[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 78 KB, 1024x1200, 747.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17491790 No.17491790 [Reply] [Original]

If someone uses a word "wrong," and you still understood them, then they didn't really use it incorrectly, did they?

>> No.17491794

>>17491790
accurate

>> No.17491800
File: 89 KB, 679x522, 1612329296400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17491800

You having to compensate for the author's failure does not make the author correct.

>> No.17491805

>>17491790
So what does Sneed mean then

>> No.17491813

>>17491790
Seems about right

>> No.17491817

in general conversation and casual reading, yes, i do not correct people. because i do not like fool's errands.

>> No.17491910

>>17491800
Correct by what metric? There is no difference, besides semantic, in information conveyance between a sentence that is opaque on account of its structure and another that is made vague by vocabulary. And since there is no objective standard to rank the clarity of former, why should there be one for the latter?

>> No.17491911

>>17491790
In my experience most people who correct word usage have shit understanding and only understand a word in their narrow understanding, generally related to their field of study, do not understand words have multiple meanings and that 'misuse' can imply something more than the surface level statement suggests. Personally, in casual conversation I will ask about their usage if someone uses a word in a way I am unfamiliar with or think might be wrong.

Also, if you want a dead language there are plenty to choose from, one of the ways in which language evolves and grows is through common misuse.

>> No.17491982

>>17491790
Correct

>> No.17491992

>>17491790
>then they didn't really use it incorrectly, did they?
Yes they did buy I compensated with my big brain. They should still speak correctly because I care about language and tradition and go fuck yourself.

>> No.17492053
File: 79 KB, 600x800, penn.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17492053

>>17491992
I got more information from your typo than from the rest of your sentence. "Buy" instead of "but" indicates to me that you're a fat-fingered phoneposting zoomer.

>> No.17492080

>>17491790
of course. literature is a dialogue between the writer and the reader. anyone who complains about "incorrect" word usage just wants something to winge about

>> No.17492105
File: 513 KB, 1280x720, w.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17492105

>>17492053

>> No.17492589

>>17491790
There would be no understanding if there wasn't a correct usage of the word in the first place so yes, they did use it incorrectly. The question might rather be: is it all that important? Well, perhaps not, unless the (original) word becomes unusable because of constant misuse and the language doesn't compensate for this semantic loss.

>> No.17492628

We have to enforce grammatical rules, otherwise language will devolve into incomprehensible gibberish. Language does evolve with time but we should at least try to slow down this process as much as possible.

>> No.17492690

>>17492628
Language has to evolve at the same speed as everything else or things get very confused.

>> No.17492695

>>17492690
There's no everything else

>> No.17493001

>>17491790
If I play a guitar lick, but one of the notes is incorrect, but you still recognized the lick, did I actually play it incorrectly?

Yes, yes I did.

Let’s not cope for illiterates.

>> No.17493015

>>17493001
You sound like the sort that would hide his mistake by explaining you were actually playing the version from a rare live recording or how it was played when you saw them live.

>> No.17493103

>>17493001
That is a superficial analogy, there is so much more nuance in language than in music. Notes have only intrinsic meaning, words have both intrinsic and extrinsic meaning. A malapropism is much less disharmonious than an incorrect note

>> No.17493144

>>17491790
>If someone does something wrong, they meant to do it right so they're right

>> No.17493959

>>17491790
no

>> No.17493996

>>17491790
What if they use it incorrectly on porpoise?

>> No.17494044

>>17491790
it's a doggy dog world that requires real literati to get down to brass tax; can't afford to tow the line

>> No.17494050

>>17491790
Not necessarily, even if I max out the charitable descriptivism. The speaker could be addressing a large audience. Other members of the audience may get the wrong message.

>> No.17494064

>>17491790
Depends, do I like what they said or not?