Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 4th Nov 2006 21:39 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source "I am a linguist by training. Long before I delved into free software and was snagged by the quagmire of marketing, I pondered the marvels of morphology, the grimness of grammar and the splendor of semantics. It is only natural then that my wrangling criticism of industry-speak, in both technical and literary modes, is informed by ingrained linguistic sensibilities, descriptive and proscriptive. Given my background, I find it vexing when open source is used as a verb."
Thread beginning with comment 179009
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: What?
by remiss on Sun 5th Nov 2006 08:39 UTC in reply to "RE: What?"
remiss
Member since:
2006-01-24

Funny..

"The term nonstandard was introduced by linguists and lexicographers to describe usages and language varieties that had previously been labeled with terms such as vulgar and illiterate."

http://www.answers.com/nonstandard

Edit; Btw, I can't understand why he even cares that some people use the word as a verb? If it's meant to be it will be, let people use the language as they please. However, I'm guilty of correcting people myself sometimes, even if it's just grammatically corrections, and yes, i know there's too many commas in this sentence.

Edited 2006-11-05 08:43

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1

RE[3]: What?
by Phloptical on Sun 5th Nov 2006 15:52 in reply to "RE[2]: What?"
Phloptical Member since:
2006-10-10

Using the term "open source" as an action is about the same as using "google" or "xerox". These words (nouns) have made it into the lexicon and since they're so universal, everyone knows what you mean when you say it.

I guess "nonstandard" doesn't bother me. Although I can't think of a situation where I would need to use it.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[3]: What?
by cheezlbub on Sun 5th Nov 2006 19:29 in reply to "RE[2]: What?"
cheezlbub Member since:
2006-07-17

"The term nonstandard was introduced by linguists and lexicographers to describe usages and language varieties that had previously been labeled with terms such as vulgar and illiterate."

right... the statement *then* goes on to say: "Nonstandard is not simply a euphemism but reflects the empirical discovery that the varieties used by low-prestige groups have rich and systematic grammatical structures and that their stigmatization more often reflects a judgment about their speakers rather than any inherent deficiencies in logic or expressive power. Note, however, that the use of nonstandard forms is not necessarily restricted to the communities with which they are associated in the public mind. Many educated speakers freely use forms such as can't hardly or ain't I to set a popular or informal tone. • Some dictionaries use the term substandard to describe forms, such as ain't, associated with uneducated speech, while reserving nonstandard for forms such as irregardless, which are common in writing but are still regarded by many as uneducated."

Which simply means that nonstandard forms are not part of the prestige dialect. No where does it suggest that they aren't words.

If we take apart 'irregardless' it seems almost like the speaker is trying to make a stronger form of 'regardless' especially if we look at the context in which it was spoken.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1