PSA: The word "aesthetic" is a noun, not an adjective.

File: Troll Face_IRL_younger_problem.jpg (46KB, 498x760px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 498x760px

If you weren't such ignorant nigger, you'd have been aware of the fact that language constantly evolves.

>>12625055
you are gay


saw what i did there ?

>>12625060
>teenagers on the internet using buzzwords theyve just read for the first time because they dont have the mental capacity to describe things is the same as languages adapting and evolving over the course of years

hmm i see

>>12625064
I would LITERALLY beat the shit out of you if I could Anon. I would LITERALLY (not figuratively) beat you within an inch of your life and leave you on the doorstep of heaven's gates if the opportunity ever presented itself. I need you to know that I LITERALLY typed this post out with nothing but malice in my heart, Anon.

See what I did there?

File: Screenshot_20170722-161904.png (216KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 1440x2560px

>>12625055
?

>>12625066
Where do you think all the "adapting and evolving over the course of years" occurs? I'll give you a hint, it occurs within youth culture, wherever said culture occurs.

>>12625055
Wrong, it CAN be used as an adjective, but not in the way braindead teens do. You can speak of something's aesthetic property.

It does not however mean "cool" or "pleasing" or "beautiful"

>>12625060
Descriptivist scum should be shot on sight. Yes it evolves but that doesn't excuse misinformed retardation caused by misunderstanding a 2013 internet meme

File: 779e9e5a6790264dc1e17917f3c1c1bb--fresh-girls-style-star.jpg (80KB, 736x1104px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 736x1104px

>>12625118
When you use aesthetic as an adjective, what aesthetic are you referring to? Look at the example they used.

>the pictures

If there were any real pictures, you'd be able to notice the tone, the quality, the lighting, the atmosphere it conveys, etc.

Context is important when it comes to those things.

>>12625129
Languages can evolve, doesn't mean we have to get lazy with it.

This board was better when everything that was appealing wasn't just classified as "aesthetic" with no real analysis to understand what made it so appealing.

>>12625118
Yeah, while "aesthetic" is a noun, its adjective form is more commonly used. Looking into the etymology of both forms would be interesting, but I have a feeling the adjective form came first, given the ending of the word (compare "aesthetic" to "realistic," "hyperbolic," hysteric," etc.)

>>12625148
>shitting on descriptivism
If you want someone to tell you how to use language, maybe move to France.

>>12625149
>Languages can evolve, doesn't mean we have to get lazy with it.
A lot of language changes (and writing system changes) come down to ease of articulation, so if we want to be dicks about it, language probably evolves far more often due to laziness than other factors.

>>12625153
GHet mailurgh eblodfru ek Orpfeir dan ghards sizle? Dhyeim ghucte podleus, fucking faggot

>>12625055

I'm an artfag and at art school when things were described as aesthetic this was used as short for 'solely beautiful/lacking substance', when transferred to fashion I read this very much the same way. Simple/safe, but usually elegant and pleasing to the eye.

>>12625155
Language is a system that relies on cultural exchange. If you're the only asshole doing something within a language (maybe to attempt a tepid argument), then you're going to need to be okay with everyone ignoring you.

>>12625153
so your a english teatcher and one a youre students turn in a paper wroten like this. not only that ,but all a the othr students all so made the same mitsakes on there papers. clearly thes children our just agents of the evolution of langage and grammer, so you give them al A+s and pat there backs

http://wilson.med.harvard.edu/nb204/AuthorityAndAmericanUsage.pdf

DFW left Descriptivism's asshole wide, bloody, and gaping back in 2001. Time to let go.

>>12625169
Or...I establish at the start of the writing task that our language has different registers and corresponding audiences (who can have fairly rigid expectations), and while using emojis or whatever is acceptable in text messages to their friends, those same features aren't acceptable in their papers. The only caveat to this is if the student had a sound rhetorical reason for using the feature, but most college undergrads can't accomplish such a feat, so I don't that situation would arise often.

>>12625173
>a post-modernist is railing against descriptivism
I think you may need to re-read the article.

>>12625177
Why would you willing subject yourself to a Babel-ification of your language? Why would you take the path of direct democracy when we've far surpassed it with the underlying philosophy of a republic? We should subject ourselves to our language unless making a point, not the other way around.

The role of a dictionary in a descriptivist language is both paradoxical and impossible. Where do you draw the line between one person making a mistake and half the population making that mistake? Where do you draw the line and finally list the word's new definition? Unless you accept a level of prescriptivism, you'd need to log every single mistake any speaker of that language ever made in their speech

>>12625182
I think you may need to both actually read the article and actually learn what DFW was before saying something as stupid as what you just said, buddy.

>>12625182
you're retarded

>>12625157
I pity you and those that pay for your educators wages.

>>12625187
If we buy into even a bit of what Derrida et al. were saying, the task of the dictionary is always already an impossible one.

But I don't draw any lines regarding our language as a whole because I'm a single person. Should I deem the English spoken abroad as incorrect in pronunciation, syntax, etc. because it might differ from mine, even when the group that uses it agrees on the terms of its usage? Ultimately, I'm not in control of the language. If a new lexical item gains enough cultural inertia to spread and wind up in dictionaries, then how on earth would I mount a defense? The only measure of perscriptivism I can divvy out is in writing, where I—were I a teacher—could train students to recognize audiences and audience expectations.