Origin of Slang Term "Boni"?

[Umbran]

In the US congress gets to pick which words are what

Um, no. You may be thinking of the Académie française, which works to maintain the purity of the French Language. The USA does not have any analogous body.

 

[Desdichado]

Mods, please delete. Last edited by Asmor : Today at 12:12 PM. Reason: Made myself look stupid... Attempting to cover it up. Nothing to see here.

You guessed opossodes, didn't you?

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Of course there are also people who, having taken English classes and Latin, and so forth, come away convinced that the English language is fixed, immutable, is and always will be subject to authoritative dictates. Which, of course, is total crap. Language changes. How people use a language changes. New words, new ways of using old words, changes in grammatical structures, assimilation of foreign words and devices, etc. As I have always been given to understand, English is a particularly mutable language that incorporates words from everywhere at the drop of a hat.

It certainly isn't a language that got a big, red stamp on it a few hundred years ago that said "FINAL DRAFT - NO CHANGES IN USAGE SHALL BE TOLERATED EVER AGAIN." For example, I once upon a time believed my teachers and professors when they said "ain't" is not a word. BULL. Maybe it isn't a word that fits traditional, strictly FORMAL uses of English, but I've come to consider such assertions as "ain't just isn't acceptible" as pretentious crap spouted by teachers trying to justify their salary.

Now, as far as boni is concerned (or as I've seen and used it: "bonii") I have no fear in saying that it was coined purely in jest and not in an erroneous attempt at genuinely accurate plural form. And it was probably Hong. It was probably done to poke fun at people who couldn't make the correct plural form in the first place ("Is it bonuses, bonus's, bonus' or what?"). It doesn't matter that it isn't in a dictionary right now. In ten years that could have actually changed. Even if it WERE a failed attempt at genuinely accurate plural form it doesn't matter - words can and do become accepted as a result of corrupting forms of other words, or even when they are completely fabricated from whole cloth.

 

[Nifft]

"Ain't" shouldn't be tolerated -- in formal writing. The type that you should use in most classes. So the teachers could be correct, yet their correctness incomplete.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Desdichado]

As I have always been given to understand, English is a particularly mutable language that incorporates words from everywhere at the drop of a hat.

If that's true, a notion that I ain't grantin' ya fer free, then that's only because English has been remarkably successful over a short period of time in coming to ascendence as an important language over a vast range of places with a vast range of substrate languages underneath. Also, America---as the proverbial "melting pot" culture---has been inundated with divers linguistic influences that is quite possibly unprecedented, or at least unusual.

There's nothing intrinsic to English per se that makes it particularly mutable or able to incorporate words from everywhere.

And it's not just loanwords we're talking about either. Loan structure, grammer and form also does happen.

 

[WhatGravitas]

There's nothing intrinsic to English per se that makes it particularly mutable or able to incorporate words from everywhere.

Well... IMO, English IS very mutable, because of several reasons:
1) It's spread over the entire world, and everyone and their dog has their own version: Proper English (BE), American English... and so on. But that's historical.
2) It has a superficially very redundant vocabulary. There are so many words for ONE thing... and all are correct (though the nuance may vary) - this makes the language much less defined.
3) Its grammar is sturdy, yet simple. English has a dead simple grammar, and even if you botcher it completely, you remain quite understandable. Really.

Everything above is compared to German, Chinese (my native languages) and Latin (second foreign language)... so YMMV.

Cheers, LT.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I vote this as the best explanation.

It's a symptom of our times. More and more I see people using cell phone shorthand, cutting words up, and horrible, horrible misspellings and grammar. It makes me sad for the future, because I won't understand half of it.

o tempora, o linguistical mores.

Same as it ever was, man.

 

[Heckler]

Grammar ninjae care.

Cheers, -- N

Where's the posrep button?

 

[Darklone]

Well... IMO, English IS very mutable, because of several reasons:
1) ...

Cheers, LT.

Last week there was an article here in the newspapers about how modern languages still evolve. They all do, all the time. The study focused on the probability that seldom used words change faster than others... there even was a top 100 list which words are probably going to change soon (as well as a shorter list which words changed in the last few decades).

 

[WhatGravitas]

Last week there was an article here in the newspapers about how modern languages still evolve. They all do, all the time. The study focused on the probability that seldom used words change faster than others... there even was a top 100 list which words are probably going to change soon (as well as a shorter list which words changed in the last few decades).

Sounds interesting... link?

Cheers, LT.