From: Chad Perrin Date: 2007-07-21T05:54:15+09:00 Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Religion (was: god 0.1.0 released) On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 12:19:39PM +0900, Todd Benson wrote: > On 7/19/07, Hal Fulton wrote: > > >To use "daemon" and "demon" to mean different things may be common > >usage, but I consider it an outgrowth of ignorance.(I'm not calling > >you ignorant, Chad, I'm just saying I think ignorance is the origin of > >this false distinction.) > > Well, if you subscribe to the meme concept, I would posit that > ignorance has nothing to do with it. You can drill the 'correct' > meanings of words into everyone, but the most popular use of a word > will determine its future. Hey, it's fab, man! > > I've only followed part of this very interesting conversation, so as a > preemptive strike, I apologize if I'm missing the core concept here. > But really, IMHO, descriptivism is where it's at with understanding > and using living languages (or even dead ones too?). Words and the > grammar that puts them in a discernible order will continue to avoid a > definitive rule set as best they can. > > I imagine that you and Chad are irritated by such words as > "irregardless", irregardless of which ism you ascribe to :) I'm particularly annoyed by "irregardless" because anyone that pays attention to the construction of words at all can actually piece together an understanding of what the world would *really* mean, based on its parts -- and no amount of "descriptivism" will change that unless the meaning of the root word itself is altered. . . . in which case "regardless" would come to mean something else entirely. Since that hasn't happened, "irregardless" is still, in current usage, *wrong*. -- CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ] Ben Franklin: "As we enjoy great Advantages from the Inventions of others we should be glad of an Opportunity to serve others by any Invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously."