I can't think of any time I felt "under pressure to misuse words" but I take delight in creative *adaptations* of words. I only wish I was important enough for them to catch on. 😏 (Long ago I tried to start "go ogle" as a neologism for searching the interweb, but it never caught on.)
There's perhaps an interesting discussion to be had about the notion that the misuse (or creative repurposing) of established cultural truths is fundamental to art. In part for their attractive shock (or even just dissonance) value, but also in fueling the dynamism of a living language.
I think you're right about art and creative misuse. It would be hard to say anything that sounded fresh without altering language to some degree, and anyway, it's fun!
hmm ...when I was in college I somehow missed that grade inflation thing : ) And I don't misuse words. That's for politicians and other salesmen. "Misinformation", for instance, is no longer something false, but something they disagree with.
"Misinformation" is a great example of a word on the move. It starts out as a euphemism for "lie" or "falsehood"—I don't know why "lie" needs to be sugar-coated, but okay—and if a sufficient number of people use the word to attack opposing views without regard to whether those views are true or false, facts or opinion, over time it loses its "falsehood" meaning and disintegrate into..."something one disagrees with". Let's hope that one doesn't go viral. I don't want to hear ordinary people accusing each other of "misinformation" when all they mean is they disagree!
I actually listened to this one while driving from work!
It seems like word meanings shift all the time in IT. I remember when the words "hack" and "hacker" had a positive connotation, as someone studying a system and figuring out how it works, before all the security issues turned them into words for malicious activity. Although in that case, the change was so gradual I never felt pressure about using its new meaning.
On the grade thing, strangely enough it seemed like Cs were okay when I was an undergraduate in the 1980s. But when I went to grad school 20 years later, it felt more like the situation described in the chapter, although maybe even more extreme, with anything less than an A representing an issue, and instructors willing to find a way to give an A or B unless a student just wasn't trying. I always took that to be more a grad school thing than any general change, but who knows.
Awesome! I'm glad the podcast works. Thanks for letting me know.
That's an interesting one I've never thought about: hack. Of course, I wouldn't know how to hack a computer, but I might talk about "hacking" something totally unrelated to computers, as in, "Here's a clever hack for keeping such and such a thing organized".
That's interesting about your experience with grading in the 80s. I was in grade school then and I felt like anything less than an A or B meant I just didn't try. But maybe it's different in college. I recall grading being all over the place at Oklahoma State University. I made an A in a psychology class without ever going to class, but I took a math class that was a total nightmare and I had to study hard and get tutoring just to stay afloat. (Come to think of it, the professor was a foreigner, so maybe that factors in.) I don't know what it was like beyond the freshman level because I transferred after that.
Good point that some positive senses of "hack" are still around. You reminded of the "life hack" concept I occasionally see articles on.
For the grades, maybe it amounts to what circles you hung out in. My GPA in high school was in the 2s, mostly because I was largely an indifferent and undisciplined student. My first year of college was similar, but there was too much money at stake so I had to clean up my act, although my final undergrad GPA was still nothing to write home about (low 3s). In grad school, I finally got my act together from the beginning and had a 4.0, but again something close to that seemed like the expectation there.
There are probably many factors going on with the grading thing. Plus, Oklahoma doesn't score very high when it comes to public education. You really had to neglect your work to get bad grades, and there wasn't anything else to do while the teacher was talking. (I had a serious problem with doing homework at home—not on my time!)
I can see why expectations would be high in grad school, especially given the cost and what's at stake. I mean, no one goes to grad school to party, at least no one I know.
I just published an academic paper on the ways equality and lies combine to cause major problems in schools. Seems relevant here.
TLDR, the stuff we call equality is actually three things, and the most common usage of these three is "I wish to have a status equal to those who are richer/more powerful than myself, and do not wish to have a status equal to those who are power/weaker than myself."
This is obviously a great way to make the world seem like a very evil place.
