flammable and inflammable are synonyms, the opposite is unflammable.

          The original word was inflammable, meaning able to be inflamed.

          As I've heard before, English isn't a language so much as three toddlers in a trench-coat pretending to be one.

      • (Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Monday July 13 2020, @05:27PM (2 children)

        by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @05:27PM (#1020494) Homepage Journal

        Things I've learned from authoritative grammar books:

        (1) English texts tend to be more lively with active instead of passive voice. That does not mean we need to ban the passive voice.
        (2) Sometimes splitting an infinitive is the best way to make your meaning clear.
        (3) There's nothing wrong with having a preposition at the end of a sentence.

        Thing I've learned on my own:

        (4) The presence of typos it the second law of thermodynamics applied to text.

        -- hendrik

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:20PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:20PM (#1020706)

          1) That's generally true, however scientific research papers and mystery novels tend to use a lot more passive voice.
          2) This is true and it's part of why there was never a rule against doing so. In some cases, grammar demands that infinitives be split up.
          3) Yes and as with the previous one, not only is there no rule against doing so, but in some cases you can't avoid it without making the a huge mess of things.

          4) Quite possibly, there's no particular reason to think that entropy shouldn't apply to text.

        • (Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday July 14 2020, @12:31PM

          by Bot (3902) on Tuesday July 14 2020, @12:31PM (#1021193) Journal

          >(4) The presence of typos IT the second law of thermodynamics applied to text.
          TRUER WORDS HAVE NEVER BEEN SPOKEN, especially since these ones were read.

          --
          Account abandoned.
      • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday July 13 2020, @08:24PM

        by maxwell demon (1608) on Monday July 13 2020, @08:24PM (#1020653) Journal

        These are the same morons that ban the passive voice and split infinitives on the basis of some abitrary rule their teachers made up for 3rd grade English.

        I think you mean:

        These are the same morons that demand the passive voice to strictly be banned and infinitives to not be split based on some arbitrary rule that was made up by their teachers for 3rd grade English.

        :-)

        --
        The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:57PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @09:57PM (#1020751)

        Perhaps aristarchus will tell us if it's a word, after all he's apparently something of an expert on a language that he isn't anywhere near mastering.

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 13 2020, @01:06PM (1 child)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @01:06PM (#1020277) Journal

      here's hoping... Betteridge's law applies here.

      And you call yourself MostCynical, mate? (grin)

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 3, Informative) by MostCynical on Monday July 13 2020, @08:03PM

        by MostCynical (2589) on Monday July 13 2020, @08:03PM (#1020629) Journal

        hell, handbaskets, but with the optimism of the truly delusional.
        I know how bad it is, I spend alot of time explaining how bad things are, but I spend most of my life trying to make things better, more than just hoping they can be,

        Cynic, not nihilist

        On topic: grammar and agreed/understood meaning make life easier

        EG: ebay has lots of listing for "Shearling" jackets. "Shearling" means young lamb skin, with the fleece left attached (like this [ebay.co.uk]

        But searching the word "shearling" gets you thousands of hits, then in most of them the details say "Faux fur" or "Polyester lining" or, (my favourite) "Real Shear Ling Polyester"

        Truth in advertising is lovely ideal.. but people not knowing any better, or actively trying rip people off, or just being dumb or lazy makes my life harder, and so they are all hard to excuse.

        The less precise you are, the less people will understand you. Some won't understand you anyway, which is why effective communication is active, requiring confirmation of understanding being sought by the person speaking from the listener.. which takes time and effort.

        --
        "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by anubi on Monday July 13 2020, @12:44PM (6 children)

    by anubi (2828) on Monday July 13 2020, @12:44PM (#1020267) Journal

    Irregardless of the prefix, both mean the same thing.

    We park in driveways, and drive on parkways.

    It's an idiosyncracy of the English language.

    And it's always changing where the same word will have meanings as a function of where, when, who spoke it, how they spoke it, and to whom they spoke it.

    Something becomes a word when the right people start using it.

    Confused? Yeah, right.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 13 2020, @01:08PM (1 child)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 13 2020, @01:08PM (#1020278) Journal

      We park in driveways, and drive on parkways.

