Did you know....(random odd fact)

Ahhhh.... What is the world coming to.

 

No Webster and the power that be are right.

New words are added all the time as a language grows and evolves. Just because you say so or the power at be says so does not make it any less than of a word.

An example of words that have been added in our life time
"google"
"google" verb, use web search to look something up on the internect.

"Go google it"
Very difference than Google.com or go to Google.

Remember English is always changing adding new words and changing meanings.

 

I think company or product names should not be allowed as official words.

I'm wondering when they'll add "refudiate"...

 

While I understand that our language is constantly evolving, I refuse to stop yelling at people who say "irregardless."

 

Yes. But it isn't a word.

 

not unirregardless.

 

is there really a difference? the first instance of an evolved word is a mispronunciation/mispelling. it remains a 'mistake' until it becomes common or someone uses it in some 'serious' writing

 

Umm hate to tell you this but evolution of a word and new words includes misspelling.

So it is still a word and correct. What is defined as a new word I believe has a new word being added officially to our language about ever 20-30 mins.

 

They do that to help us stay orientated.

 

It's not in the OED, it's not a word.

I don't mind dictionaries attempting to keep up with contemporary usage -- that's what they do -- but 'conversate'? I've never heard it used and I don't see the utility of including it in the lexicon.

 

Neither do I.

It seems that this is a catering to the lowest common denominator. There is a perfectly valid word still in use.

If converse is phased out of our lexicon for "conversate" it would actually destroy some of etymological clues we have for the meaning of that word and its origins.

I'm all for an adaptive lexicon (eg "googling" should be in the dictionary because it describes a particular type of activity that transcends a traditional search), but new words have to offer some advantage. Contractions, clarifications, expansions, etc, are valuable. "Conversate" adds nothing.

 

Interesting. Until this thread, I have never heard or seen the word 'conversate' before. Of course, now I'll begin seeing/hearing it all the time.

 

A bit like "flammable" and "inflammable."

 

So if frequent misspelling means a word becomes correct, does this mean I have to give up my my crusade to get people to use the correct versions of the following:
- your, you're
- to, too
- there, their, they're
- accept, except
- then, than

Because the misuse of those words has become so frequent, I'm almost beginning to think that I am wrong. They are actually misused more than they are used correctly in my experiences. In fact, I haven't seen someone use the correct "you're" in ages...it's almost as if it has disappeared from language.

Sorry, that does not make it correct.

And does this mean that to "axe" a question will now become correct? Because I'm not ready for that.

 

I agree. Simply because a word is common and ubiquitous doesn't mean it's correct.

 

pretty much the case. Words get phased out over time. As the English language evolves some of those will be combined in multiple meaning.

Take for example the word you. It used to have 3 different words

You used to have
you -formal some one higher than you in terms of respect
you - informal friend (thee)
you - for group kind of like ya'll

All those have been reduced down to just you. Now I do not know all of the older types of you but it shows the point. Words change over time.

 

Actually, thou was the singular form (nominative) and thee was the singular form (accusative). Ye was the plural (both nominative and accusative). The transition to you for all forms was originally from a misreading of the Anglo-Saxon thorn character, representing 'th'.

 

So the etymology is:

to converse is to have a conversion.

to conversate is to have a conversation.

I personally think people from Canada should call themselves Canadans. They're not from Canadia like I'm from Australia.

Only written though? I heard spake once that 'th' is/was pronounced 'y', so thou and you were pronounced the same but written differently. And thee was said yee. Which is still in use actually, as in "what're ye lookin' at?" or "does ye mother sow?" in various parts of the UK.

Basically, all yee and yoo, so it's always been us making the mistake of saying thou as thow instead of yoo in movies and suchlike.

 

You forgot "yore"
Also
- its, it's

And a bunch more:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

 

I could care less.

 

I'm punching you from across the internet. My fist is flying at you through the monitor.

 

Possibly the one that is most difficult to keep straight is the difference between "effect" and "affect".

But I will not be happy until a dictionary contains the word I came up with, "eschereal" - or did it come up with me?