> But these are adaptations of existing words to new meanings. I wasn't > clear. "Cab" was not invented to refer to taxicabs; it was applied to > cabriolets and other horse-drawn vehicles, and then to motor vehicles, > and now only to motor vehicles for hire and usually equipped with a > (ta-dahh!) taximeter to calculate the fare. (Oh, also to a part of a > locomotive, etc.) "Carriage" meant an act of carrying or the manner of > carrying for centuries before it was applied to a vehicle. Between this list and the Cthulhu lists I'm on, I'm gaining a multitude of new information... :) > Language does much, much more than express truth-value meaning. > It demonstrates group membership (I talk like one of OUR people; that > person doesn't), attitude (I scorn the person I am talking about: "and > then what do you think the b*****d did?"), and many other things. A > language without slang is like a kitchen without pepper. Heh. I like... And don't get me wrong. I'm not saying slang is bad, or that words should stay stagnant. Aside from the fact that it's impossible, it would be boring. However, I also feel that many english speakers have become "lazy" over the years (I've been training myself to not be as lazy in this regard...:) This, in some areas, is perfectly fine with me. In other areas, I feel it devalues the language. > What remedy do you recommend? I actualy don't. I'm just being philosophical. And, I tend to like arguments. Good for the brain, and I learn alot that way... :) > Of course not. That's my point. What's yours? I mean that literally, not > as challenge. Now I'll have to go back and see if I can find an earlier email... but it seemed (and I could be wrong, as I've been responding to multiple people:) that someone mentioned that it's people's usage of a word that defines it's meaning, as in the sense of the word "hopefully." People start using it, and it generates a word. Think of "higgley-piggley" as well. Not a real "word" per se, but people started using it, and now it's out there. Perhaps I should have expanded the "dictionaries getting together to change the word 'fig'" to "english-language users get together to change..." If you're saying people can't just get together and change a word that's already been established, what happened to nauseous? 'Course, it's early now, and I'm probably confused on who's saying what...:) (as an aside, I'm enjoying the discussion. If I get too annoying, just let me know...:) Chris