“Irregardless”

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Captain Obvious, Aug 27, 2020.

  1. Thought Criminal

    Thought Criminal Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    17,851
    Likes Received:
    12,872
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This has been the course of language throughout history.

    'Gay' once meant happy or festive.
    'Factoid' once meant a falsehood repeated so much that it became accepted as truth.
    'Nazi', 'racist', fascist', and 'white-supremacist' also, at one time, had actual meanings.
     
  2. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    17,284
    Likes Received:
    829
    Trophy Points:
    113
    sure and exterminate in germany meant to put beyond or outside your borders, which corresponds precisely to what is stated in wannasse 'The J-Wish solution' and precisely what hitler did, 'Havaara',,,,,,,,,, but never fear the boneheaded illiterates in todays society think it means genocide that hitlers plan was to kill all J-Ws.

    Thats the problem when you start changing the meaning of a word to conform to popular usage, fallacy ad populum
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
  3. Thought Criminal

    Thought Criminal Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    17,851
    Likes Received:
    12,872
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. I agree.
     
  4. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    17,284
    Likes Received:
    829
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no need to change your superior reasoning abilities to knuckle under to inferior pressure, you are not logically inconsistent.

    Lets change the word owner to mean koko! yeh
    Now lets look at their property titles! yeh
    viola! any property yardmeat owns now belongs to koko!
    I can do the same thing to yardmeat that they did to hitler with the word exterminate.
    Hell why stop there! Now all property throughout the world now belongs to koko! woo hoo
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
  5. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    28,222
    Likes Received:
    3,328
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is silly to flip out over word usage. This is our world now and we can use whatever words we want to to express our ideas. Our ancestors used to crap in the woods. Is that something we should still do because they did it?
     
  6. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    17,284
    Likes Received:
    829
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is so far from the truth I had to get my waders on just to red it
     
  7. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    28,222
    Likes Received:
    3,328
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I wrote four simple sentences. Which one(s) do you disagree with?
     
  8. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    17,284
    Likes Received:
    829
    Trophy Points:
    113
    all of them
     
  9. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    830
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    While I'm one who highly values the ability of anyone who speaks or writes well, & have ferocious pet peeves w/ regard to language (everyone today showing they're one of the cool kids by beginning their sentences w/ a completely inappropriate, "So..." in place of the apparently now un-hip, "well,...;" &, of course, the erroneous use of, "literally."), I must say that, "(original)late," despite having a confusingly unorthodox user-name, is correct in his contention. Your criticism is not only mistakenly unfair, but contains the very flaw you are condemning in, "irregardless," namely that his argument does not have a, "CRUXT," but a, "crux." And it is stated very clearly in his opening sentence-- that dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive-- which is nothing like your interpretation, "this is what others think so I think that way too."

    Really, there seems to me no reason for your objection: did you notice, in your dictionary, the definition for, "irregardless," is preceded by, "nonstand," the abbreviation for NON-STANDARD? This means that, when a person uses it, they're NOT SPEAKING CORRECTLY. So Webster's is not teaching bad habits. Now, there are instances when, as for effect, a person might WISH to employ non-standard language ("don't that beat all?" for example). It is up to the listener to decide if this is the case when he comes across it (in the case of, "irregardless," besides intending to parody the type of person who speaks in that incorrect manner, as if coming out of the mouth of Archie Bunker, for instance, there seems little other reason for its deliberate misusage). And Webster's is essentially saying that if someone speaks this way for no other reason than that they don't know any better, you are justified in judging them as uneducated.
     
    Curious Always likes this.
  10. (original)late

    (original)late Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2015
    Messages:
    5,003
    Likes Received:
    2,449
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    True, even if your comment prob doesn't apply to this thread.
     

Share This Page