Your arguments remind me of a line from BROADCAST NEWS describing what the devil would really do: "he will just bit by little bit lower standards where they are important."
I guess since mostly Palin supporters wanted to read the dictionary article, the comments were overwhelming positive. But I see her popularity as further proof of eroding standards, and I'm not too interested in being reminded of it. It's bad enough that "socialism" now means any policy that doesn't favor the rich.
Your arguments remind me of a quote from BROADCAST NEWS describing what the devil would really do: "he will just bit by little bit lower standards where they are important."
I think you only saw praise in the comments for the dictionary article because mostly Palin supporters were interested in reading it. People like me see her popularity as a sign of our eroding standards, and don't enjoy further evidence of that.
Ted/Carrol vs Clevon ? Fortunately, intelligence is not as clearly genetic as this would have you believe. Unfortunately, it does not take a drop in functional IQ to achieve an "idiocracy".
american english is not real english ... if palin ever gets near the white house i pray ( lol not really ) that some patriotic american will smuggle the only copy of the nuclear launch codes the hell outta there the thought of that fool having her finger on the button is a truely frightening thought
The professionals at the Jaguar Jones Institute should immediately conduct a study of the contents of Sarah Palins brain in order to find out exactly what it is that makes her so politically relevant.
I have to say, I don't like Palin, but a lot of this video makes assumptions to how language, authority in a language, and how it changes and such makes my inner-linguist cringe horribly.
I mean, yeah, "refutiate" sucks as a word. But its no egregious then truthiness and I think that you show the opposite end of people too afraid of linguistic evolution to understand a lot of its concepts.
So yeah, sorry man. Love your stuff normally, but this video isn't your best.
New words are invented that is a cool thing, because just as many are getting lost, forgotten, superseded. It is seemingly easier to say "in the past", "the day before yesterday" than "nudiustertian" nowadays - is that why we lost it, or 'cause it was too high brow for the masses?
I have no trouble with 'new' words, I'll agree Palin is an idiot but to say it was all praise for her is wrong well at 5:38 it clearly says someone thinks she sucks on donkey balls. Language, just love it.
Also, whose version of English are we using? US spelling has twisted the spellings and use of many words.
I am an English speaking person. When I visited the US the time before last and asked a girl at a shop for 'a bottle of water' I had to repeat 'water' a few times. Apparently we had the same 'spelling' but my 'warrter' was her 'whadar'.
Our 'communication' is also impaired with our lack of internationally defined sizes and volumes. A US 'cup' and Aus 'cup' is different = bad cooking.
JaguarJ0nes, you really need to quit whatever insignificant job you're currently working and start making Youtube vids full time :-) It's been far too long since your last post, and every time you open your moth it's goddamned pure gold that comes out!
If you can't spell refute correctly you shouldn't be running for office, you should be asking your children if they can help you when you try to learn something from their homework. I am not a native speaker and if I would say something that stupid in English class, people would laugh at me in my face. And rightly so!
Unbelievable is not the right reaction to this "news." Unacceptable is the proper reaction. How did this get into the dictionary without anyone hearing about it? Where are the people that decide that chewing up and spitting out the language does not constitute a large vocabulary. I'm saddened, embarrassed, and ashamed.
Sometimes, I kind of despair that we are waging a losing battle against stupid ...... But I have to remind myself that sense and sensibility will always triumph in the end. (or will it?)
Was it just me or did anyone else notice that JJ's internet dictionary just happened to 'fall' open on the word vagina; closely followed by a picture of Sara Palin in the next clip. Could it be that Mr Jones is try to subliminally convince us that Ms Palin is a cunt?. If so, works for me.
good video. to celebrate a foolishness like that is okay for me. We should all be able to laugh at ourselves for stupid mistakes. But to reward is a no-no, yes that can lead to disastrous consequences later on.
Merriam-Webster made Stephen Colbert's "truthiness" the 2006 word of the year, as well as in 2005 by American Dialect Society. It is not unheard of for dictionaries to use invented words of celebrities as WotY. It's publicity on their part.
The difference is that Colbert invented the word for satire while Palin is being labeled an intellectual using the a 'fake' word. I don't really care that words are invented, so long as vocabulary doesn't diminish like in some dystopian novels e.g. 1984.
William Shakespeare is said to have invented over 1000 words that enriched the English language. Putting Sarah Palin on the same level is a supreme insult to thelegenadary bards that have ever breathedd the air of this planet.
What is maddening about this is that "refudiate" was never actually coined. Even the little pit bull herself acknowledged it as a mistake. And it didn't make it's way into mainstream speech. I don't see how even the most adamant defender of descriptivism could defend adding this word to the dictionary.
I disagree... great video, but language changes overtime words come in and out of vogue lest thine own tongue be cut out for it speaketh in stange and queer manners
@ticijev Thanks for the thought but if that happens, they might want to interview my fat, ugly ass and I have to much respect for my fellow human being to subject 1 million households to having my image dumped in their living room.
Fortunately for the human race, abject stupidity is not easily hereditable. The sons of intellectually gifted people are sometimes as low in intellectual attainment as we imagine the children of parents of lesser intellectual status might be. And the reverse is also true. However, a mind gifted beyond the vast majority of the human race raised in an intellectual vacuum will act like a moron and a moron gifted with a good education can use those learned skills and act much more intelligently.
@RyuDarragh You are correct sir/mam. The mind is a muscle and it must be exorcised, nourished and rested if it is to the join the ranks of great minds. Just like some people are born with natural athletic ability, if they do nothing to develop that ability, it really goes to waste.
The inability of a native speaker to use an accepted form of English shows a lack of education, and more worryingly a lack of reading. That's why people tend to excoriate those who screw the language up.
The illiteracy of half the internet population drives me nuts.
@Misterb0z: Worse. Much worse! Many Creationists deliberately redefine words and point to obsolete meanings as their justification. I can't begin to tell you of the battles I've had with them over nearly every word relating to science and critical thinking.
The fromulus of the planigart is so drimnuld it causes great threjkullage.
Foorsoth, an representative of an organisation with an agenda normally affiliated with one very right end of the political spectrum has sucessfully infiltrated and to such a distasteful level deformed our mostly venerated syntactic basis defining this very language!?
Language is not and cannot be preserved.The nature of language is to evolve along with society and to be re-purposed as necessary, if this were not the case there would be no such thing as etymology.
I fail to see how a spelling mistake followed by a misused word is news worthy let alone worthy of being defended as an extension of political thought.As long as we continue to talk about this stuff she'll remain culturally relevant and that's no good.
@Scheckig The best explanation of what's wrong with 'safeguarding' English is this:
The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.
@evensgrey Agreed.If there is a better word for something in another language we take it, that is another strength of language.
I think this conversation maps nicely onto the problems with preserving religious doctrines in text.two generations after codification you start to see very different interpretations hinging on different usages of key words or alternate meanings recently added to them.
@Scheckig Some languages explicitly DON'T borrow from other languages, or at least not CERTAIN languages. In France, there is a government agency that decides on 'official' now words and phrases in French, and it almost never allows anything in that's from English. Only a fairly small number of civil servants actually USE this language, but that doesn't stop it from being 'official French'.
@evensgrey Codifying the language into an "official" version does nothing more that declare it a dialect like American English, or Australian English.An extreme example of this would be something like how French was derived from Latin.Before it was french it was Latin, and it was probably something else before that.
