Hacker News Reader

Comment by ludston | Hacker News Reader

I enjoy collecting little things like this to annoy the grammar gatekeepers. Why say "regardless" when "irregardless" means the same thing but also annoys prescriptivists? "Ironical" instead of "ironic" and "less" instead of "fewer".

Now that I know, "comprised of" fits in this category, it's definitely going to be a part of the everyday lexicon.

View on HN

The use of prescriptivists as though it was a sports team is ironic. It's actually you who's pushing a certain use of language despite knowing that it's ambiguous. You're the one enforcing your language on others.

Communication through language seems like it's by its very nature enforcing your language on others.

Bạn nghĩ tốt hơn nếu chúng ta giao tiếp bằng nghĩa mọi người không thể hiểu ko?

... and being antisocial. What's the point of doing things with the sole motivation of annoying people?

Firstly because it makes me laugh, but also it's because it's actually gatekeeping other people's language that is excluding and antisocial. I firmly believe that we ought to accept the language that others use when the speakers intention is clear, even if they "don't speak good". The uneducated don't deserve scorn by default just because nobody rapped them across the knuckles when they used "coz" instead of "because". And that's ignoring even that many of these grammatically incorrect but often used phrases come from minority groups and shitting on people for using them is actually a subtle avenue for (probably unintended) racism.

Except for if someone hasn't been educated what 'ironical' means, in which case you'd like to dunk on them.

If somebody doesn't know what ironical means they are either a child, ESL or one of the lucky 10000 and therefore don't deserve any disdain?

Too late to choose whether or not to be disdainful, you've already excluded them from understanding you.

It's never too late to learn the meaning of a new word. Why just yesterday I was reading The Count of Monte Cristo, where the author used "felicity" in a context I'd not seen before. Fortunately in my very pocket was a powerful device that includes a dictionary unsurpassed in the history of mankind, and thus my brief ignorance was swiftly overcome! Perhaps the author meant to exclude me? Oh dear...

Ambiguity in conversation leads to problems every day. Leisurely reading is another world entirely.

Mm yes indeed. Context is important isn't it?

This literally begs the question.

You are pure entropy!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com