If you've ever corrected someone about their use of a word

[yesthattom]

(especially ME on my LJ or blog), then please view this lecture about dictionaries by a real authority:

(Especially around 3 minutes in)

By the way... I’ve never laughed so hard during a lecture about dictioniaries.

(Thanks, Pop!Cast)

Update: Put the video behind a cut because for some reason it starts playing when viewed, not after clicking "play"

Comments

[shaggy-man.livejournal.com]

This video seems to be set up to play without me even asking it to, which is Very Poor.

[ninaf.livejournal.com]

heh I was just going to comment about that. I turned my sound on and was trying to figure out why English is better but decided turning the sound off was a better choice.

[qwrrty.livejournal.com]

It also doesn't appear to permit you to skip forward or behind, despite the slider. I agree, worst embedded video ever.

But it's a great talk! Maybe someone with more streaming video smarts than I can put it on YouTube, too :-) (I found this talk from TED (http://youtube.com/watch?v=J4VzuWmN8zY) on YouTube, which is similar to this presentation and covers a lot of the same ground but is not quite the same one.)

Anyway, while I agree with her that dictionaries are descriptive and not prescriptive, that does not mean that it is not appropriate from time to time to correct someone on their use of a word. :-) Arguing over, say "regardless" vs. "irregardless" is the worst kind of lexical masturbation, but if someone uses "bemused" to mean "amused" again I will hit them with Erin McKean's big hammer.

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

My point in posting the video was that she, an expert, agrees that people that worry so much about "regardless" vs. "irregardless", "bemused" vs. "amused" and similar things need to get over it. Language changes over time.

[qwrrty.livejournal.com]

Right, and my point is that I think you've misunderstood her. :-)

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

+1, this coming from someone with a MA in Anthropology, specifically sociolinguistics. Not an expert, but at least a 1st dan! ;) I also think Tom has not understood that she's slapping the dictionary-fixated, not those who wonder what the heck someone means and has to figure out whether the speaker really did mean "infer" or "imply" every time someone mixes them up.

Getting dictionary fixated is a sign one doesn't understand cause and effect. However, deciding that whatever sounds come out of one's mouth are fine because "that's how language works" is to fail to comprehend that the function of language is communication. Communication requires reasonable overlap of the participants' culturally-contextualized meanings of those noises, which does, from time to time, necessitate some social correction.

Also, "irregardless" may "be a real word" but do not forget that, while it may now "be a real word," it, like all language use, also serves as a marker of social status. One may be comfortable in its use, but not in that use's social side-effects.

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

Here's what you've misunderstood.

When I post an important message and I get fifty fucking comments about a fucking misplaced comma rather than a response to the question that you or they KNEW i was asking, it fucking pissing me off.

[la-directora.livejournal.com]

There is a huge difference between "If you've ever corrected someone about their use of a word" and "When I post an important message and I get fifty fucking comments about a fucking misplaced comma rather than a response to the question that you or they KNEW i was asking". Just because language CAN change, and over time often does, doesn't mean, "So no rules are important, just ignore them and let people talk whatever way they want." Continually using a word incorrectly does not suddenly make the incorrect meaning correct. So there are times and places when the discussion of the correct use of words is appropriate and, I think, absolutely necessary.

A picky correction about the misplacement of a comma at the price of never responding to the question in which the comma is contained is perhaps not that time or place.

[awfief.livejournal.com]

Right, but obviously we know what a speaker means when they say "nauseous" instead of "nauseated" -- but if they say imply but mean infer, or say slander but mean libel, there are actually different meanings.

I will continue to correct people when what they say is wrong, and if you put a misplaced comma that changes the meaning I might point it out.

I have the same problem too, I post an important message and nobody cares (or people take a tangent) and then I post something stupid and get 30 comments.

I'm with you...

[happypete.livejournal.com]

...I want people to know when they're saying something that could easily be significantly misunderstood...The point of using language is--ultimately--to transfer things from one person's brain into another person's brain, generally with an eye towards effecting [Yes, I HAD to do it!] some response.

If they are inadvertently using the wrong word, they risk getting an undesired response. That response might--as another poster pointed out--include creating a negative impression on the listener or reader.

Re: I'm with you...

[la-directora.livejournal.com]

*nod nod nod* It's like letting your friend know she's gotten her skirt stuck in her pantyhose. You don't do it to make her feel bad. You do it so she doesn't face FURTHER embarrassment in front of someone who cares about her less just because you didn't say something.

There is also the matter of the tone used when making the correction. If it's done in a snitty way, it will probably NOT be interpreted as helpful. (And, to return to the original complaint, if it's done in the context of responding to a blog post, dealing with the actual content of the post would be good, too.)

[qwrrty.livejournal.com]

Yegad, that pisses me off too. The runner-up is when I describe a task I'm trying to solve, and carefully explain my restrictions, what I've done to solve it, and why it's not working, and get ten people following up with some variant on, "Why are you trying to do that?"

Judging from this post, your communication issues may go beyond simple dictionary arguments, but that doesn't make the lexicographical pissing match any more palatable. :-)

[crs.livejournal.com]

Yes, please put this behind a cut so that my headphones don't keep making that beeping sound whenever I go to my friends page.

I keep hoping 19 more posts come through...

[srakkt.livejournal.com]

Tom. Seriously. Cut, please.

[nooks.livejournal.com]

Fuck Pop!Cast for making their video start on every page view—it's incredibly annoying if you click through and use the back button a lot.

[tactisle.livejournal.com]

Or hit "Refresh" a lot.

[knell.livejournal.com]

AAAAIIIEEEEAUTOPLAYVIDEOSMAKEITSTOPCUTPLEASE!

Okay, I wasn't the first to say it, but I tried to say it in a different way.

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

Done

[whitebird.livejournal.com]

Thanks for posting this. I love her presentations, she's just so very good at them.

Have you altered your copyright notices yet? :)

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

I will for future books. I also want to permit mechanical reproduction just to see the publisher's reaction!

[whitebird.livejournal.com]

But only by lexicogical abacus?