On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 06:23, Jeff G. wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > One judges the changes according to whether, in one's opinion, > > > > > > > > > That's just it, with language, how do you judge who's opinion is > > > correct? > > > > > > > Ummm...by considering the arguments? You appear to be contending that if two people disagree, this indicates that neither is correct. I doubt that is what you mean. I'm not sure what you mean. Which arguments are correct? Uh...that's why we're having the argument, because we want to explore that, and perhaps increase our understanding of a given usage, and language in general. Example: I think the broadening of the word "relationship" is damaging, overall, to language, because it encourages people to think they have said more than they said, and heard more than they heard. I was going to write, "...of the relationship to mean..." only I couldn't think of what it has been broadened to mean. Something to do with sex, only it might not be sex, or with romance, though romance might not be involved. I think this weakens the language. Others disagree with me; they believe that it is useful to have a word that is vague and nebulous when speaking of one's lovelife. I have counter arguments. They have counter arguments to my counter arguments. &c. But, you see, I think I'm right. More, I contend such arguments are worth having. Because through them something can be *settled* and *solved*? No. Because through them, knowledge and understanding can be developed and increased.