Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

merriam-webster.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 337 posts

Re: What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

#201

Post by da_chicken »

denton-scratch wrote: post #187
giraffe_lady wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This places pendants like me at a serious disadvantage; I can't rely on a dictionary to help me win arguments about correct usage. I feel like you're being sent a strong signal about what "correct" means re usage but refusing to heed it. Dictionaries aren't descriptivist because of an idealogical commitment or whatever; a strictly prescriptivist stance is simply not very useful for achieving the goals that a dictio…

> simply not very useful for achieving the goals that a dictionary has. Apparently the dictionary's goals are not the same as my goals. Sure, I want to know about incorrect usages; but I also want to know that those usages are incorrect .

Simply put, that's not how English works.

Say that an English speaker speaks a sentence, and an English listener understands it. If they both agree that it was an English sentence -- including no jargon -- and they both agree on the meaning of the sentence, then that's correct English. If the two individuals have also never met before, then it's certainly correct English.

That's what "defined by usage" means. English does not have a language regulator or language academy.

Re: What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

#202

Post by Tijdreiziger »

elicash wrote: post #29
jtbayly wrote: post #8

I think I've always assumed it meant "unimpressed." That is not the "new" meaning under discussion, but they seem to hint at it when they say, "This new sense appears to stem from a mistaken belief that the first three letters of nonplus are there to indicate that someone is something other than “plussed” (although what being plussed would entail here remains a mystery)." I bet my meaning is the next change to this s…

I am excited to start slipping "plussed" casually into conversation.

https://youtube.com/shorts/Z9ifuTpljg0

Re: What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

#203

Post by giraffe_lady »

denton-scratch wrote: post #187
giraffe_lady wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This places pendants like me at a serious disadvantage; I can't rely on a dictionary to help me win arguments about correct usage. I feel like you're being sent a strong signal about what "correct" means re usage but refusing to heed it. Dictionaries aren't descriptivist because of an idealogical commitment or whatever; a strictly prescriptivist stance is simply not very useful for achieving the goals that a dictio…

> simply not very useful for achieving the goals that a dictionary has. Apparently the dictionary's goals are not the same as my goals. Sure, I want to know about incorrect usages; but I also want to know that those usages are incorrect .

I understood what you meant I was just trying to gently point out that it's not a goal that is valued or even taken seriously by people who study language, including lexicographers. Some curiosity about why that is could take you pretty far here.

Re: What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

#205

Post by tejohnso »

In my mind it came from the French non plus, meaning neither. Often heard when responding "me neither", as the "me" would be a very short syllable at the beginning of the response. I can imagine people hearing "non plus" and seeing uninterested or unfazed people uttering it, sharing lack of enthusiasm with someone else.

Re: What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

#207

Post by arrowsmith »

tejohnso wrote: post #205

In my mind it came from the French non plus, meaning neither. Often heard when responding "me neither", as the "me" would be a very short syllable at the beginning of the response. I can imagine people hearing "non plus" and seeing uninterested or unfazed people uttering it, sharing lack of enthusiasm with someone else.

According to this source it comes directly from Latin: https://www.etymonline.com/word/nonplus

Re: What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

#208

Post by bzhang255 »

arrowsmith wrote: post #207
tejohnso wrote: post #205

In my mind it came from the French non plus, meaning neither. Often heard when responding "me neither", as the "me" would be a very short syllable at the beginning of the response. I can imagine people hearing "non plus" and seeing uninterested or unfazed people uttering it, sharing lack of enthusiasm with someone else.

According to this source it comes directly from Latin: https://www.etymonline.com/word/nonplus

Well, also according to the article itself :)

Re: What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

#209

Post by kimbernator »

codeulike wrote: post #124
andycowley wrote: post #15

As a Brit, I don't think I've ever encountered the latter meaning. I've only ever heard it to mean 'perplexed'.

Its clearly a UK/USA split, for some reason the article does not mention this. Wikipedia has it on 'List of words having different meanings in American and British English' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_words_having_different...

The article does not mention this, but the second paragraph links a MW definition which does explicitly call out that this usage is primarily US-based: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nonplussed

Re: What's Going on with ‘Nonplussed’? (2017)

#210

Post by djur »

Angostura wrote: post #96
djur wrote: post #20

The word is skunked at this point. Using it guarantees that readers are going to have to pause and refer to the context, and depending on the context it may not even be possible to confidently disambiguate. Luckily both meanings have ample synonyms.

… I’m entirely nonplussed by your use of ‘skunked’.

It's the term Bryan Garner uses for words that are inconsistent in meaning in a way that makes them difficult to use effectively:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunked_term

I'm not sure what his origin was for the term, but "skunked" as an adjective to me indicates a beer that was spoiled by exposure to light and/or heat. It's gone off.

Post reply on HN