Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jfdlsjfd" data-source="post: 8386710" data-attributes="member: 42856">Indeed, there is a strong possibility that word with a wide applicability are more commonly used. As the number of word one knows reflects education level and social background, but on the other hand, having a limited vocabulary doesn't prevent communication, it's possible that words like &quot;container&quot; that can apply to many objects are learnt before the more specialized ones, but it would be very difficult to quantify it. AFAIK, the basic D&amp;D books are also guilty of using specialized vocabulary. I remembe the instruments of the bards to be a cittern, a word that must be more &quot;exclusive&quot; than cistern (but maybe it's just me).A silly, but maybe funny anecdote on vocabulary use that happened to me recently that translates well into English:The characters had been ambushed on a slippery bridge on a rainy day, in an ever-rainy metropolis, by creatures of fey origin. I gave them their proper folkloric names, and it was readily understood by the players. During the fight, one of the strongest and largest fey caught the halfing character and threw it over the bridge. Fortunately, the character didn't fall completely thanks to an Acrobatic check... he managed to avoid taking too much damage by catching, as I said, &quot;a protruding gargoyle&quot;. To his horror, the next player to act said &quot;A gargoyle? I didn't know there was a gargolye, I cast eldritch blast on the gargoyle&quot;. It reminded me of the gazebo classic story, except it happened to me in real life so I got an extra empathy with the original DM of this classic! (and I quickly said &quot;no, not this sort of gargoyle&quot; to clarify).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jfdlsjfd, post: 8386710, member: 42856"] Indeed, there is a strong possibility that word with a wide applicability are more commonly used. As the number of word one knows reflects education level and social background, but on the other hand, having a limited vocabulary doesn't prevent communication, it's possible that words like "container" that can apply to many objects are learnt before the more specialized ones, but it would be very difficult to quantify it. AFAIK, the basic D&D books are also guilty of using specialized vocabulary. I remembe the instruments of the bards to be a [I]cittern[/I], a word that must be more "exclusive" than cistern (but maybe it's just me). A silly, but maybe funny anecdote on vocabulary use that happened to me recently that translates well into English: The characters had been ambushed on a slippery bridge on a rainy day, in an ever-rainy metropolis, by creatures of fey origin. I gave them their proper folkloric names, and it was readily understood by the players. During the fight, one of the strongest and largest fey caught the halfing character and threw it over the bridge. Fortunately, the character didn't fall completely thanks to an Acrobatic check... he managed to avoid taking too much damage by catching, as I said, "a protruding gargoyle". To his horror, the next player to act said "A gargoyle? I didn't know there was a gargolye, I cast eldritch blast on the gargoyle". It reminded me of the gazebo classic story, except it happened to me in real life so I got an extra empathy with the original DM of this classic! (and I quickly said "no, not this sort of gargoyle" to clarify). [/QUOTE]

Verification