Language is always changing. At one point ‘an apron’ was ‘a napron’ while words like ‘literally’ are no longer literally literal. What are some language battles that have been lost in living memory and what are some others you predict will soon occur?

Edit: Non-english examples very welcome!

  • chunes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    People no longer double-space after sentences.  No one cares that further compares metaphorical distance and farther compares physical distance.  Most people seem to think that joining two independent clauses with a comma (a comma splice) is just fine.  Things are now done on accident instead of by accident.  Compute used to be something you did; now, it’s something you rent.  People seem to have given up on less being used for uncountable things and fewer for countable things.  Now they just use less for everything.  People these days are enamored ‘by’ something instead of with it (or of it, for our British friends).

  • CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 days ago

    Australian English language is now largely Americanised, a process that started in the post-war era is now mostly complete.

    • Terms such as ‘gaol’ have been widely replaced by ‘jail’.
    • ‘Programme’ is mostly replaced by ‘program’.
    • A ‘car bonnet’ is likely to be called a ‘hood’.
    • ‘Play lunch’ is mostly replaced with ‘recess’.
    • ‘Pusher’ is mostly called a ‘pram’
    • ‘Lacker band’ is now mostly just ‘rubber band’.
    • ‘Boomer’ no longer means kangaroo, but instead ‘Old person.’

    I’m not really bothered by it or anything, but it’s been interesting to see it shift even over my lifetime.

  • RavuAlHemio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    7 days ago

    From my perspective, literally being used for emphasis does not actually change its meaning, it’s simply hyperbole.

    If you complain that you’ve been “waiting for hours”, even though it’s been 45 minutes, that doesn’t change the meaning of “hours”, you’re just exaggerating.

    Hyperbole is a stylistic element; style is a completely different level of language than grammar/spelling/semantics (word meanings). As another example of style, ending a sentence with a preposition is grammatically correct but stylistically not recommended.

    • AnarchistArtificer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      The OED actually includes the definition of literally as being what used to be the opposite of its definition nowadays, so I think that it does count as an auto-antonym (a word that means both itself, and the opposite of itself)

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      I agree, but there was a period in the '00s, or maybe early '10s, where the meaning was changing because you only ever saw it mean “figuratively”, to the point where dictionaries included both meanings. I think it’s settled back to its original meaning now though.

  • Ydna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    Ending sentences with propositions, and getting them jumbled around. My work does it in their advertisements and i cry every time.

    “See what classes you can register for.” Or modifying it to be worse; “see what classes you can register for fast”

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      I still use them. I find it makes reading and finding sentences easier in a paragraph. There was a study that it had an impact

  • NathanDerWeise@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 days ago

    While not totally gone, German’s genitive case (which is used to show ownership) is becoming less and less common. They have both the genetive case as well as their equivalent of " 's " - which is just “s,” if you’re wondering. Example:

    Der Herr der Ringe.

    The Lord of the Rings. It would normally be “die Ringe,” but it becomes “der” in the genetive case.

    Another transition in German is that the “formal you” is being used less and less frequently. I understand this is the case for a few other European languages as well.

    • Dagobah@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Interesting! Thanks for a non english perspective. Is German language development Influenced by widespread english competency? Are Germans becoming less fussy about certain rules in favour of some of English’s simpler or more flexible constructs? (Not to suggest that English isn’t a Byzantine mess of a language itself!)

      • NathanDerWeise@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 days ago

        Unfortunately, I’m not a native German speaker. So, take this with a grain of salt.

        I will say that the German language has always been open to loan words from other languages. And, according to my German teacher (who is native), the biggest change recently in that regard is NOT how loan words are accepted BUT how quickly they are accepted these days. New loan words are being added all the time, especially by young people. He said that generally the word will be accepted as it is at first, and then over time it well become more “germanified” and used more like native words. He said this process used to take decades but now it can happen in less than a year. An example of a germanified English loan word is “chatten” which means “to chat,” just like English. Ich chatte, du chattest, wir chatten. (I chat, you chat, we chat.)

        I believe the simplification of grammatical structures (like the abandonment of genetive) has been going on slowly over centuries and is mostly unrelated to contact with English speakers. But, there is likely some influence there.

        • Dagobah@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          Really interesting stuff! It just goes to show that even without ‘authorities’ such as the French Language Academy, loan words end up becoming modified and molded by their adoptive language. I’m learning Japanese and it has so many loan words going all the way back to the dutch. Some are barely recognisable for example computer is パソコン = pasokon = personal computer.

  • likebudda@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Apple put the nail in the coffin for adverbs when “Think different” let illiterates think they were speaking correctly.

  • KaChilde@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 days ago

    “Casted”

    The past-tense of cast is cast. “The fisherman cast their line into the river.” “The actor was cast in the leading role.”

    Casted makes you sound like a child.

    • Dagobah@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      I think any word sounds more childish with ed on the end! “I wented fishinged at the beached and casteded”

  • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    “Reticent” used to mean ‘reluctance to speak’, or, ‘holding your tongue’, but in the last decade I saw it being used more frequently as a straight up synonym for ‘reluctance’. I wonder if people maybe think it’s a more authoritative sounding word?

    It’s not a change of convenience or cultural drift, just a sign of people reading less and subconsciously trying to hide it, I think.

  • MrPnut@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    The one that bothers me most (heard a lot in the software dev world) is when people say process-eez instead of processes, even if it is technically a word now, like ain’t