Jump to content

words and their meaning


michel555555
 Share

Recommended Posts

So yesterday i comented in my cc about how the word heresy comes from the the greek word haerisis and that one possible translation of this word is choice and that, by definition then, herasy means that you are being accused of choosing your own fate or making a choice rather then blindly following dogma.

 

I'm not sure why but after this another of my clan mates had a blow out and when so far as to say that i was "poisoning the minds of impretionable young people" might not be the exact words but its close enough. He then started to bring up other hot topics such as marriage to say that words have meaning and that they are actually important to some people. I'm not complaining or anything because I have this same discusion with a co-worker every other week and am used to it now, but it did get me thinking.

 

Why is it that people will defend the definition of certain words such as justice, mariage, religion, ect as if it is a fight for life and death.

 

Justice for instance, in the middle ages it consisted of any peasant being accused of a crime to be tortured because it was believed that they were not inteligant enough to tell the truth. Another instance is the inocent unless proven guilty concept that we use today. It was actually rare in most medival societies for this to be true and you either had to prove that you were innocent or be summilarily sentanced by the local ruler, dictator, ect.

 

Marriage and religion are the other two big ones but theres enough topics about those two that i'll leave them alone.

 

So why is it that people try to defend a words "meaning" even though that meaning has been constantly shifting throughout history?

michel555555.png

[spoiler=click you know you wanna]
Me behave? Seriously? As a child I saw Tarzan almost naked, Cinderella arrived home from a party after midnight, Pinocchio told lies, Aladin was a thief, Batman drove over 200 miles an hour, Snow White lived in a house with seven men, Popeye smoked a pipe and had tattoos, Pac man ran around to digital music while eating pills that enhanced his performance, and Shaggy and Scooby were mystery solving hippies who always had the munchies. The fault is not mine! if you had this childhood and loved it put this in your signature!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. Ever since my English taught me that you can't use hopefully the same way you use ideally, I cringe every time I hear it.

Matt: You want that eh? You want everything good for you. You want everything that's--falls off garbage can

Camera guy: Whoa, haha, are you okay dude?

Matt: You want anything funny that happens, don't you?

Camera guy: still laughing

Matt: You want the funny shit that happens here and there, you think it comes out of your [bleep]ing [wagon] pushes garbage can down, don't you? You think it's funny? It comes out of here! running towards Camera guy

Camera guy: runs away still laughing

Matt: You think the funny comes out of your mother[bleep]ing creativity? Comes out of Satan, mother[bleep]er! nn--ngh! pushes Camera guy down

Camera guy: Hoooholy [bleep]!

Matt: FUNNY ISN'T REAL! FUNNY ISN'T REAL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The study of the origins of words is etymology, this is not the same as the meaning of words. Language is always evolving, think of Shakespearean English - in Shakespeare's era that was standard spoken English. Since then it evolved gradually to what we know know. In a couple of hundred years, the English we speak now will seem archaic.

wild_bunch.gif

He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart,

and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.

- Aeschylus (525 BC - 456 BC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

Quote

Anyone who likes tacos is incapable of logic.

Anyone who likes logic is incapable of tacos.

 

PSA: SaqPrets is an Estonian Dude

Steam: NippleBeardTM

Origin: Brand_New_iPwn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do care too much about words. The purpose of talking is to communicate messages. There's no real point arguing over the definition of a word if every party concerned knows and understands the message being communicated. People will defend a word's meaning because they take language too seriously and worry too much about what it is and not what it's for. Human intelligence comes at a price.

redarrows-1.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get the problem, you explained the origin of a word, and this guy went crazy about you not respecting justice?

 

No i was just using justice as an example. His original rant was about marriage but theres already to many topics about that and religion floating around so i thought i'd go with something els.

michel555555.png

[spoiler=click you know you wanna]
Me behave? Seriously? As a child I saw Tarzan almost naked, Cinderella arrived home from a party after midnight, Pinocchio told lies, Aladin was a thief, Batman drove over 200 miles an hour, Snow White lived in a house with seven men, Popeye smoked a pipe and had tattoos, Pac man ran around to digital music while eating pills that enhanced his performance, and Shaggy and Scooby were mystery solving hippies who always had the munchies. The fault is not mine! if you had this childhood and loved it put this in your signature!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defining and contextualizing words like murder, marriage, abortion, freedom, and so on are some of the most important things that our government, and any society for that matter, can do. Millions of people have died for their take on certain words, to trivialize their cause is nothing short of shortsighted.

[iNSERT "I R EATIN TEH SHIX ATM" BILL COSBY SIGNATURE GIF HERE, LOL]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do care too much about words. The purpose of talking is to communicate messages. There's no real point arguing over the definition of a word if every party concerned knows and understands the message being communicated. People will defend a word's meaning because they take language too seriously and worry too much about what it is and not what it's for. Human intelligence comes at a price.