@Scheckig Actually, what Latin was before it was Latin is somewhat unclear, but we have a very clear idea of at least part of the transition from Latin to Italian, French, and Spanish. There exists at least one late Roman-era Latin grammar text with descriptions of regional slangs in Italia, Gaul, and Iberia which are, apparently, clearly embryonic forms of Italian, French, and Spanish.
@Scheckig I've never seen a language actually become standardized. Things like writing change the ways that languages change, but languages only stop changing when they stop being used.
@evensgrey Then I don't see what the problem is because we are in full agreement on this.The entire point of my posts here is that language is a constantly changing and uncontrolled meme.Codification and standardization fail because influences,meaning,usage,context,culture,etc. are constantly changing and language needs to be fashioned to express these changes.
@Scheckig This is entirely true, and we're not disagreeing. I've just pointed out some specific ways some specific languages have changed, and an instance of a government that mistakes itself for being able to control that process. (Governments have a tendency to mistake themselves for entities capable of doing lots of things that governments can't actually do.)
You are right, BUT when a Presidental candidate does this kind of error, (and a Presidents skill should be/has been social and LINGUISTICS) eyebrows should be lifted...
the essex / tendering dialect is the ONE TRUE DIALECT OF ENGLISH!!! American english is FALSE ENGLISH!!!! I don't get this language-worship from someone who's language isn't my first language which is by definition the one true language because it's the one i think in P=
Every day I find myself more and more like Bruce Willis in the movie 12 Monkeys. I'm desperately working towards helping people see their own impending doom, yet how do you reason with someone who is more inclined to talk than listen. Maybe Bruce had the right idea, and I should just say fuck it and settle down with a hot actress.
well the perhaps i could have been making fun of the guy that i QUOTED... saying he hates american spellings and then misspelling something... maybe just MAYBE that was the case
colour was just another example but im not familiar with ALL british spelling variations
@Leadman1989 Well, he's a bit of a jerk as well (perhaps moreso than myself). I still noticed your first sentence doesn't make much sense, I'm still willing to say I went in rather rash and should bury the hatchet.
Oh, FYI, if you wanted to insult British spellings, go for the ones you actually know very well. Or to help you out, words like "globalisation", "paedophile", "arsehole" etc.
I don't like the keepers of words. They demand that I cannot start a sentance with a conjunction, or end a sentance with a preposition. They tell me that this does not make sense, yet everybody I know still understands what I am saying. So I say to these keepers of words and language: FUCK YOU.
They don't accept slang words like fuck :I so wouldn't understand what your saying...officially. Seriously if we only went by what's in the dictionary we couldn't understand 1/2 of the words people actually use... then there's non verbal communication, do we need to 'regulate' that too? All a dictionary does is describe, no one is enforcing this BS spelling rules outside maybe schools and workplaces (ok they are kinda enforced lol) but they're not laws or anything
Every now and again one experiences one of those simply incredibly large face palms of exasperation, frustration, and incomprehension.
This is one of those times. What the fuck is going on? I really don't imagine much confusion as to whether Palin is smart, let alone an intellectual. BUT New Oxford American Dictionary, what the hell are you thinking?
An excellent video as usual and extremely eloquently articulated. My only complaint about your videos is that they do not appear anywhere as frequently as they should.
Also, could someone point Nephilimfree to the first half of this video so that he can learn why it is important to use the same definitions for words as everyone else does. I'd do it myself, but for some reason he's blocked me.
Stupidity should not be rewarded or encouraged in any way. I think the American Oxford Dictionary could only be redeemed by a press release that says "Just Kidding!"
I think you are taking the issue a little too serious, I mean people whom would never have been published in the past, has become so, because of technological innovation as the internet.
The majority of people would in the past never write anything but the odd letter now and then, but have gotten their voice on medium like the internet.
But I do agree that people who has the power to make laws, should be able to formulate themselves in a correct manner.
@JRBendixen I think that Palin is just the leader of people who are incredibly uneducated. She is the perfect representation of said segment of our societies. So no wonder they vote for her.
We know she thinks that being a mom is her highest qualification, so I wonder what people would thing if I postulated I would be a great president because I´m a father.
How honourable of you to hold onto hope for humanity. I've given up on that long ago. Much praise to you for these, your very well articulated statements about the past and future. Here's to hoping for a better world or at least to a slowing down of its destruction.
you really have something against efficient, quick slang communication? I don't understand people who take language so seriously - it's a TOOL to communicate, not a god to be worshiped. If it communicates, FINE. There was no set dictionary until what 150 years ago - we got by. Palin is a trig-tard because she fails to grasp reality, not because of her spelling
@unassumption "you really have something against efficient, quick slang communication?"
Nope, where'd you get that idea? Certainly not from my post or this video, as EVERY example of new words given are actually as long or longer than the words they're replacing and not as readily grasped
isn't=ain't
regardless=irregardless
refudiate=repudiate
Take your soap box elsewhere, the parts of your rant that are factually accurate do not apply to the post you are responding too.
Celebrities have got words added with their clout all the time, this is nothing new or harmful, jag is over reacting like crazy here, and rejecting natural linguistic progress for status-quo worshiping ...conservatism?
The world is slowly being taken over by retorlectuals (yes that word does not currently exist, but I believe was put forth by Bionic Dance--I think.) Retrolectual though perhaps should become an official word. It is an apt description of those who would prefer we live in a modern dark age where ignorance is perpetuated, and intelligence is suppressed.
Language has to be erroded down to something more grounded in facts IMO. People just need words to be able to convey ideas to the people they're talking to we only need to agree on words with whoever we're conversing with while we converse and only enough for the idea to spread. People get too worked up over syntax. Language always evolves. Slang will always rise up. Jargon too. These words are useful, speed up info transfer, among those who know them - it's harmless as long as confined.
@unassumption "Language has to be erroded down to something more grounded in facts IMO."
Wow, you're an idiot. What fact should the word "lava" be based upon? Or, conversely, what word should be based upon the fact that skinny dipping in a lava flow will kill you?
"we only need to agree on words with whoever we're conversing with while we converse"
No. You need a large base of common language before you can even begin to discuss the definition of other words you intend to use.
I said erroded down to something based on facts - lava is a word clearly based on something observable, so we don't need to errode it, most words are, it's the most emotionally powerful abstract concepts like right, good, free, etc, we need to tackle.
There doesn't need to be a word for a concept as convoluted as that - we have something called *Sentences* - letters don't need to express words, words don't need to express combinatorial concepts...you know :I
@unassumption "lava" is not based on or "grounded in" facts though. It's simply the chosen reference for an observed entity.
What would be the purpose of "eroding" the labels for abstract concepts like "love", to be more "grounded in facts". Love is by its very nature, abstract and subjective; ie. non-factual. Sure you can describe it as a particular set of brain chemistry states, but why and how would you change the word itself to reflect that?
@unassumption "A swim in lava = death", is not convoluted. A 5 year old can grasp this concept.
"words don't need to express combinatorial concepts"
Like facts?
I would really like to hear your suggestions for new words that would be more "grounded in facts". How is one particular arrangement of arbitrary symbols somehow more factual than another?
clabo
bronder
smeckia
The only thing that sets those apart from "balloon" is that we haven't opted to use them. Odd, I didn't even mention facts.
The power people give language over facts is the single greatest problem humans face in overcoming ignorance; its reasonable the medium through which we think, what sets us above other animals, would come to dominate us, but we need to tame language as other aspects of nature. I'm hoping autism or some other language-modifying disorder will spread through the population divorcing non-literal language and emotional connotations of words from the power they have over us.
