No.20654
>>20653How is the category of words made useless by adding expressions with meaning to it? What does the category impart upon those words that belong to it?
No.20655
>>20654Because defining the category as "Any word that has a meaning to any person" means any array of letters can be considered a word, thus the category may as well be "any array of letters". This is why it's necessary to distinguish words that are actually part of the language's vocabulary if the category is to be exclusionary to anything (aka useful)
No.20656
>>20655>the category may as well be "any array of letters"It may not, because not any array of letters communicates information. The letters "HsHsJjjl" communicates nothing to no one, but "zellig" communicates something(the show) to someone (people on this site).
No.20657
>>20656It communicates something to me, therefore it's a real and actual word on par with "detection" or "car".
No.20658
>>20657What does it communicate? What does it refer to?
No.20659
>>20658it means 2 cylinder engine
No.20661
>>20660that a concession or..?
No.20663
Why has the IQ of this board jumped by 20 points today?
No.20666
>>20661It's a reply to a bad faith argument.
I do not accept your statement that zellig isn't a real word. I believe it to be a real word for the reasons I have stated at length above. I doubt you actually use the word "HsHsJjjI", but if you insist on the validity of such a term to refer to engines, then it is a term that refers to twin engines.
No.20668
>>20666It's reductio ad absurdum, showing that your definition of what belongs in the category of a "real, actual word" is absurd. Being able to categorize any array of letters as a legitimate word of the English language just because someone said it has meaning makes the category pointless, as it just becomes "any array of letters"
>hey mate, how's fixing that hihihihijjjj coming along?<that's not a real word>yes it is, it means 6 cylinder 80 horse power engine.<I'll be damned, it IS a real word!^absurd
No.20669
>>20667Also I'm not a dutchman, I'm slavic
No.20671
>>20668Then what separates a real word from an array of letters? Is it not the meaning assigned to the array of letters? How come [apple] is a real word, if not for referring to the fruit? If you refer to the fruit by [elppa], will not that become a word synonymous with [apple]?
Where's the line between a word and an array of letters, and why is it important?
No.20672
>>20671some sort of official recognition, wide spread usage and consensus. That's what makes a word "real" and not just gibberish
Basically, if it's got a red line underneath it when I type it it's fake
You can get into adoption and birth of languages and what not but that's not really relevant to the conversation at hand.
No.20673
>>20672>widespread usage and consensusSet the benchmark for how widespread that usage ought to be. If this site, which encompasses a considerable part of the Ongezellig community, uses zellig to refer to the show, is that not sufficient consensus? Or do you want to involve the whole population when a new term is used by the scientific community, too?
>official recognitionI really do not understand why this should be the case. As the English language, for example, evolved into its modern form, the king did not publish a book on what words were real and what words were not.
>>20671>and why is it important?This question has yet gone unanswered. What harm would come of using fake words? Why is the line between a word and a set of characters without meaning so important to determine and keep?
No.20674
>>20673The benchmark and authority is up for debate and I am not obligated to give a precise definition considering the alternative leads to reductio ad absurdum.
As for why is it important? It's not, really. There is no harm in using fake words, but they are fake, and thus not "actual words", as OP stated.
No.20676
>>20674Just going to jump in, do you not think implicit validation via common use by a community is at the very least not qualification enough to make "zellig" a slang word?
No.20677
>>20676Hi I'm this
>>20673 guy, as he said debating the benchmark is pointless.
>>20674>It's not, really.I think we should let the 20 hour autism fest stop and leave the request thread be a request thread.
Zoot should add a philosophy board.
No.20678
>>20676It's really not about what I think and about the fact that he insinuated op was wrong and by association that I was agreeing with someone who was wrong and therefore obligated me to disagree with him.
To answer the question doe, unrecognized slag still doesn't fall into the category of legitimate words of the English language
>>206779 hours albeit
No.20679
>>20677The idea one can out-autist a member of an imageboard dedicated to a 20 min dutch cartoon was very silly to begin with.
No.20735
How about Mymy scuba diving?
No.21437
>>21435embedded 2022 Buffalo Mass Shooting live stream archive within the metadata btw
No.21438
>>21434This nigger gives you bad advice (which is kind of expected from a 'cord user), if you did exactly what I requested it would be much better. Not that the realisation is bad, you did the wrong thing well.
No.21569
>>21444Nigger-killing gem
No.21649
>>21434>>21439>>21444Mymy looks tactical and dangerous. I like it
No.21685
>>21434>der 'cordYou've got to stop, faggot
No.21912
>>21877Ay that's me, thanks drawDEITY
No.21913
Draw her solemn and reflecting to herself about being Japanese or something.
No.22685
>>20650Errm, that image has been debunked sweetie
english is a descriptive language, not a prescriptive one
therefore "zellig" becomes part of the english vocabulary once used and understood as a concept by other english speakers
this means ""meaningless"" words like "grok" can become english
No.22692
>>22685debunked by the oxford dictionary doe
No.22824
>>22822That's too specific xe won't do that.
No.23581
>>23491shiniest gem of the day
No.23603
>>23491darkest coal of the day