As the purpose of language is to facilitate communication, that is, the conveyance of meaning, then it is the speaker's responsibility to ensure that the words they use communicate the ideas that they wish to communicate. There is no reason not to take language seriously when there is a chance that people will misinterpret your ideas. Among friends who are accustomed to speaking to each other, miscommunication isn't a huge issue, but ideas must be presented with clarity when talking to other people.

 

Incidentally, there is an idea which comes up in linguistic philosophy that suggests that it is impossible for listeners to understand what a speaker wishes to communicate via language, as there will always be a discrepancy between how the listener decodes and interprets words, and what the speaker thinks their words actually mean.

 

Incidentally, fix your spelling, OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do care too much about words. The purpose of talking is to communicate messages. There's no real point arguing over the definition of a word if every party concerned knows and understands the message being communicated. People will defend a word's meaning because they take language too seriously and worry too much about what it is and not what it's for. Human intelligence comes at a price.

As the purpose of language is to facilitate communication, that is, the conveyance of meaning, then it is the speaker's responsibility to ensure that the words they use communicate the ideas that they wish to communicate. There is no reason not to take language seriously when there is a chance that people will misinterpret your ideas. Among friends who are accustomed to speaking to each other, miscommunication isn't a huge issue, but ideas must be presented with clarity when talking to other people.

 

Incidentally, there is an idea which comes up in linguistic philosophy that suggests that it is impossible for listeners to understand what a speaker wishes to communicate via language, as there will always be a discrepancy between how the listener decodes and interprets words, and what the speaker thinks their words actually mean.

 

Incidentally, fix your spelling, OP.

 

I agree on everything, but what's up with the Ph.D like language?

 

And I still don't really get the problem. You explained to him where the word heracy comes from, as in you explained its origin, but the person you explained it to flipped over the meaning of marriage? Or did he get mad over the meaning of heracy, that you were somehow not taking it seriously by explaining its origin. And come on man, it's marriage, not marridge...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do care too much about words. The purpose of talking is to communicate messages. There's no real point arguing over the definition of a word if every party concerned knows and understands the message being communicated. People will defend a word's meaning because they take language too seriously and worry too much about what it is and not what it's for. Human intelligence comes at a price.

As the purpose of language is to facilitate communication, that is, the conveyance of meaning, then it is the speaker's responsibility to ensure that the words they use communicate the ideas that they wish to communicate. There is no reason not to take language seriously when there is a chance that people will misinterpret your ideas. Among friends who are accustomed to speaking to each other, miscommunication isn't a huge issue, but ideas must be presented with clarity when talking to other people.

 

Incidentally, there is an idea which comes up in linguistic philosophy that suggests that it is impossible for listeners to understand what a speaker wishes to communicate via language, as there will always be a discrepancy between how the listener decodes and interprets words, and what the speaker thinks their words actually mean.

 

Incidentally, fix your spelling, OP.

 

I agree on everything, but what's up with the Ph.D like language?

 

And I still don't really get the problem. You explained to him where the word heracy comes from, as in you explained its origin, but the person you explained it to flipped over the meaning of marriage? Or did he get mad over the meaning of heracy, that you were somehow not taking it seriously by explaining its origin. And come on man, it's marriage, not marridge...

 

What in the world are you smoking? He didn't use a single word that the common, educated person wouldn't understand. It sounds like the person who got angry was religious and felt that by undermining the negative connotation of the word 'heresy,' the OP was somehow justifying the rejection of religion. Sounds like it was probably an extremely annoying conversation.

 

It's also 'heresy,' not 'heracy.'

dgs5.jpg
To put it bluntly, [bleep] off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do care too much about words. The purpose of talking is to communicate messages. There's no real point arguing over the definition of a word if every party concerned knows and understands the message being communicated. People will defend a word's meaning because they take language too seriously and worry too much about what it is and not what it's for. Human intelligence comes at a price.

As the purpose of language is to facilitate communication, that is, the conveyance of meaning, then it is the speaker's responsibility to ensure that the words they use communicate the ideas that they wish to communicate. There is no reason not to take language seriously when there is a chance that people will misinterpret your ideas. Among friends who are accustomed to speaking to each other, miscommunication isn't a huge issue, but ideas must be presented with clarity when talking to other people.

 

Incidentally, there is an idea which comes up in linguistic philosophy that suggests that it is impossible for listeners to understand what a speaker wishes to communicate via language, as there will always be a discrepancy between how the listener decodes and interprets words, and what the speaker thinks their words actually mean.

 

Incidentally, fix your spelling, OP.

 

I agree on everything, but what's up with the Ph.D like language?

 

And I still don't really get the problem. You explained to him where the word heracy comes from, as in you explained its origin, but the person you explained it to flipped over the meaning of marriage? Or did he get mad over the meaning of heracy, that you were somehow not taking it seriously by explaining its origin. And come on man, it's marriage, not marridge...