Evolution of language as the world evolves is going to happen - chemistry words were the revolution that let chemistry happen via lavioser. German has a means of evolution - compound words. I often slip into compounds despite being english because people know what i mean and it conveys the concept more accurately even if it's not in a dictionary...people learn alnguage all the time, the meaning of new words can be interprited just as easilly as old, which have their own misinterpritations
I actually agree with beserker scary as that is - not that Palin is teh intilektual but that as long as your words convey your intended meaning to the average audience member what does it matter what words you use, language is constantly changing, we can't stop it just have to live with it, try to control it. Controling lingusitic evolution is a bit like eugenics...which i always too idiocracy as a call for, maybe i took the intro too literally, i found it advocating outdated 1930s ideology :/
@unassumption "The power people give language over facts is the single greatest problem humans face in overcoming ignorance"
Negative. Idiots like you are the single greatest problem we face in overcoming ignorance, because you attempt to spread it.
Go ahead, try to express your precious facts without the use of language.
Yes, facts are/can be very important, but in and of themselves they've got shit all to do with language. And without a way to communicate them, facts are all but useless.
Exactly what ignorance / "pseudoscience" am i spreading here? Does language not evolve? Does it not have power to make people ignore the observable facts, to engage in logic fallacy, etc? I said we need to ground langauge in facts not "express facts without language," don't "strawman" me, though a language lover would fall for fallacy. I agree on the last point - but language given more power than what it's trying to communicate can't communicate.
@unassumption Who said anything about pseudoscience? Of course language evolves. Of course it can make people ignore facts, toenail clippings, and gumdrops. So what?
For someone obsessed with it, you've failed to explain what you mean by "ground language in facts". (add more power ROFL)
Could you at least give an example of language being given more "power" than what it's trying to express?
My grammar is terrible. If I were to ever publish something under my own name, or write a school paper, I would make sure it was 100% perfect. If I were to speak in public I would do my damnedest to not be as uninformed as her.
People freaked out when Obama just mentioned non-believers in his inauguration speech. Why aren't there actual protests over rewarding the incompetence of Palin?
I'd be interested of seeing what would happen if there were to be a large scale campaign in which people send in their clumsily mixed words to Oxford and demand the same reward and reverence.
Shakespear more than anyone moved english on - by inventing words.
Every field has it's jargon that only people in that field understand - words have context specific meanings (theory in science) that change every 10 years but that doesn't mean it's not useful at that time, that place, that conversation. Language is a tool we shouldn't let it be more than that - philosophy, politics, law, all are the worship of words over evidence, facts and deduction :(
the idea that the dictionary has somehow kept language 'solid' is "lulz" (useful concept that L-word).
French wasn't even a language when shakespear wrote. it unified very recently as did spanish - doesn't mean those languages are useless because we wouldn't know what someone in them meant if we went back in time - just as it doesn't mean japanise is useless because I don't speak it. Internet is pushing linguistic evolution faster than ever, glad you seem to agree :)
I will freely admit that I am far from being the most intelligent or educated person around, but this attitude of glorifying ignorance disgusts me beyond words. Not knowing about the world is not something to be proud of.
I'm getting pretty tired of people running their mouths against good ol' Sarah Palin. Don't you see she's got what America craves? She's got electrolytes!
as if people don't invent new synonyms all the time - how do you think there came to be big, large, huge, colossal, giant, gargantuan, enormous, etc, all mean roughly the same must have came into the language at different times...as long as you know what the idea it's conveying is, who cares? The new slang won't last long anyway but neither will your life, you have to use the language around when your alive, in the place your living, or the context your involved in
Lavioser's 1789 book, elements of chemistry, started the chemical revolution by giving it a nomenclature - without words for chemical ideas chemistry couldn't happen but we had loads of names for each compound stil have multiple standardised naming schemes along with traditional and street names - but we needed neogolisms at the start to get concepts like oxidation, reduction, acid, base, reaction, etc, out there
@unassumption I was making a joke. We obviously need new words to describe new things. I was making a joke about the claim of the video that new words are idiotic.
To be fair, they have also said they are "unlikely to include" the word. Look at the history of Words of the year/decade/century. None of them have successfully entered the language. That said I don't disagree with what you're saying.
I disagree with you JaguarJ0nes, languages are not set in stone, they evolve over time. If I were travel to 18th century London and attempt to have a conversation with someone, we would not be able to understand each other even though we are both technically speaking english.
@DrFoolishit +1 score for missing the point entirely of what J0nes is saying.
Languages do change over time, yes, but if I decide that apples are oranges and that left is right and then tell you to make a right turn and buy me an orange, then I've effectively destroyed any possibility to communicate because you don't agree on those definitions of the words.
Languages evolve, but that's no excuse to aardvark ubiquity wheelchair.
@SeruQuik You're actually a hell of a lot better at that than I am. I'm so dedicated to correct use of language that I have to struggle to come up with random words.
no one is making up random sounds, the context in the sentence is enough to communicate the idea and as long as everyone's keeping up (which they will, being human, we're designed to keep learning words/concepts until we drop it's how we be so reproductively successful) we'll have no trouble - weather we incorporate it into a dictionary or not. No one's jumping to extremes, it's changing as slow as ever, well quicker now we got net, but still slow enough for people to understand
Languages do evolve over time, but usually due to slang and dialect. I think he's pissed because a political/pop culture ignoramus made an unwitting error and its not only being praised as genius, but also being treated as it were a widely used term that has been accepted by the culture.
powerful people have the means of spreading memes - like dawkins spread meme when he was powerful enough to be published :/ Dawkins LOVES making up new words it's like his hobby - he tried making a new TENSE in ancestor's tale - does that make him a trigtard as i call retards since Palin's 'r word' fiasco?
It's not quite as bad if he was trying to do it, but glorifying a typo for media attention is ridiculous. In this case I think it's just a marketing ploy to sell more dictionaries.
From my POV there is a large segment of American society who view intelligence and knowledge as a bad thing. I am so glad I will be dead in 20 year or so.
This reminds me of the use of the word 'real'. Seems many sky daddy worshippers use it much differently than I do. Probably why I cannot communicate with ANY god lover.
Don't need to agree on a definition of real - their god can be 'real' in it's effects on them, but that doesn't mean it's not 'unreal' in your sense. You can communicate the idea if you stray away from contentious language to other synonym tools - closer to the reality of observable testable facts, away from the superstructure of wordplay
a word is a sound, a squiggle on a page - it's meaning is whatever society gives it - it's meaning is what people decide it is. If they ignore it's meaning, it's meaning literally changes. Words aren't facts, they're not observable reality, they're just a means of communicating it, just tools, if they do the job - that's all.
PS. Huxley believed in free will / the invisible hand, from what i can tell, so he really needed to re-read that quote a couple hundred times P=
Languages change Jaguar, Palin may be an idiot but if she coins a term that people use then it is the dictionaries responsibility to catalogue that word. Shakespeare also made up words, but Sarah Palin is not Shakespeare. I am curious as to what the difference between refudiate and repudiate is though.
We share the same attitudes toward language. I have echoed these sentiments to others. The word in question was "refudiate" I suppose. What's funny is that in her "correction," she choses the wrong word!! LOL. It should have been "repudiate."
I can see how someone would combine these words in a comical sense. I've done it myself, but always with a hint that it's a joke. Who was that comedian who did it all the time?
In Palin's case, however, it was certainly just a mistake.
While I enjoy the general premise of the video, there are two things that just don't sit right with me:
1) Dictionaries are not authoritative "guardians" of language, they are catalogs of use. The speakers of a language, collectively, are its only guardians.
