From: Kevin <darkintent@...>
Date: 2011-04-14T01:18:58+09:00
Subject: Re: functional paradigm taking over

--0016e6db2978561e2d04a0cf2a19
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

No a jargon or slang does not put aside the language it exists inside of.
 To try and argue this is ridiculous, the definitions used within the
standard language do not become invalid just because you speak to a specific
group.  Now you accuse me of moving the goal posts because I utilize
standard as opposed to nonstandard meanings of terminology to point out that
one may feel free to call any program a language? A jargon only supersedes
the standard usage of a term when it is no longer specific to a single
group, at which point it stops being a jargon.

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Phillip Gawlowski <
cmdjackryan@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Kevin <darkintent@gmail.com> wrote:
> > @Phillip: Yes they are applicable, jargon does not supersede the rest of
> the
> > language.
>
> jargon*, n.:
> - (uncountable) A technical terminology unique to a particular subject.
> - (countable) Language characteristic of a particular group.
> - (uncountable) Speech or language that is incomprehensible or
> unintelligible; gibberish.
>
> Yes, it does. That's why jargon develops in the first place.
>
> >  Especially not when the subject being discussed (In part) whether
> > or not Excel can be considered a programming language is answered by
> those
> > definitions.
>
> language*, n:
> (computing, countable) A computer language.
>
> That's the definition that applies. If you want to use another one:
> that's called "moving the goal posts".
>
> >  Why do you think that the word language is even a part of the
> > phrase "programming language"?  It is because of the way the word
> language
> > could be and is used by people who are not a part of this field.  It was
> not
> > in any way random that such a phrase came to describe tools like Ruby, or
> > C++.
>
> *facepalm*
>
> Language is ambiguous to start with (compare US English and American
> English on the use of the word "fag" in slang). Words evolve, and
> change meaning (see also: "gay").
>
> "programming language" is used for the same reason that airplanes use
> a similar terminology to ships: The words match, at least roughly, and
> get everyone on the same page with ease. From there, additional
> meanings develop. Just ask Google about how happy they are that
> "googling" is a verb now, or ask Kleenex about what "trademark
> dilution" means.
>
> Or are you really suggesting that, since the words are the same, a
> captain of a ship is as qualified to navigate the seas as a ship's
> captain, just because the spelling is the same? Is driving a car the
> same as driving a nail? Is a meter the same as 1 meter?
>
> This whole thing is called "semantics". You are, in fact, arguing
> semantics (in English: meaning). Badly.
>
> * definitions sourced from Wiktionary.org
>
> --
> Phillip Gawlowski
>
> Though the folk I have met,
> (Ah, how soon!) they forget
> When I've moved on to some other place,
> There may be one or two,
> When I've played and passed through,
> Who'll remember my song or my face.
>
>

--0016e6db2978561e2d04a0cf2a19--