• yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    If only people could accept that English being a living language isn’t just about the past, but words are changing now, and that’s OK.

    This is for the people who gouge their own eyes out when they hear people say “unalived”; the people who (suspiciously) insist on the clinical definition of pedophile; and “it’s called a magazine actually” gun-brains.

    • LurkingLuddite@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      2 months ago

      “Unalive” is stupid NOT because language changes and ree, but because it came about via over-censorship by megacorporations.

      • Jax@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        This about sums it up. There’s a vast difference between a language naturally evolving to fit the times and whatever the fuck ‘unalive’ is.

      • terranoid@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        it wasn’t over censorship. It was them choosing to not show children stuff that probably talks about adult themes, like death. Because maybe you shouldn’t be talking about blowing someone’s head off to children, right? Sane decision.

        Then influencers decided they wanted money and more money meant avoiding the algorithm from noticing you talk about adult themes, so they show more users ie children, and kids love watching weird shit especially if it’s talking about adult themes. Then you get a bunch of weird fucking influencers talking about people “unaliving themselves” and targeting children viewers

      • pmk@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        While I agree, I also think we have a responsibility to use language as a tool to be fair and precise. How should we react when for example far-right people start using the word “groomer” about LGBTQ people in general? Should we push back, or nod and say “interesting, this usage is catching on I guess”?

      • Jax@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        No, no — see, skibidi is actually a valuable addition to the English language.

        What does it mean, you ask?

        That’s right, it sure does. Have meaning, that is.

    • ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Also SAed instead of raped. Then there is PDF-file.

      The reason is more due to the algorithm searching for words to censor, strike, or other reduce the likelihood of recommendation. Not natural language change.

      • cockmushroom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Just an extension of set of reasons for the application of neologistic methods. There’ll never be a shortage of euphemisms fading in and out of social consciousness

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think your first two examples couldn’t be worse.

      Also this post is a fake. So there’s that.