2) In order for language to maintain its cohesive power, uniformity need only be so precise as not to lose meaning. Further precision may affect presentation or add subtext, but it will not (by definition) alter content.
The book Planet of the Apes is based on was an attempt to warn people over our culture becoming more mediocre. It seems a bit exaggerated and it's not high on my list of fears. Great video nonetheless though.
@ProgressiveAudio I have no problem with that, and I am a real fundamentalist about this. "Doh!" is an interjection. They are a special class of words which in most cases, aren't really words at all but just spelled-out utterances. Allowances have to be made for interjections because they imitate any kind of sound we might make. I believe these evolve much more rapidly than other parts of speech and we just have to keep up.
Thanks, Mr J0nes, this hits a nerve. Most of my smart friends have 0-2 children, but my dumb ones have >=2. From that anecdotal evidence I do worry that as a species we are getting dumber. Mind you, I also worry we are becoming Borg. Think about it. Vision isn't important: if you're vision is bad you get glasses. Soon we'll all be getting ocular implants. And after that, what's next?
@Astrobrant2 I'm so glad. The missus and I can't have kiddies (and we're both pretty intelligent), so I'm glad you're keeping the smart persons end up (ooh er). Though I do hope the man/woman you had kids with is also intelligent, otherwise it's a wash.
I always thought idiocracy was about eugenics like those "people with high iq have kids every hour, ppl with low iq have kids every second" posters in the 1930s... i hear the genetics behind this is flawed but anacdotes support it so... not sure
i like how any time a republican does something stupid or immoral that cannot, even by the wildest stretches of logic, be defended, they instantly become a democrat.
i think "outfoxed" showed a few examples of this. when an elected republican gets into serious legal trouble, fox quietly changes the "R" by their name to a "D"
Everytime I hear Sarah Palin speak I dide a little inside. I die of Laughter.
MisterTutor2010 2 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
The people who post on yahoo news are the dumbest, sons-of-bitches on the planet.
Lordgaraj 4 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Your arguments remind me of a line from BROADCAST NEWS describing what the devil would really do: "he will just bit by little bit lower standards where they are important."
I guess since mostly Palin supporters wanted to read the dictionary article, the comments were overwhelming positive. But I see her popularity as further proof of eroding standards, and I'm not too interested in being reminded of it. It's bad enough that "socialism" now means any policy that doesn't favor the rich.
graphicalex 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Your arguments remind me of a quote from BROADCAST NEWS describing what the devil would really do: "he will just bit by little bit lower standards where they are important."
I think you only saw praise in the comments for the dictionary article because mostly Palin supporters were interested in reading it. People like me see her popularity as a sign of our eroding standards, and don't enjoy further evidence of that.
Good to have you back making videos, Mr. J0nes.
graphicalex 1 year ago
Comment removed
graphicalex 1 year ago
refutiate. re-fut-iate. \ri-fyūt-ē-āt\. Transitive verb.
1) to refute; 2) to show how dumb Sarah Palin is; 3) to establish a clear pathway to an idiocracy.
SilverCat25 1 year ago
Sam Harris actually uses the word before Sarah palin
watch?v=AH005Zi7nvg&feature=related
0:15 seconds in
sansdeus 1 year ago
Ted/Carrol vs Clevon ? Fortunately, intelligence is not as clearly genetic as this would have you believe. Unfortunately, it does not take a drop in functional IQ to achieve an "idiocracy".
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
Don't read the Yahoo comments. You will get ulcers.
Recovermin 1 year ago
You mispronounced jubilance. Or maybe it isn't even a word, since the Firefox spell checker says it isn't. I guess the right word is jubilation.
Heathenfidel 1 year ago
For a minute, I thought this video would be about variablast.
Heathenfidel 1 year ago
american english is not real english ... if palin ever gets near the white house i pray ( lol not really ) that some patriotic american will smuggle the only copy of the nuclear launch codes the hell outta there the thought of that fool having her finger on the button is a truely frightening thought
bushie09 1 year ago
English they sure fuck up a language.... specially one they are named after
MaTchBoOkPoEt 1 year ago
The professionals at the Jaguar Jones Institute should immediately conduct a study of the contents of Sarah Palins brain in order to find out exactly what it is that makes her so politically relevant.
citizen762 1 year ago
I have to say, I don't like Palin, but a lot of this video makes assumptions to how language, authority in a language, and how it changes and such makes my inner-linguist cringe horribly.
I mean, yeah, "refutiate" sucks as a word. But its no egregious then truthiness and I think that you show the opposite end of people too afraid of linguistic evolution to understand a lot of its concepts.
So yeah, sorry man. Love your stuff normally, but this video isn't your best.
realblaqueandstuff 1 year ago
Why are you not famous?
ProfoundReality2 1 year ago
Refutiate is a perfectly cromulent word.
Leehofooks 1 year ago
New words are invented that is a cool thing, because just as many are getting lost, forgotten, superseded. It is seemingly easier to say "in the past", "the day before yesterday" than "nudiustertian" nowadays - is that why we lost it, or 'cause it was too high brow for the masses?
I have no trouble with 'new' words, I'll agree Palin is an idiot but to say it was all praise for her is wrong well at 5:38 it clearly says someone thinks she sucks on donkey balls. Language, just love it.
O2BSoLucky 1 year ago
Also, whose version of English are we using? US spelling has twisted the spellings and use of many words.
I am an English speaking person. When I visited the US the time before last and asked a girl at a shop for 'a bottle of water' I had to repeat 'water' a few times. Apparently we had the same 'spelling' but my 'warrter' was her 'whadar'.
Our 'communication' is also impaired with our lack of internationally defined sizes and volumes. A US 'cup' and Aus 'cup' is different = bad cooking.
O2BSoLucky 1 year ago
That vehicle is obviously a blardafigglehonk. A red one.
TheAtheistSwede 1 year ago
JaguarJ0nes, you really need to quit whatever insignificant job you're currently working and start making Youtube vids full time :-) It's been far too long since your last post, and every time you open your moth it's goddamned pure gold that comes out!
Finkeren 1 year ago
If you can't spell refute correctly you shouldn't be running for office, you should be asking your children if they can help you when you try to learn something from their homework. I am not a native speaker and if I would say something that stupid in English class, people would laugh at me in my face. And rightly so!
Evilanious 1 year ago
Unbelievable is not the right reaction to this "news." Unacceptable is the proper reaction. How did this get into the dictionary without anyone hearing about it? Where are the people that decide that chewing up and spitting out the language does not constitute a large vocabulary. I'm saddened, embarrassed, and ashamed.
fiusux12 1 year ago
Sometimes, I kind of despair that we are waging a losing battle against stupid ...... But I have to remind myself that sense and sensibility will always triumph in the end. (or will it?)
htoontube 1 year ago
Was it just me or did anyone else notice that JJ's internet dictionary just happened to 'fall' open on the word vagina; closely followed by a picture of Sara Palin in the next clip. Could it be that Mr Jones is try to subliminally convince us that Ms Palin is a cunt?. If so, works for me.
philthy122 1 year ago
good video. to celebrate a foolishness like that is okay for me. We should all be able to laugh at ourselves for stupid mistakes. But to reward is a no-no, yes that can lead to disastrous consequences later on.
jewellx80 1 year ago
Ony god kin juge U. Why U be dissin Sarah?
Irreguardless, substansative conseps kin cum frum jus abbout any1.
Jes sitbak n laff at dose fools. We bofe no bedder den dose mooroons.
Luv Da Vid.
