Why You Don't Work Live

[holmslaw]

..

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The BAS philosophy — says it all

What's wrong with it?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

"It is their duty to learn"

Absolutely.

Without the tiniest shred of doubt.

 

[JohnD]

So what do you do when someone uses the word "nice" to mean "pleasant"?

Or "Presently" to mean "in the future"?

Or "Anti-Semitic" to mean anti-Jewish?

Or "Gay" or "Bent" or "Queer" to mean "Homosexual"

Or "Pouffe" to mean a padded footstool?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Oh I accept that languages constantly evolve, new words come, old words go, and words change in meaning and usage.

But I think it is valid to question at what point mistakes, misuse, incorrect usage etc should be accepted as the status quo, and before which point those who know the usage is wrong should object. Sometimes a slang use of a word subverts the original meaning completely, like one of your examples, "gay".

Sometimes there is no context-free way to determine what usage of a word is intended, and we see the ludicrous results here when a particular unacceptable use is used to justify the automatic banning of the word, so for example I can write screw, but without avoidance techniques I cannot write shag. I can write bunny but not pussy.

So maybe your question should also be addressed to the fools who think that a context-free auto-censor is a valid concept.

But as for the word "electrocute", its use right now to mean "non-lethal electric shock" is just plain wrong, and it is unnecessary, and it should be resisted.

 

[skenk]

There is every point. They are wrong and you are right.

In your opinion

It's not up to you how the meaning of words change, it's up to everyone who uses the words.

If 99% of people call a lamp a bulb then it is called a bulb, if you don't like it - tough.

If the OED say 'electrocution' can mean getting a shock and people start using it to mean such a thing then, unfortunately, it's meaning does change by the very fact that people use it to mean something different than before. I wouldn't say we're there yet with electrocution but if other people change it's use then, really, and as much as i'm sure this bothers you, THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT (save perhaps for being a pedant about it - trying to 'correct' people). Sorry BAS you don't own other people's use of language to mean anything they like.

Edited to remove error

 

[martinxxxxxx]

Aint dis an lectric forum anymore duh.

Just whileout ya all

 

[skenk]

book

 

[Grizzly]

... so for example I can write screw, but without avoidance techniques I cannot write shag. I can write bunny but not pussy.

Neat trick. Clever.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I could but i'd rather leave that to your ilk, 99.9% of people are quite happy with 'bulb' and aren't going to change to 'lamp' because of you 'correcting' them.

I never mentioned the bulb/lamp issue - if you would care to pay attention this sub-topic arose out of the completely incorrect use of the word "electrocute" to mean something which hardly any authoritative source recognises.

With chat like that, do you find people gravitating away from you in social situations!?

With the inability to grasp what they are talking about, do you find people gravitating away from you in social situations?

Maybe in the case of something actually important but for the sake of explaining 'correct' usage of 'bulb' and 'lamp'!?

I never mentioned the bulb/lamp issue

Life's too short!

Is it too short for you to pay attention to it?

In your opinion

And that of almost everybody else who is not ignorant or incompetent.

Learn YOUR interpretation? How arrogant.

Not just mine - also that of almost everybody else who is not ignorant or incompetent.

It's not up to you how the meaning of words change, it's up to everyone who uses the words.

So you advocate complete anarchy? Where no words have any agreed or official or correct meanings, and anybody can use any word to mean anything they want?

If 99% of people call a lamp a bulb then it is called a bulb, if you don't like it - tough.

Why on earth do you keep going on about lamps and bulbs? Are you a red tarmac?

If the OED say 'electrocution' can mean getting a shock and people start using it to mean such a thing then, unfortunately, it's meaning does change by the very fact that people use it to mean something different than before.

Indeed, but do you agree with the following

1) At one point, the word "electrocute" did not mean anything other than "kill by electric shock".

2) The very first use of "electrocute" to mean "to get, but not be killed by, an electric shock" was wrong.

If you don't, then quite seriously, are you really arguing that any individual can, at any time, use any word to mean anything they like, no matter if not one other person in the entire world agrees with that usage, and that this is perfectly OK, and not one other person in the entire world is allowed to say "hang on - that's not what the word means"?

I wouldn't say we're there yet with electrocution

Neither would I, and neither would many other people here, and neither would many dictionary writers it seems.

but if other people change it's use then, really, and as much as i'm sure this bothers you, THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT (save perhaps for being a pedant about it - trying to 'correct' people).

I may not be able to stop it, but I can complain about every incorrect use I encounter.

As can you, and as you don't agree that it means something other than a lethal electric shock then you think it is wrong to use it to mean that, and it is your duty to correct it.

And yes, I really do mean that - it is your duty, it is everybody's duty, because that is how the cause of human knowledge is advanced, that is how we avoid anarchy and ignorance, that is how we, as a race, ensure that learning is protected and promoted.

