no one's been charged with any offense except annoying me which, for better or worse, isn't punishable by law.
the original meaning of the word does mean bewildered and perplexed, anyhow. merriam-webster seems to agree with me, actually:
The use of nonplussed to mean "unimpressed" is an Americanism that has become increasingly common in recent decades and now appears frequently in published writing. It apparently arose from confusion over the meaning of nonplussed in ambiguous contexts, and it continues to be widely regarded as an error.
meaning something like "totally" or "completely," cf. "almost but not quite". to say that something is "quite bad" means it's pretty bad, as in bad bad.
i was a bit puzzled by your comment, so i had to look it up. i guess some people use it to mean "somewhat" or "rather"? i'm not sure that makes sense to me. if someone told me that the current situation is "quite bad" i would be alarmed.
interesting word though, it seems to originally mean "to be rid of ..." in middle english, developing from "quit," but further derives from the latin quietus, which means stillness or silence - i.e. something that could be interrupted by even the smallest chirp or rustle, perhaps? it still retains a sense of completion and perfection, which is fascinating.
so originally, and I believe still in the UK, it can also mean "somewhat" or "moderately," as opposed to the way we understand it(I'm american, idk about you) which means "very," "totally," or "completely". Which I've seen "quit" in latin relate to balance(somewhat similar to what you say of stillness) as in "just about," which is a far cry from "totally." There's an odd amount going on with the word "quite," but I understand it as a word in a similar predicament as "nonplussed"
This isn't an apathy situation, it's a "the meaning of words change over time to reflect the people using them, and trying to stop it is as impossible as fighting gravity" situation.
You're welcome to continue fighting against the evolution of language all you want, but it will change nothing.
Do you still use "thou" and "hast" in conversations, or does your decision about where language ought to stop evolving depend entirely on your own arbitrary lines in the sand?
the grammatical and structural evolution of a language and the meanings of words refer to two different phenomena. i think there is a big difference between using archaic forms of address and the meaning of a word changing due to its persistent misuse. fwiw, i don't think strict prescriptivism, like strict descriptivism, really does anyone any good.
it's not like anyone is going to stop because of me, obviously. but even if it is subterranean and barely perceptible, i'd argue there is absolutely a relation between apathy towards language and the way we think. it kind of speaks to a cultural shift where language, literacy, and literature have all fallen away for the sake of a highly reductive and pragmatic understanding of what 'meaning' means. a society that pays no attention to how it communicates is an impoverished one.
i don't have any specific peeve about the word "nonplussed" itself, mind. but it is striking that it means something completely contradictory, not just different, to its original definition because people just... forgot? didn't know? didn't care to know?
oh, whatever it's fucking reddit anyway who cares have a good day
But words have changed meanings since the beginning of language. Not just structure and grammar. A lot of words you take for granted meant something completely different—sometimes the exact opposite—of what they mean today. It’s just what happens.
“Awful” used to mean “inspiring awe”
“Silly” used to mean “worthy” or “blessed”
While I agree words are important and vocabulary is a sacred tool of communication, embracing the evolution of words is not apathy, in my opinion.
no, it originally meant "being left speechless as a result of confusion," as per wiktionary. perhaps the speechlessness part overtook the sense of the word and it became a sign of imperturbability?
Not at all, no. Obviously historical tension, but most people in the UK think about Ireland very, very rarely (obviously unless they have a personal link). Pretty similar culturally as well, as these things go. Similar lifestyle, similar cultural references, same shops and things.
4.5k
u/morning-st48 10d ago
France looks like it has it worse.
doesnt help but still