TooferMan 1 year ago
Merriam-Webster made Stephen Colbert's "truthiness" the 2006 word of the year, as well as in 2005 by American Dialect Society. It is not unheard of for dictionaries to use invented words of celebrities as WotY. It's publicity on their part.
The difference is that Colbert invented the word for satire while Palin is being labeled an intellectual using the a 'fake' word. I don't really care that words are invented, so long as vocabulary doesn't diminish like in some dystopian novels e.g. 1984.
AngelsInAbsentia 1 year ago
I cannot believe they allowed Palin’s “refudiate” and not one of W. Bush’s many wonderful made up words.
Ladies first I guess.
jebus6kryst 1 year ago
William Shakespeare is said to have invented over 1000 words that enriched the English language. Putting Sarah Palin on the same level is a supreme insult to thelegenadary bards that have ever breathedd the air of this planet.
Afriboy10 1 year ago
What is maddening about this is that "refudiate" was never actually coined. Even the little pit bull herself acknowledged it as a mistake. And it didn't make it's way into mainstream speech. I don't see how even the most adamant defender of descriptivism could defend adding this word to the dictionary.
Maxdwolf 1 year ago
People pay attention to what Sarah Palin has to say because her daughter is such a gifted dancer.
NoTrueScotsman 1 year ago 2
I disagree... great video, but language changes overtime words come in and out of vogue lest thine own tongue be cut out for it speaketh in stange and queer manners
Leadman1989 1 year ago
This is why I side with Webster over new Oxford
HellsCowBoy666 1 year ago
Liking and favoring the video is great and all. But how about we all somehow make this video go on national. ah... world television?
ticijev 1 year ago
@ticijev Thanks for the thought but if that happens, they might want to interview my fat, ugly ass and I have to much respect for my fellow human being to subject 1 million households to having my image dumped in their living room.
JaguarJ0nes 1 year ago
I loved the premise of this movie and when I see a bunch of mouth breathers in Wal-Mart I think "Fuck! That's Idiocracy at work."
snugsaltynutz 1 year ago
Fortunately for the human race, abject stupidity is not easily hereditable. The sons of intellectually gifted people are sometimes as low in intellectual attainment as we imagine the children of parents of lesser intellectual status might be. And the reverse is also true. However, a mind gifted beyond the vast majority of the human race raised in an intellectual vacuum will act like a moron and a moron gifted with a good education can use those learned skills and act much more intelligently.
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
@RyuDarragh You are correct sir/mam. The mind is a muscle and it must be exorcised, nourished and rested if it is to the join the ranks of great minds. Just like some people are born with natural athletic ability, if they do nothing to develop that ability, it really goes to waste.
JaguarJ0nes 1 year ago
@JaguarJ0nes: Agreed, especially on the exorcised part (grin)
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
The inability of a native speaker to use an accepted form of English shows a lack of education, and more worryingly a lack of reading. That's why people tend to excoriate those who screw the language up.
The illiteracy of half the internet population drives me nuts.
Misterb0z 1 year ago
@Misterb0z: Worse. Much worse! Many Creationists deliberately redefine words and point to obsolete meanings as their justification. I can't begin to tell you of the battles I've had with them over nearly every word relating to science and critical thinking.
The fromulus of the planigart is so drimnuld it causes great threjkullage.
I'm sure you get my meaning :P
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
@RyuDarragh Vogon poetry?
Misterb0z 1 year ago
Foorsoth, an representative of an organisation with an agenda normally affiliated with one very right end of the political spectrum has sucessfully infiltrated and to such a distasteful level deformed our mostly venerated syntactic basis defining this very language!?
3ncoctmebreu 1 year ago
i downt kaar wat u see, sara paylen is smarts
RadioFreeWisconsin 1 year ago
The word 'refutiate' actually goes back at least a generation in print.
evensgrey 1 year ago
@evensgrey Hmm, a misspelling a generation ago doesn't make same misspelling right now, or does it.
Cheers
ekhaat 1 year ago
@evensgrey No kidding? PM me some links. That would be interesting reading.
JaguarJ0nes 1 year ago
@evensgrey
So... not only is it incorrect usage of a non-word, it's unoriginal as well?
Fordi 1 year ago
Language is not and cannot be preserved.The nature of language is to evolve along with society and to be re-purposed as necessary, if this were not the case there would be no such thing as etymology.
I fail to see how a spelling mistake followed by a misused word is news worthy let alone worthy of being defended as an extension of political thought.As long as we continue to talk about this stuff she'll remain culturally relevant and that's no good.
Scheckig 1 year ago
@Scheckig The best explanation of what's wrong with 'safeguarding' English is this:
The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.
evensgrey 1 year ago
@evensgrey Agreed.If there is a better word for something in another language we take it, that is another strength of language.
I think this conversation maps nicely onto the problems with preserving religious doctrines in text.two generations after codification you start to see very different interpretations hinging on different usages of key words or alternate meanings recently added to them.
Scheckig 1 year ago
@Scheckig Some languages explicitly DON'T borrow from other languages, or at least not CERTAIN languages. In France, there is a government agency that decides on 'official' now words and phrases in French, and it almost never allows anything in that's from English. Only a fairly small number of civil servants actually USE this language, but that doesn't stop it from being 'official French'.
evensgrey 1 year ago
@evensgrey Codifying the language into an "official" version does nothing more that declare it a dialect like American English, or Australian English.An extreme example of this would be something like how French was derived from Latin.Before it was french it was Latin, and it was probably something else before that.
Scheckig 1 year ago
@Scheckig Actually, what Latin was before it was Latin is somewhat unclear, but we have a very clear idea of at least part of the transition from Latin to Italian, French, and Spanish. There exists at least one late Roman-era Latin grammar text with descriptions of regional slangs in Italia, Gaul, and Iberia which are, apparently, clearly embryonic forms of Italian, French, and Spanish.
evensgrey 1 year ago
@evensgrey So you're saying that the language continued to drift even though it'd been standardized?
Scheckig 1 year ago
@Scheckig I've never seen a language actually become standardized. Things like writing change the ways that languages change, but languages only stop changing when they stop being used.
evensgrey 1 year ago
@evensgrey Then I don't see what the problem is because we are in full agreement on this.The entire point of my posts here is that language is a constantly changing and uncontrolled meme.Codification and standardization fail because influences,meaning,usage,context,culture,etc. are constantly changing and language needs to be fashioned to express these changes.
Scheckig 1 year ago
@Scheckig This is entirely true, and we're not disagreeing. I've just pointed out some specific ways some specific languages have changed, and an instance of a government that mistakes itself for being able to control that process. (Governments have a tendency to mistake themselves for entities capable of doing lots of things that governments can't actually do.)
evensgrey 1 year ago
@Scheckig Excellent point.
JaguarJ0nes 1 year ago
@Scheckig
You are right, BUT when a Presidental candidate does this kind of error, (and a Presidents skill should be/has been social and LINGUISTICS) eyebrows should be lifted...
otur1 1 year ago
Я не колдунья
Nhurm 1 year ago
the essex / tendering dialect is the ONE TRUE DIALECT OF ENGLISH!!! American english is FALSE ENGLISH!!!! I don't get this language-worship from someone who's language isn't my first language which is by definition the one true language because it's the one i think in P=
unassumption 1 year ago
Every day I find myself more and more like Bruce Willis in the movie 12 Monkeys. I'm desperately working towards helping people see their own impending doom, yet how do you reason with someone who is more inclined to talk than listen. Maybe Bruce had the right idea, and I should just say fuck it and settle down with a hot actress.
damaxman 1 year ago
I also hate American spellings. ''honor'' LOLOL
TheProf1988 1 year ago
@TheProf1988
great and we don't like your british spellings "sentance" "colour" hahaha
Leadman1989 1 year ago
@Leadman1989 "sentance" is not a word in the U.K., dipshit. Good luck on your spelling bee contest.