 

What in the world are you smoking? He didn't use a single word that the common, educated person wouldn't understand. It sounds like the person who got angry was religious and felt that by undermining the negative connotation of the word 'heresy,' the OP was somehow justifying the rejection of religion. Sounds like it was probably an extremely annoying conversation.

 

It's also 'heresy,' not 'heracy.'

 

I knew I spelled it wrong, just had no idea how else to spell it. And it's not like I didn't understand him, it's just that he seemed to be picking the longest words he can find to say something that could've been said in a simpler way. But yeah, it probably was an annoying conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I knew I spelled it wrong, just had no idea how else to spell it. And it's not like I didn't understand him, it's just that he seemed to be picking the longest words he can find to say something that could've been said in a simpler way. But yeah, it probably was an annoying conversation.

In that case, please rephrase my post in a "simpler" way which doesn't change its original meaning.

 

I type the way I do because I want the meaning of my posts to be as unambiguous as possible, ironic statements excepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do care too much about words. The purpose of talking is to communicate messages. There's no real point arguing over the definition of a word if every party concerned knows and understands the message being communicated. People will defend a word's meaning because they take language too seriously and worry too much about what it is and not what it's for. Human intelligence comes at a price.

As the purpose of language is to facilitate communication, that is, the conveyance of meaning, then it is the speaker's responsibility to ensure that the words they use communicate the ideas that they wish to communicate. There is no reason not to take language seriously when there is a chance that people will misinterpret your ideas. Among friends who are accustomed to speaking to each other, miscommunication isn't a huge issue, but ideas must be presented with clarity when talking to other people.

 

Incidentally, there is an idea which comes up in linguistic philosophy that suggests that it is impossible for listeners to understand what a speaker wishes to communicate via language, as there will always be a discrepancy between how the listener decodes and interprets words, and what the speaker thinks their words actually mean.

 

Incidentally, fix your spelling, OP.

 

Sorry i'm using a new abi word and the spell checker on it stinks.

 

And to clarify my clan mate brought up marriage to try and say that words do have meaning and that I should be more, i think he was trying to say careful about what a words meaning actually was but didn't use such kind language about it.

michel555555.png

[spoiler=click you know you wanna]
Me behave? Seriously? As a child I saw Tarzan almost naked, Cinderella arrived home from a party after midnight, Pinocchio told lies, Aladin was a thief, Batman drove over 200 miles an hour, Snow White lived in a house with seven men, Popeye smoked a pipe and had tattoos, Pac man ran around to digital music while eating pills that enhanced his performance, and Shaggy and Scooby were mystery solving hippies who always had the munchies. The fault is not mine! if you had this childhood and loved it put this in your signature!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I knew I spelled it wrong, just had no idea how else to spell it. And it's not like I didn't understand him, it's just that he seemed to be picking the longest words he can find to say something that could've been said in a simpler way. But yeah, it probably was an annoying conversation.

In that case, please rephrase my post in a "simpler" way which doesn't change its original meaning.

 

I type the way I do because I want the meaning of my posts to be as unambiguous as possible, ironic statements excepted.

 

Meh, I won't bother, like I said, it's not really hard to understand, so just ignore my post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really depends on the situation. There should be no confusion about what a word means when it comes to the government. But as for songs and books, the audience enjoys it when you use words flexibly and there is no harm done if somebody misinterprets something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. Ever since my English taught me that you can't use hopefully the same way you use ideally, I cringe every time I hear it.

 

Now I'm curious...

 

Explain why not?

In Soviet Russia, glass eats OTers.

 

Alansson Alansson, woo woo woo!

Pink owns yes, just like you!

GOOOOOOOOOO ALAN! WOO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. Ever since my English taught me that you can't use hopefully the same way you use ideally, I cringe every time I hear it.

 

Now I'm curious...

 

Explain why not?

Because if you say "hopefully the computer will work" it means as the computer works, it will be full of hope. Ideally means in the best of cases, the computer will work.

 

http://grammar.about.com/od/grammarfaq/f/sentadvqa.htm

Matt: You want that eh? You want everything good for you. You want everything that's--falls off garbage can

Camera guy: Whoa, haha, are you okay dude?

Matt: You want anything funny that happens, don't you?

Camera guy: still laughing

Matt: You want the funny shit that happens here and there, you think it comes out of your [bleep]ing [wagon] pushes garbage can down, don't you? You think it's funny? It comes out of here! running towards Camera guy

Camera guy: runs away still laughing

Matt: You think the funny comes out of your mother[bleep]ing creativity? Comes out of Satan, mother[bleep]er! nn--ngh! pushes Camera guy down

Camera guy: Hoooholy [bleep]!

Matt: FUNNY ISN'T REAL! FUNNY ISN'T REAL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.