Normally I say the "usage defines meaning" argument is flimsy at best and actively encourages misuse that ultimately limits the ability for precision and nuance in language. 'Since' isn't causal, 'because' (as one can guess) is. "I've been sick since Thursday" means one thing, "I've been dice because of Thursday" means a different thing.

But then an old farmer will tell you a story about needing to buy some rubbers because they're getting into their tranny and I think, "those words don't mean that to me."

[–] Sorchist@kbin.social 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'd say that having three different words for "because" increases nuance. As the link to merriam-webster's article pointed out, you get a nuance of formality between "because" and "as"; "as" is somewhat more formal. I'm not sure if there's another nuance between "because" and causal "since" but smart money is on there being one (if you survey the use of the two I bet you will find there are very subtle differences of usage there -- there almost always are nuances of difference between supposedly synonymous words, even if they're only differences like level of formality).

[–] bleistift2@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago

Since reading your comment I’ve noted that I don’t use since and because interchangably. I believe because puts emphasis on the reason, while the main focus when using since still lays on the thing being explained.

“I take the left here, since that route is shorter.” – (Slight) stress on the first part, the latter is “just” a justification.

– “Why do you take the right when the left route is shorter?” – “I don’t take the left because it is shorter.” Stress on the last part, it’s the main point of that sentence.

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

the "usage defines meaning" argument is flimsy at best

So what else does? I never understood how you can reason the objective meaning of a bunch of phonemes. If usage doesn't define meaning, you can look up the meaning in a dictionary. But if it's a good dictionary, it deduces the meaning of the word by its usage. There is ultimately no other way.

[–] Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 11 points 11 months ago (2 children)

But then a good dictionary is ultimately personal, contextual, regional, and ephemeral, making it ultimately useless.

I will never recognise 'suposably' as a proper English word. But my children might, and so to their children, until it universally is a correct, proper word. That's the scope of the tide of language.

Its a necessary battle between the old ways and the new, one that I know I am ever drifting to the wrong side of. When some people use the word wrong, they are wrong. When everyone uses the word wrong, they are right. The old guard dies and the new gaurd rises.

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 6 points 11 months ago

Well put. That's not to say that dictionaries are useless. I use them alot but not in my native language since that's where I know the words. In English, which is my second language, dictionaries are close enough to help me around most of the times. It's like a map. The map isn't useless because a new road is build or a cabin is no more. You can still use the map but don't trust it over reality.

[–] dontpanic@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)