Chambers <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote:
> On 5/13/2009 1:56 PM, clipka wrote:
> > Something like, "we don't have a proper name for it, so it can't be outlawed."
>
> My original point, of course, is subtly (yet importantly!) different
> from this.
>
> More like, "We don't have a proper name for it, so we need a new name
> rather than bastardizing an existing one."
>
> --
> ...Chambers
> www.pacificwebguy.com

The re-use of terms where a new term's coining is warranted has always driven me
crazy.  Usually the word with with the racier connotations leads people to avoid
the word to express the non-racy meaning.  E.g. Thong.

I also had a great example of a new term which did *not* need coining, but I
can't think of it right at the moment.

Charles

Post a reply to this message