Saturday 27th April 2013 3:50 pm
I've been reading The Time Traveller's Guide to Elizabethan England and yesterday I came to a section about language. It's interesting to see how words have changed their meaning, such as cheap, which meant market and several which meant separate.
Language is changing all the time, but it doesn't mean we have to like it.
For instance, my parents hate "bored of", but I feel that if you can be sick of or tired of something, you should be able to be bored of it on the basis that it all means the same thing. On the other hand, I think that anyone who uses "could of" comes across as uneducated. It all depends on your perspective.
My particular dislikes at the moment are excite and disappoint when people actually mean excited and disappointed. To me it just makes people sound like an idiot and/or sixteen year old valley girl who will only pass exams if they're about fashion or make-up or celebrities.
The word that amused me was one I saw when I was roleplaying on LJ, which was enable used to mean encourage. I always wondered why people didn't therefore use disable to mean discourage. It's just such an obvious next step... (I never got the courage to try and use it myself though, not least because online no one would be able to tell my tongue was in my cheek).
I like the subtle differences we have in words, to end on a more positive note. Such as arse and bottom meaning the same thing, but kicking arse and kicking bottom don't come across the same way. Also how Americans talk about the Doctor wearing suspenders, which leads to much more interesting mental images for anyone from this country.
Categories: NaBloPoMo, Random stuff : Language, NaBloPoMo |
Comments are off for this post |