I often hear that the meaning of words is bound to change if

>>9434677
>ignorant masses
but words are used to convey meaning, op. as long as they can do that, theyre doing their job.

>>9434736
but what is the purpose of the meaning a word is created for if people will just twist it to fit their needs in the future, even ignoring already existing vocabulary

>>9434677
> could care less
This has literally the exact opposite meaning to what is intended, yet retards use and understand its meaning... go figure.

>>9434749
words are just tools, if the masses end up changing the definition of a word like you describe theres nothing you can do about it. society has deemed it a better use of the tool. You shouldn't/can't force language to be used.
look at the whole ms mrs thing and the preferred speech legislation in canada

>>9434769
>has deemed it a better use of the tool.
>better
based on what? the meanings don't change for the better, they only change so people can keep throwing it around without ever caring for its meaning
Maybe you can't force someone to use the right word but the least we could do is force professional or state indentities to respect the meaning of words instead of polluting the world with more misinformation and stupidity
I mean, there isn't even a good argument to change the meaning of a word when there is an already existing one for it, it's completely baffling to do so

>>9434779

Words are arbitrary anyway, many of the words we use today certainly didn't originally mean what we use them for, and it doesn't really matter. Words exist as a basis for the exchange of meaning. As long as you can reasonably understand what someone else is saying, words are doing their job. Caring about more than that is certified autism

>>9434677
>god damn
>retarded
>fucking
Are you doing this deliberately? You're using a bunch of words which have obviously acquired new meanings since they were 'invented'. Physician, heal thyself or just stop being so god damn fucking retarded

File: 1393989988361.jpg (111KB, 848x900px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 848x900px

>>9434784
>>9434787
I am well aware this is nothing new and that there is a lot of words we use commonly that had different meanings in the past, but that just made me realize the importance of having some manner of respect for words and their original meaning
is it really autistic to desire some manner of line for the alteration of words?

>>9434822
As anon said, words are tools, and tools change over time.
Horses did a lot for us. Horses are great. That doesn't mean we should abandon automobiles to readopt them.

>>9434822
It's not artistic, but the changing of words is nothing to worry about. Most of these kinds of changes take place over a pretty large span of time, so you'll probably only ever witness a few different words slightly changing meaning.

>>9434677
>Facism comes to mind with people turning its meaning into whatever fit them, it was the same with Communism not so long ago.
A forced change is different than a natural change.

We use language to codify our perception of reality, not the other way around.

When a meaning gets twisted it's almost never a coincidence or mistake, because language can never be independent from its structure (life).

When fascists and communists play with words they're not abusing language, they're abusing reality and there's no official institution that can stop that without bending the rules themselves.

There are many institutions with the mission of preserving the structure of specific languages (Accademia della Crusca comes in mind for Italian), but they continuously have to make way for new rules and meanings.