Changes

:Was that a ad hominem attack? I found plenty of definitions for those words. Just because your etymological dictionary doesn't have a word won't negate the fact that it is a word. Diachronic linguistics has shown that words are changing constantly. I like these words and will continue to use them whenever necessary. Or any other nonstandard words, terms, or phrases that I feel will convey the appropriate message.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:15, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

:Was that a ad hominem attack? I found plenty of definitions for those words. Just because your etymological dictionary doesn't have a word won't negate the fact that it is a word. Diachronic linguistics has shown that words are changing constantly. I like these words and will continue to use them whenever necessary. Or any other nonstandard words, terms, or phrases that I feel will convey the appropriate message.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:15, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

::Pointing out to someone that they are making a common grammatical error is hardly an ad hominem attack.  Mr. Schlafly himself points out such errors all the time.  The fact that language is dynamic does not change the fact that there are generally-agreed upon standards.  You are, of course, perfectly free to flout those standards if you so choose; however, the message that you are likely to convey in so doing is a lack of facility with standard English.  Someone who insists on using "ain't" on a resume, on the grounds that it's a word and he has a right to use is, is still likely to get his job application tossed in the circular file in short order.  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 16:29, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

::Pointing out to someone that they are making a common grammatical error is hardly an ad hominem attack.  Mr. Schlafly himself points out such errors all the time.  The fact that language is dynamic does not change the fact that there are generally-agreed upon standards.  You are, of course, perfectly free to flout those standards if you so choose; however, the message that you are likely to convey in so doing is a lack of facility with standard English.  Someone who insists on using "ain't" on a resume, on the grounds that it's a word and he has a right to use it, is still likely to get his job application tossed in the circular file in short order.  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 16:29, 29 June 2008 (EDT)