Afriboy10 1 year ago
@Afriboy10
well the perhaps i could have been making fun of the guy that i QUOTED... saying he hates american spellings and then misspelling something... maybe just MAYBE that was the case
colour was just another example but im not familiar with ALL british spelling variations
Leadman1989 1 year ago
@Leadman1989 Well, he's a bit of a jerk as well (perhaps moreso than myself). I still noticed your first sentence doesn't make much sense, I'm still willing to say I went in rather rash and should bury the hatchet.
Oh, FYI, if you wanted to insult British spellings, go for the ones you actually know very well. Or to help you out, words like "globalisation", "paedophile", "arsehole" etc.
Afriboy10 1 year ago
@Leadman1989 They also have "flavour", "armour", and "favourite". I also do not humour these spellings. Heheh ;-)
reddog22000 1 year ago
@reddog22000
so so brilliantly dry... i love it XD
Leadman1989 1 year ago
@Leadman1989 Why thank you. I'm glad I was able to amuse someone other than myself. :-D
In other words (Mr. unassumption's ultra-efficient slang to be exact):
yo dis got dat biggins up tizop
Ah yes, much better. I should have been using that from the get-go. Silly me.
reddog22000 1 year ago
I don't like the keepers of words. They demand that I cannot start a sentance with a conjunction, or end a sentance with a preposition. They tell me that this does not make sense, yet everybody I know still understands what I am saying. So I say to these keepers of words and language: FUCK YOU.
TheProf1988 1 year ago
@TheProf1988
They don't accept slang words like fuck :I so wouldn't understand what your saying...officially. Seriously if we only went by what's in the dictionary we couldn't understand 1/2 of the words people actually use... then there's non verbal communication, do we need to 'regulate' that too? All a dictionary does is describe, no one is enforcing this BS spelling rules outside maybe schools and workplaces (ok they are kinda enforced lol) but they're not laws or anything
unassumption 1 year ago
Every now and again one experiences one of those simply incredibly large face palms of exasperation, frustration, and incomprehension.
This is one of those times. What the fuck is going on? I really don't imagine much confusion as to whether Palin is smart, let alone an intellectual. BUT New Oxford American Dictionary, what the hell are you thinking?
Fabulous video JJ.
martiangrundy 1 year ago
An excellent video as usual and extremely eloquently articulated. My only complaint about your videos is that they do not appear anywhere as frequently as they should.
Also, could someone point Nephilimfree to the first half of this video so that he can learn why it is important to use the same definitions for words as everyone else does. I'd do it myself, but for some reason he's blocked me.
TheLivingDinosaur 1 year ago
House of Representin' was my favorite part... that and the whole hospital scene. The Doctor was hilarious.
3mate1 1 year ago
Stupidity should not be rewarded or encouraged in any way. I think the American Oxford Dictionary could only be redeemed by a press release that says "Just Kidding!"
Atriviality 1 year ago
I think you are taking the issue a little too serious, I mean people whom would never have been published in the past, has become so, because of technological innovation as the internet.
The majority of people would in the past never write anything but the odd letter now and then, but have gotten their voice on medium like the internet.
But I do agree that people who has the power to make laws, should be able to formulate themselves in a correct manner.
JRBendixen 1 year ago
@JRBendixen I think that Palin is just the leader of people who are incredibly uneducated. She is the perfect representation of said segment of our societies. So no wonder they vote for her.
We know she thinks that being a mom is her highest qualification, so I wonder what people would thing if I postulated I would be a great president because I´m a father.
JRBendixen 1 year ago
How honourable of you to hold onto hope for humanity. I've given up on that long ago. Much praise to you for these, your very well articulated statements about the past and future. Here's to hoping for a better world or at least to a slowing down of its destruction.
BlowDevilUp 1 year ago
I make spelling mistakes all the time, because I usually do not bother to check when commenting casually as on the internet.
JRBendixen 1 year ago
haaha april fools arpil fools!! ...no?
F * * K !
I guess the guardians of language are the DICs of Dictionary...
Paxmax 1 year ago
So Sarah Palin joins the ranks of whatever guys invented Ain't and Irregardless.
I don't think we run the risk of anyone assuming Sarah Palin is smart because of this.
Jermbot15 1 year ago
@Jermbot15
you really have something against efficient, quick slang communication? I don't understand people who take language so seriously - it's a TOOL to communicate, not a god to be worshiped. If it communicates, FINE. There was no set dictionary until what 150 years ago - we got by. Palin is a trig-tard because she fails to grasp reality, not because of her spelling
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption "you really have something against efficient, quick slang communication?"
Nope, where'd you get that idea? Certainly not from my post or this video, as EVERY example of new words given are actually as long or longer than the words they're replacing and not as readily grasped
isn't=ain't
regardless=irregardless
refudiate=repudiate
Take your soap box elsewhere, the parts of your rant that are factually accurate do not apply to the post you are responding too.
Jermbot15 1 year ago
@unassumption Actually, dictionaries came on the scene of civilization almost 4,000 years ago.
JaguarJ0nes 1 year ago
Well this is sad news. Which celebrity idiot will have their blunder added to a dictionary next?
reddog22000 1 year ago
@reddog22000
...Shakespear?
Celebrities have got words added with their clout all the time, this is nothing new or harmful, jag is over reacting like crazy here, and rejecting natural linguistic progress for status-quo worshiping ...conservatism?
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption Moronic error =/= "natural linguistic progress"
reddog22000 1 year ago
yes
penvsword 1 year ago
The world is slowly being taken over by retorlectuals (yes that word does not currently exist, but I believe was put forth by Bionic Dance--I think.) Retrolectual though perhaps should become an official word. It is an apt description of those who would prefer we live in a modern dark age where ignorance is perpetuated, and intelligence is suppressed.
Swidhelm 1 year ago
Language has to be erroded down to something more grounded in facts IMO. People just need words to be able to convey ideas to the people they're talking to we only need to agree on words with whoever we're conversing with while we converse and only enough for the idea to spread. People get too worked up over syntax. Language always evolves. Slang will always rise up. Jargon too. These words are useful, speed up info transfer, among those who know them - it's harmless as long as confined.
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption "Language has to be erroded down to something more grounded in facts IMO."
Wow, you're an idiot. What fact should the word "lava" be based upon? Or, conversely, what word should be based upon the fact that skinny dipping in a lava flow will kill you?
"we only need to agree on words with whoever we're conversing with while we converse"
No. You need a large base of common language before you can even begin to discuss the definition of other words you intend to use.
reddog22000 1 year ago
@reddog22000
I said erroded down to something based on facts - lava is a word clearly based on something observable, so we don't need to errode it, most words are, it's the most emotionally powerful abstract concepts like right, good, free, etc, we need to tackle.
There doesn't need to be a word for a concept as convoluted as that - we have something called *Sentences* - letters don't need to express words, words don't need to express combinatorial concepts...you know :I
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption "lava" is not based on or "grounded in" facts though. It's simply the chosen reference for an observed entity.
What would be the purpose of "eroding" the labels for abstract concepts like "love", to be more "grounded in facts". Love is by its very nature, abstract and subjective; ie. non-factual. Sure you can describe it as a particular set of brain chemistry states, but why and how would you change the word itself to reflect that?
reddog22000 1 year ago
@unassumption "A swim in lava = death", is not convoluted. A 5 year old can grasp this concept.
