Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Pielorinho" data-source="post: 397366" data-attributes="member: 259">First, leet speek annoys me, but I recognize the purpose it serves.&nbsp; I'll get back to that in a minute.Forces do exist to maintain a language as it currently is:&nbsp; if I change how I talk too drastically, then you'll have trouble understanding me.&nbsp; If my goal is to communicate to you (which is usually the goal of someone using language), then I'll fail in my goal if you can't understand me.&nbsp; Next time I speak, I'll be more conservative in my word and grammar choice, so that you can figure out what I'm saying.At the same time, there are forces that exist to change a language.&nbsp; One of those forces is the creation of new words to capture novel or non-novel meanings.&nbsp; &quot;Internet&quot; captured a novel meaning:&nbsp; prior to the creation of the word, no single word described the distributed worldwide network of computers that we've come to know and love.&quot;Flammable&quot; captured a non-novel meaning:&nbsp; it means precisely the same thing as &quot;inflammable.&quot;&nbsp; However, it served a highly useful purpose, inasmuch as it made communication more efficient.&nbsp; Many people, on hearing the word &quot;inflammable,&quot; assumed it was analogous to &quot;inconceivable&quot;:&nbsp; that is, something inflammable could not be burned.&nbsp; Using the word &quot;inflammable&quot; was often an impediment, sometimes a deadly impediment, to communication.&quot;Flammable,&quot; then, entered the language to capture the meaning of &quot;inflammable.&quot;&nbsp; Prescriptive grammarians objected to the word, since they saw no problem with the word &quot;inflammable&quot; (children whose pajamas had caught on fire were not, apparently, a problem; their parents should have received a better education).&nbsp; Descriptive grammarians generally hailed the new word, however, as it facilitated the main purpose of language:&nbsp; communication.Leet Speek is an exception to the general goal of using language:&nbsp; it deliberately obfuscates meaning, limiting comprehension to a select group.&nbsp; As such, it accomplishes its goal by deliberately spelling words in a very nonstandard fashion.&nbsp; In the process it annoys me; I suspect that is another goal of its users.Daniel</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Pielorinho, post: 397366, member: 259"] First, leet speek annoys me, but I recognize the purpose it serves. I'll get back to that in a minute. Forces do exist to maintain a language as it currently is: if I change how I talk too drastically, then you'll have trouble understanding me. If my goal is to communicate to you (which is usually the goal of someone using language), then I'll fail in my goal if you can't understand me. Next time I speak, I'll be more conservative in my word and grammar choice, so that you can figure out what I'm saying. At the same time, there are forces that exist to change a language. One of those forces is the creation of new words to capture novel or non-novel meanings. "Internet" captured a novel meaning: prior to the creation of the word, no single word described the distributed worldwide network of computers that we've come to know and love. "Flammable" captured a non-novel meaning: it means precisely the same thing as "inflammable." However, it served a highly useful purpose, inasmuch as it made communication more efficient. Many people, on hearing the word "inflammable," assumed it was analogous to "inconceivable": that is, something inflammable could not be burned. Using the word "inflammable" was often an impediment, sometimes a deadly impediment, to communication. "Flammable," then, entered the language to capture the meaning of "inflammable." Prescriptive grammarians objected to the word, since they saw no problem with the word "inflammable" (children whose pajamas had caught on fire were not, apparently, a problem; their parents should have received a better education). Descriptive grammarians generally hailed the new word, however, as it facilitated the main purpose of language: communication. Leet Speek is an exception to the general goal of using language: it deliberately obfuscates meaning, limiting comprehension to a select group. As such, it accomplishes its goal by deliberately spelling words in a very nonstandard fashion. In the process it annoys me; I suspect that is another goal of its users. Daniel [/QUOTE]

Verification