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
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours 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).

  • Ydna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day 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
      0
      ·
      2 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

  • MrPnut@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 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

  • wieson@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    I was one of the first years to have the new spelling rules.
    It used to be, that a letter appearing more than twice in direct sequence would be cut to just twice. But that was lifted and is now just how many it should normally be. Examples: Schifffahrt, Brennnessel, Seeelefant.

    It used to be, that “dass” could also be spelt “daß”, but the rules for “ss” and “ß” were made clearer and more concise.

    They also changed the way words could be split at the end of a line. If there was a double consonant in-between the syllables that were to split, the first syllable would take both consonants but now they are split evenly.
    immer is split im-mer and not imm-er
    But ck makes an exception: knackig is kna-ckig instead of old knak-kig

  • likebudda@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

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

  • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 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.

  • sem@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    In US usage, it used to be that a situation could be “fraught with” complications, or hidden meaning, or difficulty, but it had to be “fraught with” something.

    These days, the British style of saying that the situation is simply “fraught” seems to be way more popular than before.

    Efficiency at work i guess. Maybe some cunning linguist can explain.

  • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Literally and Crescendo are my vocabulary pet peeves. Both have stupidly evolved to include definitions that mean the exact opposite of their true meanings.

    Literally is annoying, but Crescendo is impossible. That is a specific musical term with an unalterable meaning. It means a gradual increase in volume, but it has come to mean a climax. Something will be described as “it rose to a crescendo,” and that is simply wrong. Something can crescendo to a climax, but not the other way around. If you change it to mean the climax, you can’t crescendo to a crescendo, s what’s the word for gradually increasing the volume?

    Besides, it’s a musical term, and musicians will define musical terms, not illiterate civilians.

    And if Literally can also mean “similar to,” then what word can be used to literally mean Literally?

  • nore {she/her}@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    I don’t know if this fits the question, but in Brazil the “Portuguese-Language Orthographic Agreement of 1990” only started to take effect in 2009 (after I was born), in a transition state, and in 2015 it became official and obligatory.

    The changes that I still fumble with are diacritics (e.g. “Idéia” -> “Ideia”) and hyphens (e.g. “contra-regra” -> “contrarregra”).

    • Dagobah@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Most definitely fits the question, also TIL about the PLOA. Are Brazilian and continental Portuguese different enough to be called dialects? Given its much larger population does Brazil have an outsized influence on Portuguese language development through media?

      • nore {she/her}@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        does Brazil have an outsized influence on Portuguese language development through media?

        I don’t know since I only interact with other Brazilians, though from what I can remember of early to mid 2010s internet, European Portuguese was preferred over Brazilian Portuguese (as in, when a website or app had a PT translation it’d wouldn’t be PT-BR).
        Nowadays, I believe both are commonly available.

        Are Brazilian and continental Portuguese different enough to be called dialects?

        The most common way to refer to Brazilian Portuguese that I’ve seen is that it’s a variant of European Portuguese, I’m not a linguist so I don’t know the difference between a variant and a dialect.

        • Dagobah@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Interesting, thanks for taking the time to reply! How do European Portuguese sound to the Brazilian ear? Like, as an Australian, New Zealanders sound sort of plucky and goofy to me, Americans are brash and loud, Canadians are laid-back, received English sounds polite or formal etc. I’m sure they all think Australians sound like sandpaper 😅

  • Fleppensteyn@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Pronouns getting weird, especially when and is added, like “for him and I” or “her and I’s house”.

    Also excetera for etcetera and mischievious for mischievous

    • ratofkryll@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      I get irrationally angry any time I hear “I’s”. I can tolerate most other grammar issues, but something about that particular butchery of English drives me up the wall.

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s just indolence.

        It’s like people who put an S on the end of ‘e-mail’ to pluralize it.

  • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    i’ve never learnt to use tildes in spanish lol i mean i know some rules for that but i just never cared, most people dont use them while texting unless the corrector adds it.