"words don't need to express combinatorial concepts"
Like facts?
I would really like to hear your suggestions for new words that would be more "grounded in facts". How is one particular arrangement of arbitrary symbols somehow more factual than another?
clabo
bronder
smeckia
The only thing that sets those apart from "balloon" is that we haven't opted to use them. Odd, I didn't even mention facts.
reddog22000 1 year ago
The power people give language over facts is the single greatest problem humans face in overcoming ignorance; its reasonable the medium through which we think, what sets us above other animals, would come to dominate us, but we need to tame language as other aspects of nature. I'm hoping autism or some other language-modifying disorder will spread through the population divorcing non-literal language and emotional connotations of words from the power they have over us.
unassumption 1 year ago
Evolution of language as the world evolves is going to happen - chemistry words were the revolution that let chemistry happen via lavioser. German has a means of evolution - compound words. I often slip into compounds despite being english because people know what i mean and it conveys the concept more accurately even if it's not in a dictionary...people learn alnguage all the time, the meaning of new words can be interprited just as easilly as old, which have their own misinterpritations
unassumption 1 year ago
I actually agree with beserker scary as that is - not that Palin is teh intilektual but that as long as your words convey your intended meaning to the average audience member what does it matter what words you use, language is constantly changing, we can't stop it just have to live with it, try to control it. Controling lingusitic evolution is a bit like eugenics...which i always too idiocracy as a call for, maybe i took the intro too literally, i found it advocating outdated 1930s ideology :/
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption "The power people give language over facts is the single greatest problem humans face in overcoming ignorance"
Negative. Idiots like you are the single greatest problem we face in overcoming ignorance, because you attempt to spread it.
Go ahead, try to express your precious facts without the use of language.
Yes, facts are/can be very important, but in and of themselves they've got shit all to do with language. And without a way to communicate them, facts are all but useless.
reddog22000 1 year ago
@reddog22000
Exactly what ignorance / "pseudoscience" am i spreading here? Does language not evolve? Does it not have power to make people ignore the observable facts, to engage in logic fallacy, etc? I said we need to ground langauge in facts not "express facts without language," don't "strawman" me, though a language lover would fall for fallacy. I agree on the last point - but language given more power than what it's trying to communicate can't communicate.
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption Who said anything about pseudoscience? Of course language evolves. Of course it can make people ignore facts, toenail clippings, and gumdrops. So what?
For someone obsessed with it, you've failed to explain what you mean by "ground language in facts". (add more power ROFL)
Could you at least give an example of language being given more "power" than what it's trying to express?
reddog22000 1 year ago
My grammar is terrible. If I were to ever publish something under my own name, or write a school paper, I would make sure it was 100% perfect. If I were to speak in public I would do my damnedest to not be as uninformed as her.
People freaked out when Obama just mentioned non-believers in his inauguration speech. Why aren't there actual protests over rewarding the incompetence of Palin?
(This post was not proof read)
hevyAccel 1 year ago 4
I'd be interested of seeing what would happen if there were to be a large scale campaign in which people send in their clumsily mixed words to Oxford and demand the same reward and reverence.
the2500 1 year ago
We have an obligation to restore the Regenaissance English on which our Nation was founded upon.
anthonzi 1 year ago
@anthonzi *obligitoration
anthonzi 1 year ago
@anthonzi *reestablinate, *foundenced. Excuse my inproprietary English.
anthonzi 1 year ago
I miss your videos, man. I hope you make more.
Hereticbooks 1 year ago
*insert shakspearian engRish here*
langauge and culture are not fixed or solid in any way.
its about as silly as the word refudiate to imply otherwise
SCARREDMIND 1 year ago
@SCARREDMIND
Shakespear more than anyone moved english on - by inventing words.
Every field has it's jargon that only people in that field understand - words have context specific meanings (theory in science) that change every 10 years but that doesn't mean it's not useful at that time, that place, that conversation. Language is a tool we shouldn't let it be more than that - philosophy, politics, law, all are the worship of words over evidence, facts and deduction :(
unassumption 1 year ago
@SCARREDMIND
the idea that the dictionary has somehow kept language 'solid' is "lulz" (useful concept that L-word).
French wasn't even a language when shakespear wrote. it unified very recently as did spanish - doesn't mean those languages are useless because we wouldn't know what someone in them meant if we went back in time - just as it doesn't mean japanise is useless because I don't speak it. Internet is pushing linguistic evolution faster than ever, glad you seem to agree :)
unassumption 1 year ago
Ah funny cus repudiate would have the most sensible meaning in that context. And at least she deleted the error.
anthonzi 1 year ago
I will freely admit that I am far from being the most intelligent or educated person around, but this attitude of glorifying ignorance disgusts me beyond words. Not knowing about the world is not something to be proud of.
bantam700 1 year ago
I'm getting pretty tired of people running their mouths against good ol' Sarah Palin. Don't you see she's got what America craves? She's got electrolytes!
albedo00 1 year ago
Whar u beeen?
wilfredthebold 1 year ago
Thumbs up if you think that Oxford alumni should refudiate the inclusion of the word "refudiate" into the Oxford American English dictionary.
ShadowPa1adin 1 year ago 2
My son got me Idiocracy for my birthday. There are benefits to parenthood.
ozmoroid 1 year ago
@ozmoroid You're right! Parenthood was a pretty good movie too!
JaguarJ0nes 1 year ago
Now... I hate sarah "retard" palin.
But... Shakespeare made up words too.
pointmanzero 1 year ago
@pointmanzero Palin ain't no Shakespeare
Thejugglingbum 1 year ago
@Thejugglingbum trur, but just saying, making up words is how we get new words.
pointmanzero 1 year ago
@pointmanzero Yeah maybe when there isn't already a word for the idea we are trying to express.
Thejugglingbum 1 year ago
@Thejugglingbum
as if people don't invent new synonyms all the time - how do you think there came to be big, large, huge, colossal, giant, gargantuan, enormous, etc, all mean roughly the same must have came into the language at different times...as long as you know what the idea it's conveying is, who cares? The new slang won't last long anyway but neither will your life, you have to use the language around when your alive, in the place your living, or the context your involved in
unassumption 1 year ago
@pointmanzero
trigtard :) a word i coined in response to Palin :)
unassumption 1 year ago
New rule: No neologisms. Let the language stagnate now.
zantrua 1 year ago
@zantrua
Lavioser's 1789 book, elements of chemistry, started the chemical revolution by giving it a nomenclature - without words for chemical ideas chemistry couldn't happen but we had loads of names for each compound stil have multiple standardised naming schemes along with traditional and street names - but we needed neogolisms at the start to get concepts like oxidation, reduction, acid, base, reaction, etc, out there
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption I was making a joke. We obviously need new words to describe new things. I was making a joke about the claim of the video that new words are idiotic.
zantrua 1 year ago
To be fair, they have also said they are "unlikely to include" the word. Look at the history of Words of the year/decade/century. None of them have successfully entered the language. That said I don't disagree with what you're saying.
arcanics1971 1 year ago
I disagree with you JaguarJ0nes, languages are not set in stone, they evolve over time. If I were travel to 18th century London and attempt to have a conversation with someone, we would not be able to understand each other even though we are both technically speaking english.
DrFoolishit 1 year ago
@DrFoolishit +1 score for missing the point entirely of what J0nes is saying.
Languages do change over time, yes, but if I decide that apples are oranges and that left is right and then tell you to make a right turn and buy me an orange, then I've effectively destroyed any possibility to communicate because you don't agree on those definitions of the words.