      A cargo goes by ship and most shipments go by car.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @01:18PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @01:18PM (#1020282)

        No, cargo goes by car, shipments ment by ship.

    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday July 13 2020, @03:13PM (3 children)

      by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday July 13 2020, @03:13PM (#1020351) Homepage
      I reckon that people who desperately want to have a flammable word with a prefix should use *en*flammable. It's etymologically the same prefix as the one they use, what's called in some languages the transformative case - putting something into a new state - with plenty of cognate usage, but doesn't have the ambiguity in that rendering.

      And as a sign of good will and compromise, the "non" in-ers should withdraw from that territory to *un* instead, again using the same justifications as the *en* retreat.

      And finally there will be peace in the middle east.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 1) by petecox on Monday July 13 2020, @05:48PM (2 children)

        by petecox (3228) on Monday July 13 2020, @05:48PM (#1020534)

        The verb is 'inflame'. In this case "flammable" is awry. But because of words like impotent and inept, confusion reigned.

        • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday July 13 2020, @06:29PM (1 child)

          by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday July 13 2020, @06:29PM (#1020554) Homepage
          The verb you are thinking of *happens to have been first rendered in English* as "inflame", but given that it came straight from the old french "enflammer", wouldn't you accept that perhaps we made a mistake in that rendering when we inherited the word?

          Of course, the elefant in the room is the fact that you are conflating the -able word with the verb. What english verb do you think the -able word "amiable" comes from?
          --
          Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @08:14PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 13 2020, @08:14PM (#1020644)

            Amo, amas, amat? Qui questiones?

  • (Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Monday July 13 2020, @12:59PM (5 children)

    by SomeGuy (5632) on Monday July 13 2020, @12:59PM (#1020271)

    That depends, is "irregardless" considered offensive to anyone? :P

    Yet this question is asked in the same breath as the word "tweet". Putting aside that this was already a word with a different meaning (in the context of birds), there are issues with the usage of this word. The way people use this word, it specifically denotes a short micro-blog style post specifically on the Twitter(R)(TM) web site. It probably should be written Tweet(R)(TM), although I'm not completely positive if that is actually a trademark. If not, then what happens if some other similar social media web site comes along? Is "tweet" generic enough that you can say someone "wrote a tweet on Tweedupe.com?" Personally, I think "tweet" should not be used at all in the context of internet message posting. It should be "Webster is now weighing in on in a social media post", otherwise you are essentially advertising a specific web site.

    But everyone loves their precious Tweeter(R)(TM) so much that they are completely oblivious to this.

    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday July 13 2020, @03:16PM

      by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday July 13 2020, @03:16PM (#1020353) Homepage
      There's already a short way of saying "wrote a tweet on tweetdupe", and that's "wrote on tweetdupe", we don't need the neologised noun and verb at all, we already have a sufficiently rich set of terms.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by mhajicek on Monday July 13 2020, @03:45PM (1 child)

      by mhajicek (51) on Monday July 13 2020, @03:45PM (#1020393)

      I xeroxed my kleenex.

      --
      The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by MostCynical on Monday July 13 2020, @09:34PM

        by MostCynical (2589) on Monday July 13 2020, @09:34PM (#1020722) Journal

        as long as you hoovered it up afterwards

        --
        "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
    • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:10AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 14 2020, @01:10AM (#1020887)

      Just to folks like Aristarchus that want to appear intelligent without doing any of the work necessary to know what they're talking about. Sniping at people for saying things like "irregardless" is a really easy way to pretend to be smart and justify it to yourself while everybody else knows you're a moron that's completely full of shit.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Thursday July 16 2020, @01:02AM

        by aristarchus (2645) on Thursday July 16 2020, @01:02AM (#1022188) Journal

        Sometimes, when someone else appears to be moron and full of shit, it could be just that you do not understand them, and the reason they appear stupid is actually because you are. It is called the "principle of charity": always give your interlocutor the benefit of the doubt, assume they are talking sense, until they have proven beyond all doubt that they are ignorant or insane. Irregardlesserly, you provide a sterling example in this case! Have a good life, AC!

(1) 2