English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

Mitch

00:07

@Tonepoet What did you want to say? Here is fine.

Tonepoet

@mitch Sigh, I wrote a bit in the other chatroom already and there's much to be said. What I'm trying to say there is that:

1. Merriam-Webster's definition is suspect even by today's standards, since leaving the statement unqualified makes their statement absolute. The A.H.D. actually has a qualifier. I thought I mentioned their definition but I didn't.

2. Not everybody is equally likely to use the same dictionary. If you want to know why a psychiatrist is saying that somebody isn't a pedophile, even though they lust after underage teenagers, you would consult the D.S.M. 5 as a sort of te…

Tonepoet

00:54

@mitch Perhaps you think nobody else cares about point no. 3. There was a point that I didn't either. However I was swiftly corrected by Little Eva very early into my membership on this website.

Mitch

You lost me on the pedophile analogy...your using webster's 1828 version is like using, not even DSM I but some other prior work called 'Diagnostic Manual'

The wayback machine link strategy is interesting... but that's the first ever I've seen it.

Shouldn't you bring that up on meta so that everybody can judge if that is a good strategy?

Tonepoet

I've seen something similar suggested on meta before.

Meta-meta that is.

Mitch

Oh...little eva's advice was to quote the original (in addition to the original link), not wayback. You're very good at moving all the goal posts around.

Tonepoet

@Mitch I wasn't trying to suggest she endorsed my strategy. I was only trying to suggest that she cared about the problem.

Mitch

One counter argument is the concept of single point of failure.

@Tonepoet right. 'caring bout the problem' is not just a moved goal post but an almost entirely new playing field.

Tonepoet

01:01

Anyway, regarding this point, I personally believe that while this isn't an ideal solution, it's better than none, at least insofar as my own posts go.

Mitch

now to point 1, so MW is fallible? AHD is too and so is OED. But I think there is a sense of progress (I may well be wrong but you'd have to provide a lot of evidence), so it seems incoherent to suggest a very outdated reference as respected currently (but it may at a stretch be relevant for the history of dictionaries and definitions)

Tonepoet

@Mitch The question asks if Merriam Webster's definition is wrong. I'm not even going so far as to suggest it is, so much as it might be or if it is even right, that some other dictionary may have been used. So far I've seen a few definitions for afterclap and Merriam Webster's is the only one that implies the word is bad by necessity. You can see on The Free Dictionary and O.D.O. that this isn't requisite

The question even asks if Merriam-Webster's dictionary is wrong: "So, what is the definition and use of the word 'afterclap'? Does it have a positive or a negative connotation? Was Merriam-Webster wrong? Did the writer of the article use the word correctly?" I have no reason to believe that Merriam-Webster captured the nuances of the word properly.

They overprojected the word's progress according to the cross-references, if the word even really has changed in meaning.

Tonepoet

01:36

That is unless every other commonly available dictionary that defines the word is wrong. That's also a possibility, but a far less likely one.

Tonepoet

02:01

@Mitch Also no, not quite. If I had no reason to believe that specific edition was the edition preferred by bible scholars, as I would expect the lead pastor who wrote the article would be, this would be correct. However these are old fashioned people with old fashioned values who may actually have the beliefs you characterized me as personally having. Those are not the only two that extol Webster's.

Cerberus

Scottish Gaelic.

Singular, dual, and plural.

Plural is also known as dogecoin around the Internet (Google it).

Tonepoet

@Mitch Perhaps you would find a link to these amazon search results, of recent verified purchases, specifically made for bible research, as being more persuasive evidence?

@Cerberus Dave would be proud. Not that you know who that is...

Cerberus

The one from Hello Dave?

Hello dave

►

You're My Wife Now! - The League of Gentlemen - BBC comedy

►

Together one scene of ca. 4 minutes.

Tonepoet

@Cerberus No, not quite. This fellow was the op of #music on the sorcery I.R.C. server. He loved his dogecoins, and their inspirational mascot.

Cerberus

Oh, aha.

You've made me rewatch scenes from the League of Gentlemen, best comedy ever.

Tonepoet

02:22

@Cerberus I doubt that this is any great cause of grief, thankfully. Anyway, I think the sorcery I.R.C. server has a Dogecoin chatroom, if that'd be of any interest to you. I'm not completely sure since I never visited it myself. I just saw Dave discuss it in #music sometimes.

Cerberus

Indeed, it is not!

I have to admit I know little about Dogecoin except that it exists.

Tonepoet

@Cerberus Same here. Anyway, mealtime!

Cerberus