This is probably a fool’s errand, because it’s all or nothing, making it inherently unstable. If we ever get within striking distance of having enough states to cross the threshold, the law will be fought tooth and nail to prevent passage, and this battle would continue in perpetuity in every remotely purple state that has the NPVIC law in place, trying to get enough overturned to stop it.

Maybe it accomplishes something useful simply by bringing the conversation about reform to the forefront? But as an actual solution I’m completely skeptical, as much as I like the idea.

“You” and “thou” come from different roots. They are not simply different orthographies like “ye” and “the”.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/thou

https://www.etymonline.com/word/you

https://english.stackexchange.com/a/18629

If “literally” means “figuratively,” then we literally have no word for “literally.”

It’s worth pointing out that you just used the word for “literally” and we knew which sense of the word you meant through context. Just like the verb “dust” can mean to put a layer of small particles on something but can also mean to remove the small particles from something. Humans are able to sort these things out.

However, one of the best things about language is that if a need actually arises for more clarity about “literalness”, a solution will naturally emerge to address it.

Even the word “literal” started out as a word that pertained specifically to the written word, and scholarly things, and its sense evolved to refer to things not necessarily written down, to the present meaning of “the most straightforward interpretation of what I’m saying”. A need arose and a word filled the need.

I’ve always wondered why so many people have this reaction, rather than seeing it as a cool thing that languages can do. Namely, taking bits from other languages and making them into something new.

I don’t know if this is true everywhere, but I can say my elementary school kid and friends all say “search it up”, and although they have school-issued Chromebooks and use Google for search, I can’t actually recall ever hearing them say “google it”.

It seems to me that the question of free will is only truly meaningful (aside from being an interesting thought experiment) if we could then perfectly or near-perfectly predict what a person will do. But the system in which we exist is so complex that we will never be able to model that or come close.

So we might as well consider humans to have free will, just as we consider a roll of the dice to be random.

I don’t want someone to go kill him, but I absolutely wish that he would drop dead without the slightest moral reservation.

My only concern is that however he were to die, everyone on the right would go full conspiracy theory and blame it on the left, and somehow we’d be worse off in ways I can’t imagine right now. The right always seems to find a way to make me regret any turn of events that I thought was good.

Go to General > Keyboard > Text Replacement, and create an entry for each word you want, putting the same thing in the phrase field and the shortcut field. Then it won’t try to replace them every time.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it is actually “till” and “till” is not short for “until” (and “‘til” is not a word). “Until” actually came from “till”.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/till

https://www.etymonline.com/word/until

I’ve never heard anyone say “tell” to mean “till” so I won’t comment on that.

Han sarcastically calls Jabba “a wonderful human being” in the special editions of ANH

The context in which it is used makes sense, but the extra “is” is just there. By all rights it should be ungrammatical, but people pretty frequently have that extra “is”, and I do find it absolutely bizarre how pervasive it is.

If they looked exactly alike it wouldn’t even be interesting. You could just photograph actual twins

All That She Wants will always remind me fondly of being driven to high school by my older sister in 1993 with that song on repeat

I agree that it’s still saying something about the music industry, just not with the specific lyrics, but rather with the sound and the title.

All this photo would take is either a friend hanging back and snapping a pic with their phone, or a random person walking behind who thought it was funny taking a photo, the coats are noticeable enough that someone could have seen it coming far enough ahead of time to get their phone ready for the photo

The reason that a linguist would give is that -phile has become a somewhat productive suffix in English, so it is not constrained to Greek roots.

Because:

1. The words “lose” and “loose” have the same vowel sound (and for some reason the extra “o” changes /z/ to /s/).

2. There are no other words ending in -ose that have the /u/ sound

3. Many words ending in -oose exist that have an /u/ sound, including the very common word, “choose”, which has the same /uz/ sound that “lose” has at the end

I never get these spellings mixed up but I can absolutely understand why someone would.

You should have suggested you put sunscreen on each other’s backs at the same time to get it over with quicker.

https://piped.video/watch?v=CjGolrmbk9s&t=5