Sorry BAS you don't own other people's use of language to mean anything they like.

I?

No - not just I - we all own it, you minty paper!

 

[Stoday]

Where no words have any agreed or official or correct meanings, and anybody can use any word to mean anything they want?

I've read that before in Alice in the Looking Glass:
`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

And yes, I really do mean that - it is your duty, it is everybody's duty, because that is how the cause of human knowledge is advanced, that is how we avoid anarchy and ignorance, that is how we, as a race, ensure that learning is protected and promoted.

So, BAS would prevent English from changing and we would continue to talk like Shakespeare did:

The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slipper'd pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose, and pouch on side,
His youthful hose well sav'd, a world too wide,
For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,
Turning again towards childish treble, pipes
And whistles pedantic and didactic bo-lox

What we really need is something in between — Between Humpty Dumpty and BAS in his sixth age

 

[skenk]

I never mentioned the bulb/lamp issue - if you would care to pay attention this sub-topic arose out of the completely incorrect use of the word "electrocute" to mean something which hardly any authoritative source recognises.

ok you have me there, my mistake, apologies. Have edited out the references to lamp/bulb.

With the inability to grasp what they are talking about, do you find people gravitating away from you in social situations?

No, they don't mind, usually.

life's too short

Is it too short for you to pay attention to it?

Yeah I guess some things need more attention than others and that was a schoolboy error should have been on full alert not to get my facts wrong answering back to the BASinator!

And that of almost everybody else who is not ignorant or incompetent.

Not just mine - also that of almost everybody else who is not ignorant or incompetent.

Have edited out references to bulb/lamp

So you advocate complete anarchy? Where no words have any agreed or official or correct meanings, and anybody can use any word to mean anything they want?

On a technical discussion forum, no. In the right context in art, culture, communication and socially, yes. There already is to the point that people make up and use new words and meanings for existing words and phrases all the time in their daily lives and social groups. (google "slang") If someone casually uses electrocution in the 'wrong' way and all parties present know the meaning, then what's the problem? Are you arguing that people shouldn't be allowed to do this!?

Indeed, but do you agree with the following

1) At one point, the word "electrocute" did not mean anything other than "kill by electric shock".

2) The very first use of "electrocute" to mean "to get, but not be killed by, an electric shock" was wrong.

Yes

If you don't, then quite seriously, are you really arguing that any individual can, at any time, use any word to mean anything they like, no matter if not one other person in the entire world agrees with that usage, and that this is perfectly OK, and not one other person in the entire world is allowed to say "hang on - that's not what the word means"?

Well I do, but to answer your question - No, obviously not anyone at any time can say or write anything they like, that would be ridiculous!

Quick story re: language anarchy: One of the worst schools in Dundee had 3 playground 'languages' in the 90's (eggy, back-2-front and another I forget - I was not at that school) used by the children in order to communicate without teachers being able to understand. Of course they were all immediately banned but it didn't stop their use (for years)!

Neither would I, and neither would many other people here, and neither would many dictionary writers it seems.

Great, another thing we agree on then

I may not be able to stop it, but I can complain about every incorrect use I encounter.

Yes, yes you can BAS if it makes you feel better.

As can you, and as you don't agree that it means something other than a lethal electric shock then you think it is wrong to use it to mean that, and it is your duty to correct it.

In an ideal world, yes but i've got a lot of duties on at the moment and some are more important than others. I'm not going to take the time to email the producer of the video to point out their error.

And yes, I really do mean that - it is your duty, it is everybody's duty, because that is how the cause of human knowledge is advanced, that is how we avoid anarchy and ignorance, that is how we, as a race, ensure that learning is protected and promoted.

ARISE SONS! Go ye forth and correct people on poor word usage; do not stop until every man woman and child of this land knows that to electrocute means to DIE it is your DUTY!!

I'd be happy if we (as a race) could all just get along, not kill each other and have enough food to eat and water to drink. While the cause of advancing human knowledge is all well and good, is correcting incorrect use of 'electrocution' by a layman really a priority? I'm not saying it shouldn't be corrected on an electrical forum (or at least attempt to, here we are 5 pages later!) but in every instance in life? I don't think so.

Tell us BAS, if you were in someone's house working on something electrically related and they casually used electrocute in the wrong way (eg 'He got electrocuted on the hand but he was ok, just very shaken and extremely lucky') what would you say? I feel that 'fascinating story missus but actually if he was really electrocuted he's be dead you idiot' doesn't work for me!

. . .anyway I digress, I could have corrected several people for the time it's taken to me to write this out and I really do not want to be drawn into a 9 page slanging match with BAS, i'm just not up to it (cos i rite slow, ken?), so do your worst.