I can't think of any time I felt "under pressure to misuse words" but I take delight in creative *adaptations* of words. I only wish I was important enough for them to catch on. 😏 (Long ago I tried to start "go ogle" as a neologism for searching the interweb, but it never caught on.)
There's perhaps an interesting discussion to be had about the notion that the misuse (or creative repurposing) of established cultural truths is fundamental to art. In part for their attractive shock (or even just dissonance) value, but also in fueling the dynamism of a living language.
Go ogle! :)
I think you're right about art and creative misuse. It would be hard to say anything that sounded fresh without altering language to some degree, and anyway, it's fun!
hmm ...when I was in college I somehow missed that grade inflation thing : ) And I don't misuse words. That's for politicians and other salesmen. "Misinformation", for instance, is no longer something false, but something they disagree with.
"Misinformation" is a great example of a word on the move. It starts out as a euphemism for "lie" or "falsehood"—I don't know why "lie" needs to be sugar-coated, but okay—and if a sufficient number of people use the word to attack opposing views without regard to whether those views are true or false, facts or opinion, over time it loses its "falsehood" meaning and disintegrate into..."something one disagrees with". Let's hope that one doesn't go viral. I don't want to hear ordinary people accusing each other of "misinformation" when all they mean is they disagree!
yep
I actually listened to this one while driving from work!
It seems like word meanings shift all the time in IT. I remember when the words "hack" and "hacker" had a positive connotation, as someone studying a system and figuring out how it works, before all the security issues turned them into words for malicious activity. Although in that case, the change was so gradual I never felt pressure about using its new meaning.
On the grade thing, strangely enough it seemed like Cs were okay when I was an undergraduate in the 1980s. But when I went to grad school 20 years later, it felt more like the situation described in the chapter, although maybe even more extreme, with anything less than an A representing an issue, and instructors willing to find a way to give an A or B unless a student just wasn't trying. I always took that to be more a grad school thing than any general change, but who knows.
Awesome! I'm glad the podcast works. Thanks for letting me know.
That's an interesting one I've never thought about: hack. Of course, I wouldn't know how to hack a computer, but I might talk about "hacking" something totally unrelated to computers, as in, "Here's a clever hack for keeping such and such a thing organized".
That's interesting about your experience with grading in the 80s. I was in grade school then and I felt like anything less than an A or B meant I just didn't try. But maybe it's different in college. I recall grading being all over the place at Oklahoma State University. I made an A in a psychology class without ever going to class, but I took a math class that was a total nightmare and I had to study hard and get tutoring just to stay afloat. (Come to think of it, the professor was a foreigner, so maybe that factors in.) I don't know what it was like beyond the freshman level because I transferred after that.
Good point that some positive senses of "hack" are still around. You reminded of the "life hack" concept I occasionally see articles on.
For the grades, maybe it amounts to what circles you hung out in. My GPA in high school was in the 2s, mostly because I was largely an indifferent and undisciplined student. My first year of college was similar, but there was too much money at stake so I had to clean up my act, although my final undergrad GPA was still nothing to write home about (low 3s). In grad school, I finally got my act together from the beginning and had a 4.0, but again something close to that seemed like the expectation there.
There are probably many factors going on with the grading thing. Plus, Oklahoma doesn't score very high when it comes to public education. You really had to neglect your work to get bad grades, and there wasn't anything else to do while the teacher was talking. (I had a serious problem with doing homework at home—not on my time!)
I can see why expectations would be high in grad school, especially given the cost and what's at stake. I mean, no one goes to grad school to party, at least no one I know.
I just published an academic paper on the ways equality and lies combine to cause major problems in schools. Seems relevant here.
TLDR, the stuff we call equality is actually three things, and the most common usage of these three is "I wish to have a status equal to those who are richer/more powerful than myself, and do not wish to have a status equal to those who are power/weaker than myself."
This is obviously a great way to make the world seem like a very evil place.