19 ms·

Please don't write "begs the question" when you mean "raises the question". http://begthequestion.info/ http://begthequestion.info/

stanleydrew 17y ago
But if we know what he meant why does this matter? Language exists to convey meaning, and I think we all understood what he meant, so I don't see the problem here.
- sjs 17y ago
  "I know this sounds like a semantic quibble, but words mean things." -- unknown
- loup-vaillant 17y ago
  The problem lies in dilution: if people recognize a new meaning in an old phrase, it becomes more difficult to convey the old meaning. (Because you can't use that phrase any more.) There is also the case where you thought you conveyed the new meaning, while it hasn't caught on yet (meaning, you made a mistake). So, better stay safe and stick to the old meaning while we can.
  - vidarh 17y ago
    The dilution has already happened, and this cause is pretty much lost. English is my second language. I've known the "new" meaning since I was a kid. I've to date maybe seen the "old" meaning used a handful of times other than in examples given by people trying to correct someone using the new meaning. Outside of academia I'd be surprised to see it at all. I suspect it would be confusing to more people than would recognize it.
    - loup-vaillant 17y ago
      OK for this particular cause. I was more about a general stance: trying to slow down the rate of change in languages. The slower the change, the less confusing the language.
    - Confusion 17y ago
      The dilution has already happened, and this cause is pretty much lost. Don't give up too easily. Outside of academia I'd be surprised to see it at all. That's because it's originally an academical term for a logical fallacy. This is like the abuse of 'eigenvalues' by all kinds of crackpots and we should never stop fighting that kind of language abuse. We can't keep inventing new terms, just because others have hijacked the previous one.
    - Confusion 17y ago
      The dilution has already happened, and this cause is pretty much lost. Don't give up too easily. Outside of academia I'd be surprised to see it at all. That's because it's originally an academical term for a logical fallacy. This is like the abuse of 'eigenvalues' by all kinds of crackpots and we should never stop fighting that kind of language abuse. We can't keep inventing new terms, just because others have hijacked the previous one.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- jamesbritt 17y ago
  "But if we know what he meant why does this matter? Language exists to convey meaning, and I think we all understood what he meant, so I don't see the problem here." I often don't know what the user meant. It makes for extra work to stop and think what possible meaning was intended. Some thing when people use "less" for "fewer". I have to think, did they mean "lesser" or "fewer"?
ntownsend 17y ago
Whoops. You're right. I'm embarrassed because I do know the difference.
dasil003 17y ago
I respect the difference, but I'm afraid there's not much point in trying to educate people. This has already been an utterly lost cause for decades (at least).
sfk 17y ago
The Oxford Dictionary lists "raises the question" as a valid interpretation of the phrase.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]

stanleydrew 17y ago

But if we know what he meant why does this matter? Language exists to convey meaning, and I think we all understood what he meant, so I don't see the problem here.

sjs 17y ago
"I know this sounds like a semantic quibble, but words mean things." -- unknown
loup-vaillant 17y ago
The problem lies in dilution: if people recognize a new meaning in an old phrase, it becomes more difficult to convey the old meaning. (Because you can't use that phrase any more.) There is also the case where you thought you conveyed the new meaning, while it hasn't caught on yet (meaning, you made a mistake). So, better stay safe and stick to the old meaning while we can.
- vidarh 17y ago
  The dilution has already happened, and this cause is pretty much lost. English is my second language. I've known the "new" meaning since I was a kid. I've to date maybe seen the "old" meaning used a handful of times other than in examples given by people trying to correct someone using the new meaning. Outside of academia I'd be surprised to see it at all. I suspect it would be confusing to more people than would recognize it.
  - loup-vaillant 17y ago
    OK for this particular cause. I was more about a general stance: trying to slow down the rate of change in languages. The slower the change, the less confusing the language.
  - Confusion 17y ago
    The dilution has already happened, and this cause is pretty much lost. Don't give up too easily. Outside of academia I'd be surprised to see it at all. That's because it's originally an academical term for a logical fallacy. This is like the abuse of 'eigenvalues' by all kinds of crackpots and we should never stop fighting that kind of language abuse. We can't keep inventing new terms, just because others have hijacked the previous one.
  - Confusion 17y ago
    The dilution has already happened, and this cause is pretty much lost. Don't give up too easily. Outside of academia I'd be surprised to see it at all. That's because it's originally an academical term for a logical fallacy. This is like the abuse of 'eigenvalues' by all kinds of crackpots and we should never stop fighting that kind of language abuse. We can't keep inventing new terms, just because others have hijacked the previous one.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
jamesbritt 17y ago
"But if we know what he meant why does this matter? Language exists to convey meaning, and I think we all understood what he meant, so I don't see the problem here." I often don't know what the user meant. It makes for extra work to stop and think what possible meaning was intended. Some thing when people use "less" for "fewer". I have to think, did they mean "lesser" or "fewer"?

ntownsend 17y ago

Whoops. You're right. I'm embarrassed because I do know the difference.

dasil003 17y ago

I respect the difference, but I'm afraid there's not much point in trying to educate people. This has already been an utterly lost cause for decades (at least).

sfk 17y ago

The Oxford Dictionary lists "raises the question" as a valid interpretation of the phrase.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]