Pre-Order Thread

LeSamourai said:
The vinylz vs vinyl debate from a linguistic perspective:

Language Log » Peeve emergence: The case of "vinyls"

languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu

Basically, it's an example of "countification," something that's happened to lots of words over the years.
Click to expand...
People get the meaning “wrong” so much it becomes acceptable. The same thing has happened to “literally”. So many people used it as a point of emphasis to describe a figurative hyperbole that the word now has multiple meanings.
 
TenderLovingKiller® said:
People get the meaning “wrong” so much it becomes acceptable. The same thing has happened to “literally”. So many people used it as a point of emphasis to describe a figurative hyperbole that the word now has multiple meanings.
Click to expand...

Literally- not actually literal since 1769.

Or like how we now mainly apply awesome to things that mostly do not fill us with awe.
 
TenderLovingKiller® said:
People get the meaning “wrong” so much it becomes acceptable. The same thing has happened to “literally”. So many people used it as a point of emphasis to describe a figurative hyperbole that the word now has multiple meanings.
Click to expand...

As annoying as it may or may not be to live through the point in time where that happens to a particular word that is also a fact of language. It’s a live medium that rejects stasis always in a state of change. The way we speak now has little relation to how we spoke even 50 or 60 years ago and with worldwide, rather than national or even only local, communication that’s only going to accelerate. Embrace the chaos! Or you could go back and learn old Norse or something.
 
Joe Mac said:
As annoying as it may or may not be to live through the point in time where that happens to a particular word that is also a fact of language. It’s a live medium that rejects stasis always in a state of change. The way we speak now has little relation to how we spoke even 50 or 60 years ago and with worldwide, rather than national or even only local, communication that’s only going to accelerate. Embrace the chaos! Or you could go back and learn old Norse or something.
Click to expand...
I’m not complaining. I find linguistics and etymology quite interesting enough so that I’ve read a few really entertaining books by Mark Forsyth on the subject.
 
TenderLovingKiller® said:
I’m not complaining. I find linguistics and etymology quite interesting enough so that I’ve read a few really entertaining books by Mark Forsyth on the subject.
Click to expand...

Yeah me neither. The only thing that i don’t like is the homogenisation of language and culture. I love the quite stark differences that you get in even small countries and it does feel like that’s slowly dying right now.
 
Lee Newman said:
Is justs goings tos adds ss tos everythings movings forwards, justs tos bes safes.
Click to expand...
1642983981681.gif

JonnyH said:
Some classic presciptivist vs descriptivist arguments in here.

Language evolves. What matters is communication. You understand both vinyl and vinyls in the given examples. Thus, both work.
Click to expand...
If that were the argument, fine. I’m only taking issue with trying to wedge “vinyls” into established (spoken or unspoken) rules of English to try to make it “correct” in this context. It’s not; having said that, does it matter? Not especially, to me, but the original premise is flawed. We can all agree for example that “rekkids” successfully communicates an idea too, but that doesn’t make it “correct” until or unless it achieves much more mainstream usage.

I also think that (to my knowledge at least) “vinyls” isn’t an artifact of a specific cultural vernacular a la AAVE, so there’s not as much imperialist baggage in debating whether it should be used.
 
Joe Mac said:
As annoying as it may or may not be to live through the point in time where that happens to a particular word that is also a fact of language. It’s a live medium that rejects stasis always in a state of change. The way we speak now has little relation to how we spoke even 50 or 60 years ago and with worldwide, rather than national or even only local, communication that’s only going to accelerate. Embrace the chaos! Or you could go back and learn old Norse or something.
Click to expand...
I know there are plenty of people here who can relate, but I definitely did not speak at all 50 years ago.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
View attachment 126099


If that were the argument, fine. I’m only taking issue with trying to wedge “vinyls” into established (spoken or unspoken) rules of English to try to make it “correct” in this context. It’s not; having said that, does it matter? Not especially, to me, but the original premise is flawed. We can all agree for example that “rekkids” successfully communicates an idea too, but that doesn’t make it “correct” until or unless it achieves much more mainstream usage.

I also think that (to my knowledge at least) “vinyls” isn’t an artifact of a specific cultural vernacular a la AAVE, so there’s not as much imperialist baggage in debating whether it should be used.
Click to expand...

I almost exclusively use "rekkids" when writing or typing. Its worked every time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top