Originally Posted by lawyerdad
Yeah, there's an informal definition for "irregardless", too. Which is just another way of saying some dickhead on the internet has memorialized the fact that a lot of morons don't even know what the hell they're saying.
If you're one of the 3% of the population who know what the real definition is and are using the word in the "alternative" way with a sense or irony or at least awareness, I'll cut you a little slack. I'll probably still think you're a douche who's not worth listening to, but I might allow for the possibility that you're not completely stupid. But if you don't even understand that you're using the word in a way that's completely at odds with its real meaning, you can literally go step in front of a bus right now.
i laughed hard at your last line
i'm a douchebag and i fully accept it. honestly speaking i dont use the informal definitions but i think informal definitions are still legit definitions.
dictionary writers tend to look at statistics for word usage in print and make a decision based off that and usage panel surveys. social perception is that informal definitions are for idiots but eventually perception will change and it will be legitimate. irony is worse than literally cuz "idiots" like F. Scott Fitzgerald have been using it wrong for much longer
i guess i give dictionaries more credit than most people
words change meaning completely over time and a lot of times it happens when the informal definition supplant the formal one and the formal one becomes outdated.
my favorite example is the word nice. it went from ignorant or clumsy (12c latin and old french) to timid (13c) to fussy (14c) to precise (15c) to agreeable (17c) to kind (18c). is nice in the sense of agreeable then the wrong usage of the word?
oddly i never talk about this offline, but then again i've never met many vocabulary conservatives offline