Marklar
If a word can have as many meanings as we assign to it. Can was assign every meaning to one word?
Submitted 10 months ago by Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world to [deleted]
Comments
yukichigai@lemmy.sdf.org 10 months ago
Asafum@feddit.nl 10 months ago
bcgm3@lemmy.world 10 months ago
TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Marklar yea, marklar.
over_clox@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.world 10 months ago
The the the the the, the the the the the the the the; the the the the the the.
Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck
kinttach@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 10 months ago
I saw a mechanic throw down a wrench and shout “the fuck-fucking fucker’s fucking fucked AGAIN” and we all knew the deadline needed a push.
StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org 10 months ago
You’ve certainly shown the diversity of the word.
Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 10 months ago
mother-motherfuck
mother-motherfuck-fuck
motherfuck, motherfuck,
Noinch noinch noinch.
Soapbox1858@lemm.ee 10 months ago
I am groot.
slingstone@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I am Groot.
circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 10 months ago
Professional academic linguist here. (Yes, that’s a thing.)
Words have the meanings that communities apply to them. There is no governing body over word meanings. There can be a tension (e.g. two groups using the same term in different ways), but that doesn’t really mean that the word means both. Words mean different things to different groups. It has to be this way, for epistemic and pragmatic reasons.
In that sense, meanings are not consciously assigned. So the answer to your original question could be “no”.
But in another sense, all meanings are possible for any given meaningful sequence around the world. Which means, in principle, given infinite communities of practice, a word could have infinite meanings. A stretch, of course.
milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Or, to put it another way, (unprofessional academic linguist here), a word has meanings by what you mean by it, and what the listener understands it to mean.
In a sense, it can mean anything you want it to. In another sense, it can mean anything the listener/reader interprets it as. Most useful though is when you mean the same meaning that the listener understands.
And for “accepted/official meaning”, that’s just a community all agreeing on a meaning. Optionally with a recognised group (e.g. dictionary writer) affirming certain meanings as accepted in the community.
circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 10 months ago
I think you’re getting at intended meaning versus received meaning. Which is totally a thing, but intended meaning is far less well understood than accepted meaning (not necessarily at the word level, but definitely at the sentence level).
At the sentence level, companies pay big money to have tens of thousands of sentences manually annotated for intended meaning (to try and train AI to be able to discern it automatically).
GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Professional academic linguist
🧐
circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 10 months ago
It means I’m not a translator and I don’t work on one particular language.
BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Gary, Gary… Gary?
lousyd@lemmy.sdf.org 10 months ago
Alas, yes.
SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
skibidi
Skydancer@pawb.social 10 months ago
ICastFist@programming.dev 10 months ago
Theoretically, yes. In practice, no. Suppose
blabecomes a everything word. If anyone asks whatblameans, you say it meansbla. The other person won’t understand, you persist onbla bla blameaningbla means bla, by which bla can mean anythingand you realize that it just doesn’t work, because if it “means anything”, in reality it means nothing.urda@lebowski.social 10 months ago
You sure as squantch can!
Brodysseus@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Came here looking for this
GroundedGator@lemmy.world 10 months ago
My squantch in squantch you can’t squantch that in public.
dan1101@lemm.ee 10 months ago
ACK! ACK ACK ACK ACK. ACK ACK.
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 10 months ago
He comes in peace!
RunOnSmoothFrozenIce@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Ook.
M137@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Than*
yesman@lemmy.world 10 months ago
The simple answer to your question is no. Language is as much about distinction and exclusion as it is about description. The word “circle” stands for the description and properties of the circle, but would be incoherent if it did not also exclude straight lines.
You can often find examples where some things are considered premium or desirable not for the properties is has, but for what it lacks. Just think of all the products marketed to not have something like BPA, fat, sugar, Carbs, gluten, asbestos, lead, and even cruelty.
Contramuffin@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Let me introduce you to Goptjaam, probably the closest “language” that fits what you mean: youtu.be/ze5i_e_ryTk
Gremour@lemmy.world 10 months ago
There’s a sci-fi movie from USSR, “Kin-dza-dza”. The natives of another planet in another galaxy were telepathes, but used language consisting of only a few words. “Koo” was for almost any word, “kiu” for swearing, “ketse” for marches (most valuable asset) and a few more. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin-dza-dza!
lvxferre@mander.xyz 10 months ago
In theory, yes. In practice, no.
To assign a meaning to a word is a social matter. You’d need to have more than just one person accepting that that word conveys that meaning.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 10 months ago
fnord
Kolanaki@yiffit.net 10 months ago
That’s what the word “aught” means. Literally “anything at all.”
skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
That’s “jawn” in Philly. It can stand in for literally any object. “These jawns are expensive” “Make a left at the jawn” “Jawn said he ain’t coming” “This jawn is packed”
janus2@lemmy.zip 10 months ago
every time I see a transplant refer to an animate object as jawn they get mocked raucously by the phillyborn
Kingofthezyx@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Or “da kine” in Hawaiian pidgin.
xmunk@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
I aught aught that aught I?
dnick@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Yes
Sanctus@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I thought we did this with buffalo
bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 10 months ago
Hoogla!
spittingimage@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Siegfried@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Yes yes, yes yes yes. Yes, yes yes yes yes, yes yes yes!
sailormoon@lemmy.world 10 months ago
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 10 months ago
Yeah here and AskLemmy get so many replies I’ve sadly had to abandon a few posts due to the sheer number of replies. I really like to reply to everybody that takes the time to comment but in swear I’ve had posts with 400+ comments and I feel overwhelmed.
Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Im just glad I really didn’t need an answer for this one and have just been enjoying reading the replies.
ricecake@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Smurf yeah we can.
mipadaitu@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Smurfing hell… I thought I was going to be the smartass in this thread.