SERA!

[Ryko]

The long and short of it is that your example sucked.

[Ksandra]

Of the 3 words you used as examples, assuming the middle one is the n-bomb, only 1 wasn't originally a word meant to define something else. There's a difference between adding an extra definition to an already existing word (see: slang) and using a completely incorrect word then trying to pass it off as proper. If someone were to call a female dog a bitch they'd be using the proper definition...

gay meant happy now means homosexual, bitch means female dog. N was actually supposed to be the f word(fag***)...I'm getting tired... which was a bundle of sticks.

You seem to think I am arguing for "proper words" as you put it. BOTH definitions are correct. One might be the original definition, but it is not incorrect to say bitch to a woman. You would not /facepalm, if someone used the f word and say to them "dude that means bundle of sticks!"


I think "legit" is a better word to use than "proper" both definitions of said words are "legit" because both meanings are conveyed when used.

Irregardless is equally "legit" because if spoken the meaning is conveyed and understood. If you want to call it slang, that's find, slang doesn't make it wrong though.

[Ksandra]

I am going to bed though I keep having to type things over and over again cause too tired.

[Howard Roark]

are you guys talking descriptive versus prescriptive grammar?

that argument edns with people stating which camp they are in, there is not other resolution

systems of thought change like a pair of pants

[Ryko]

My camp has nothing to do with it. It's a problem with calling one thing something it isn't.

[Howard Roark]

unfortunately that's baseless when the popular usage of a word can often justify its "correctness", this would be the argument of the descriptive grammar's camp

prescriptive seems to be the side you're taking, irregardless (lol sorry) of ksandra's alleged poor examples, prescriptive being how the words are 'supposed' to be used



also if you aren't making this point at all, then that is completely due to me not paying attention to more than the last 2 posts if that

[Ryko]

She was taking exception to the fact that irregardless gets noted as improper, or rather incorrect, by the same dictionaries she thumps to justify the word's existence (which I never attacked). I pointed out the simple fact that since the word is improper, the dictionary was correct to describe or note it as such, as slang and other colloquialisms do not get a free pass to be used as proper speech based on the virtue of it being in the dictionary in the first place. She jumps from backing the dictionary to disregarding it in the same thought process, shit's silly.

I'm taking exception to her taking exception, you could say.

[Day]

If its in the dictionary it's a word, irregardless, shut the fuck up.

[Charismatic]

The point is that, well, that's not quite correct.

[Day]

Really? I thought the dictionary was like you know a book of words and their definitions. I tried to look up skdfgauygd in there and it wasn't there, because it's not a word.

[Charismatic]

Sometimes we think wrong, you are forgiven.

[Day]

irregardless, it's a stupid argument only nerds would make

[Charismatic]

You are correct, but keep in mind that only nerds would be posting here... so it kinda makes sense.

[Day]

Well maybe I should clarify, only the uncool nerds would have that argument.

[Ryko]

If its in the dictionary it's a word, irregardless, shut the fuck up.

How do you skip the post right above yours then say something that wasnt even the fucking point, dick.

[Day]

You seem mayad

[Day]

How do you skip the part where I said only uncool nerds would have this arguement, dick.

[Ryko]

Because I've not once attempted to say I was cool. How do you participate in the argument (really fucking poorly) then bitch about the people who are having it, dick.

[Day]

be mad idc

[Day]

irregardless, what does it even matter, you just hate being wrong.