Languages evolve, but that's no excuse to aardvark ubiquity wheelchair.
EdwardHowton 1 year ago 2
@EdwardHowton
Purple shine hydrogen, repudiate alabaster incense pus? Concordant rust?
SeruQuik 1 year ago
@SeruQuik You're actually a hell of a lot better at that than I am. I'm so dedicated to correct use of language that I have to struggle to come up with random words.
So yeah, Foolish, what this guy said.
EdwardHowton 1 year ago
@EdwardHowton
no one is making up random sounds, the context in the sentence is enough to communicate the idea and as long as everyone's keeping up (which they will, being human, we're designed to keep learning words/concepts until we drop it's how we be so reproductively successful) we'll have no trouble - weather we incorporate it into a dictionary or not. No one's jumping to extremes, it's changing as slow as ever, well quicker now we got net, but still slow enough for people to understand
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption Where did I say anything about random sounds? I specifically used examples where given words had their definitions changed arbitrarily.
Someone is jumping to extremes: you are. I'm not going to bother with the rest of your comment because it's entirely off base.
EdwardHowton 1 year ago
@DrFoolishit
Languages do evolve over time, but usually due to slang and dialect. I think he's pissed because a political/pop culture ignoramus made an unwitting error and its not only being praised as genius, but also being treated as it were a widely used term that has been accepted by the culture.
xccmx 1 year ago
@xccmx
powerful people have the means of spreading memes - like dawkins spread meme when he was powerful enough to be published :/ Dawkins LOVES making up new words it's like his hobby - he tried making a new TENSE in ancestor's tale - does that make him a trigtard as i call retards since Palin's 'r word' fiasco?
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption
It's not quite as bad if he was trying to do it, but glorifying a typo for media attention is ridiculous. In this case I think it's just a marketing ploy to sell more dictionaries.
xccmx 1 year ago
idiocracy to the extreme... I would seriously question the people who permitted such a thing to be created....
I weep for this world...
mrx0066600 1 year ago
So where's the rage when left leaning Colbert got all the attention for Truthiness?
Pangora2 1 year ago
@Pangora2
Because that's blatant satire. Surely you cannot be this dense. All Colbert does is satire and tongue-in-cheek material.
SeruQuik 1 year ago
Omg thanks, now i want to have 5 babies. :(
ThisIsMyDeen 1 year ago
From my POV there is a large segment of American society who view intelligence and knowledge as a bad thing. I am so glad I will be dead in 20 year or so.
prodigyat9 1 year ago
Hey Beavis he was looking up vagina. Heh Heh Heh
fooltard 1 year ago
I am glad this video was able to be re-uploaded. :)
t3hFlamingNinja 1 year ago
This reminds me of the use of the word 'real'. Seems many sky daddy worshippers use it much differently than I do. Probably why I cannot communicate with ANY god lover.
saxmanchiro 1 year ago
@saxmanchiro
Don't need to agree on a definition of real - their god can be 'real' in it's effects on them, but that doesn't mean it's not 'unreal' in your sense. You can communicate the idea if you stray away from contentious language to other synonym tools - closer to the reality of observable testable facts, away from the superstructure of wordplay
unassumption 1 year ago
@unassumption Your post reminds me of a quote I like to use when discussing reality with theists;
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."- Aldous Huxley
saxmanchiro 1 year ago
@saxmanchiro
a word is a sound, a squiggle on a page - it's meaning is whatever society gives it - it's meaning is what people decide it is. If they ignore it's meaning, it's meaning literally changes. Words aren't facts, they're not observable reality, they're just a means of communicating it, just tools, if they do the job - that's all.
PS. Huxley believed in free will / the invisible hand, from what i can tell, so he really needed to re-read that quote a couple hundred times P=
unassumption 1 year ago
Languages change Jaguar, Palin may be an idiot but if she coins a term that people use then it is the dictionaries responsibility to catalogue that word. Shakespeare also made up words, but Sarah Palin is not Shakespeare. I am curious as to what the difference between refudiate and repudiate is though.
tielec01 1 year ago
We share the same attitudes toward language. I have echoed these sentiments to others. The word in question was "refudiate" I suppose. What's funny is that in her "correction," she choses the wrong word!! LOL. It should have been "repudiate."
I can see how someone would combine these words in a comical sense. I've done it myself, but always with a hint that it's a joke. Who was that comedian who did it all the time?
In Palin's case, however, it was certainly just a mistake.
Great video.
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
While I enjoy the general premise of the video, there are two things that just don't sit right with me:
1) Dictionaries are not authoritative "guardians" of language, they are catalogs of use. The speakers of a language, collectively, are its only guardians.
2) In order for language to maintain its cohesive power, uniformity need only be so precise as not to lose meaning. Further precision may affect presentation or add subtext, but it will not (by definition) alter content.
mediusnacht 1 year ago
@mediusnacht
the dictionary isn't like the bible of language cementing down what people use.
unassumption 1 year ago
It may already be too late. But, we can still hope.
Love this video.
kelliko70 1 year ago
The book Planet of the Apes is based on was an attempt to warn people over our culture becoming more mediocre. It seems a bit exaggerated and it's not high on my list of fears. Great video nonetheless though.
ProgressiveAudio 1 year ago
I'm still scratching my head over D'oh being made into a word.
ProgressiveAudio 1 year ago
@ProgressiveAudio I have no problem with that, and I am a real fundamentalist about this. "Doh!" is an interjection. They are a special class of words which in most cases, aren't really words at all but just spelled-out utterances. Allowances have to be made for interjections because they imitate any kind of sound we might make. I believe these evolve much more rapidly than other parts of speech and we just have to keep up.
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
my favorite IQ test question in idiocracy was " If you have 2 jugs and one holds 5 gallons and 1 holds 2 gallons, how many jugs do you have? LMAO!
WisdomVendor 1 year ago
Thanks, Mr J0nes, this hits a nerve. Most of my smart friends have 0-2 children, but my dumb ones have >=2. From that anecdotal evidence I do worry that as a species we are getting dumber. Mind you, I also worry we are becoming Borg. Think about it. Vision isn't important: if you're vision is bad you get glasses. Soon we'll all be getting ocular implants. And after that, what's next?
dave28lax 1 year ago
@dave28lax Since I am an intelligent person, I deliberately went and had four children in order to counter the effect of dumb-breeding. Not to worry.
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
@Astrobrant2 I'm so glad. The missus and I can't have kiddies (and we're both pretty intelligent), so I'm glad you're keeping the smart persons end up (ooh er). Though I do hope the man/woman you had kids with is also intelligent, otherwise it's a wash.
dave28lax 1 year ago
@dave28lax
I always thought idiocracy was about eugenics like those "people with high iq have kids every hour, ppl with low iq have kids every second" posters in the 1930s... i hear the genetics behind this is flawed but anacdotes support it so... not sure
unassumption 1 year ago
i like how any time a republican does something stupid or immoral that cannot, even by the wildest stretches of logic, be defended, they instantly become a democrat.
neomp5 1 year ago
@neomp5 Show me a single example of a Democrat making a spelling error and then refusing to apologize for it.
JaguarJ0nes 1 year ago 2
@JaguarJ0nes
i think you missed the point of what i said.
i think "outfoxed" showed a few examples of this. when an elected republican gets into serious legal trouble, fox quietly changes the "R" by their name to a "D"
neomp5 1 year ago
PS: how about an example of a youtuber mispronouncing the word "jaguar"?
neomp5 1 year ago