It's surprising that this simple observation has attracted so much attention.

The premise of the criticism is that "the dictionary has changed the rules of English," which is wrong, following on "you can't end a sentence with a preposition," which is also wrong.

🧵

https://twitter.com/MerriamWebster/status/1758223522080419965

How can a “rule” not be a rule?

Why does this idea persist?

This week's podcast has 5 tips for English speakers who want to improve the sound of their spoken French.

These are just things that I've think that can be improved easily just by noticing them--and hearing them.

art19.com/shows/word-mat… 1) Try to distinguish the nasal vowel sounds. Since we don't have all of these sounds in English, they can be hard to differentiate.

But if you say them in a short sequence, your ear will help make them all sound different.

I use the sentence "En un instant" to do this.

Our latest podcast explores both the how and why of dictionary revision. We take it for granted today that dictionaries are kept up-to-date, but that wasn't always true.

In fact, until Noah Webster, English dictionaries essentially died when their authors did.

https://twitter.com/MerriamWebster/status/1532502897199546389

This is a business story every bit as much as it's about scholarship and language.

The simple fact is that dictionaries were difficult to produce. Very hard to set in type. Too expensive to sell in large numbers.

And risky: Webster's original publisher went bankrupt.

I'm always fascinated by the near duplicates in English that come from having an Old English word and a Latin word with similar meanings.

Pairs like:

Old English / Latin

tongue / language
readable / legible
brotherhood / fraternity
kingly / royal
freedom / liberty We tend to think of vocabulary in this way: an Old English word that is earthy and basic ("home") and a Latin-based word that is somehow more technical ("residence").

But there are also duplicate *word parts* like prefixes, and we tend to overlook those.

It's interesting that the American tradition of using 'inaugurate' embeds through #etymology a strange Roman superstition, a way to measure the luck of the future officeholder by ritual reading of omens from the flight of birds.

https://twitter.com/MerriamWebster/status/1351937742108766209

This, of course, is also why we say "this augurs well" (literally "this is promising according to omens").

We could have used simpler and more concrete terms like 'installation' or 'induction' for this purpose, but they are less laden with figurative meaning.

1) The fact that people care deeply about language is an unambiguously good thing! It's easy to explain why 'irregardless' is in the dictionary, and to show that the clear recommendation of the dictionary is:

"Use regardless instead." 2) It is instructive to observe that many people who seem to believe fervently that "words matter" don't seem to believe that "facts matter."

My talk this morning for ESL teachers in Mexico, for MEXTESOL, is about usage. It's a topic that is rarely covered in ESL contexts. For most of us, "usage" is about warning people: you may be judged for using a certain word a certain way--and that may distract or undermine your message.

Such an important point here:

"I get pedantic about the placement of the vocative comma in “God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen.” The song is not a suggestion to “merry gentlemen” to rest but an imperative to gentlemen to “rest merry.”"

https://twitter.com/MaryNorrisTNY/status/1075409420610404352

'Rest' in this transitive sense isn't used very much in contemporary English.

"God rest you merry, gentlemen"="God keep you happy, gentlemen"

'Merry' doesn't modify 'gentlemen.'