This perspective is so exhausting to me. We roll down windows, dial phones, use a clicker, and write on blackboards (or chalkboards, or whiteboards) that are actually computers. None of these are faithful literal descriptions of the actual actions involved, and none of them are wrong.
Biscuits are a long established name for the food, because it resembles the more accurately named, twice baked equivalent, just as a smart board resembles a chalkboard.
Precision is often important- telling a carpenter that two things are plumb makes sense, but it’s not wrong or inaccurate to say level when you’re talking to a general audience.
We have shepherd’s pie (lamb) and cottage pie (beef) and fisherman’s pie (fish). They’re all constructed in much the same way but the name refers to the contents.
It’s just a misunderstanding and it’s not important but there is a real non-obsolete reason these dishes have the names they have.
That’s absolutely fair, I was really more responding to the biscuits thing, tone of “you didn’t know what you were making,” and generally prescriptivist vibe.
Almost all of them extend from an action that still holds true:
Roll down windows - you still get manually operated windows, and the motor rolls in electric ones.
Dial phones - the verb has a separate definition to the noun.
Use a clicker - not sure what you mean here, but things do still click.
Write on computers - a piece of writing can be typed or hand-written. It’s about making a marking on a surface.
Blackboards/chalkboards/whiteboards - the first two are generally wrong, whiteboard is the only one that would apply to a digital surface.
I’ll throw in another one:
Windmill - they’re not windmills, they don’t mill anything. They’re wind turbines.
Some of these terms stem from marketing people, who are only a couple steps down from estate agents in terms of the evil they bring into the world. This should not be celebrated.
Many of these can be considered acceptable, even in the ways that they’re wrong, but it’s still acknowledged that they are wrong. With biscuits, people think they’re right.
Biscuits are established because people were wrong. That doesn’t mean people today are right.
Your example of plumb and level doesn’t work, because plumb is still considered the correct term for vertical alignment. People will generally know what you mean when you say level, but the other term is still considered more correct.
“Biscuits” are nice, but they’re not really biscuits, they’re savoury scones. Meanwhile, most store bought long shelf life cookies are biscuits, in spite of being sweet, while fresh cookies are generally not. Similarly, tomatoes are fruits, not vegetables.
You can say it the wrong way all you want, but when it goes against the core definition it can never truly be right. I literally can’t stand it being so.
I’m sorry you can’t stand it be so, but that’s literally how language works.
I’m especially sorry because I’m just as dedicated to descriptivism as you seem to be to prescriptivism- the incredibly petty baby inside me upon reading your initial comment wanted to invent a dish called Sheperds Pie (spelling intentional because I’m a jerk) with steak to fuck with prescriptivists. I’m certainly not proud of that, I just think it shows how automatic my reaction to the idea of language being hemmed in is.
I’m sorry you can’t stand it be so, but that’s literally how language works.
I think you wooshed on my joke about the definition of “literally”.
the incredibly petty baby inside me upon reading your initial comment wanted to invent a dish called Sheperds Pie (spelling intentional because I’m a jerk) with steak to fuck with prescriptivists.
I’m all for that! The difference is you know you’re doing it wrong and are choosing to do that, rather than just saying the wrong thing.
I did whoosh on it. I was really excited for you to be just as passionate as I am, just in a diametrically opposed way, and I might have used similar words. Womp womp
This perspective is so exhausting to me. We roll down windows, dial phones, use a clicker, and write on blackboards (or chalkboards, or whiteboards) that are actually computers. None of these are faithful literal descriptions of the actual actions involved, and none of them are wrong.
Biscuits are a long established name for the food, because it resembles the more accurately named, twice baked equivalent, just as a smart board resembles a chalkboard.
Precision is often important- telling a carpenter that two things are plumb makes sense, but it’s not wrong or inaccurate to say level when you’re talking to a general audience.
This is not like those other things.
We have shepherd’s pie (lamb) and cottage pie (beef) and fisherman’s pie (fish). They’re all constructed in much the same way but the name refers to the contents.
It’s just a misunderstanding and it’s not important but there is a real non-obsolete reason these dishes have the names they have.
That’s absolutely fair, I was really more responding to the biscuits thing, tone of “you didn’t know what you were making,” and generally prescriptivist vibe.
Almost all of them extend from an action that still holds true:
I’ll throw in another one:
Some of these terms stem from marketing people, who are only a couple steps down from estate agents in terms of the evil they bring into the world. This should not be celebrated.
Many of these can be considered acceptable, even in the ways that they’re wrong, but it’s still acknowledged that they are wrong. With biscuits, people think they’re right.
Biscuits are established because people were wrong. That doesn’t mean people today are right.
Your example of plumb and level doesn’t work, because plumb is still considered the correct term for vertical alignment. People will generally know what you mean when you say level, but the other term is still considered more correct.
“Biscuits” are nice, but they’re not really biscuits, they’re savoury scones. Meanwhile, most store bought long shelf life cookies are biscuits, in spite of being sweet, while fresh cookies are generally not. Similarly, tomatoes are fruits, not vegetables.
You can say it the wrong way all you want, but when it goes against the core definition it can never truly be right. I literally can’t stand it being so.
I’m sorry you can’t stand it be so, but that’s literally how language works.
I’m especially sorry because I’m just as dedicated to descriptivism as you seem to be to prescriptivism- the incredibly petty baby inside me upon reading your initial comment wanted to invent a dish called Sheperds Pie (spelling intentional because I’m a jerk) with steak to fuck with prescriptivists. I’m certainly not proud of that, I just think it shows how automatic my reaction to the idea of language being hemmed in is.
🤷
I think you wooshed on my joke about the definition of “literally”.
I’m all for that! The difference is you know you’re doing it wrong and are choosing to do that, rather than just saying the wrong thing.
I did whoosh on it. I was really excited for you to be just as passionate as I am, just in a diametrically opposed way, and I might have used similar words. Womp womp