On 12/10/17 17:50, Robert J. Hansen wrote: >> The observation that one, some, many, or all people use a linguistic >> construct in an incorrect way do not change the fact that it is >> incorrect. > > It quite definitely does. Unlike, say, French or Icelandic, where > there's an actual institution charged with the development of the > language, the *only* definition of correctness in English is found in > whether it conforms to everyday usage in the community in question.
Your argument is unsound, because the inference is unjustified. The possibilities that a language is regulated by an official body or defined by majority usage are not exhaustive. Since you are talking about the definition of the English language, and noticed that there is no official definition, then I contend that there is no _definition_ of the English language at all. However, from this does not follow that one individual or a majority are allowed to dispense of any rules and do as they please while claiming that they are speaking English. Instead, one must apply the well-known rules of English and use common sense in determining which words one will regard as legitimate. Leaving this judgment to majority amounts to the ad populum fallacy and to such blatant absurdities as regarding the words “u”, “gotta” and “wanna” as valid synonyms of “you”, “got to” and “want to”. In the case of the word “Linux”, my argument is that this word was introduced (at least in informatics) for a specific use: To refer to a kernel. For an operating system based on Linux, the phrase “Linux-based OS” is already accurate and unambiguous, and for one that includes GNU, “GNU/Linux” is. Thus it is not necessity, but plain sloppiness what explains it use as something else. Hence that I hold that any other use should be rejected as illegitimate, in analogy with the sloppiness behind the aforementioned aberrations (“u” for “you”, et cetera). As a point of contrast: in the case of mathematics, it is necessary to either coin entirely new words or use a pre-existing words with new meanings. However, in this case it is justified because coining a new words for each concept would require possible hundreds of words specific to mathematics. The consequences are bad on all sides: First this abundance of words would be hard to remember. Second, mathematicians would hardly agree on a single new word for each concept leading to diverging terminology. Third, the abundance of strange words would contribute to the perception of mathematics by the general public as an intimidating and incomprehensible subject. In short: Your argument "_many_ people use “Linux” to refer to any Linux-based operating system, therefore it is correct English” is a big mistake. -- Do not eat animals; respect them as you respect people. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+to+(become+OR+eat)+vegan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
