Fear and Hatred of Something will only increase it's Power.

[wolven7]

Voltaire - [God Thinks]--- "Bling-Bling" is in the dictionary. It's an actual, acknowledged Word...

I want to Cry.

I'm going to start making up shit, and spreading it around, to see how long it takes to get into the dictionary...

{Addendum: 4.52pm: Pain - [Easy Out]--- Let me clarify my sentiment, here; I hate the slow mauling of the English or any other Human language. I hate how we allow people to make up words that basically mean "Oooh Shiny!" and then add them to the fucking dictionary. I despise the use of these terms, in a serious setting. I want it to stop. I also think that there should be as many new words, and true understandings as possible. I think that, if we can use a word-- however inane, banal, or simply Stupid-- to truly gain a new level of understanding, in the world, then we should.

Darkest of the Hillside Thickets - [My Tank]--- I'm disgusted at the Existence of "Bling-Bling," as a phrase, as a potential philosophy of life, and as vapidity. I am hopeful at the way it can potentially be used, in the near future. (Ass Ponys - [Little Bastard]). Other than that, Fuck Bling-Bling and the horse it rode in on.}

Comments

[kitsuchan.livejournal.com]

That's.. sad. Good luck inventing words... it seems like a good thing to do.

and another thing

[kitsuchan.livejournal.com]

Bling Bling isn't in the OED yet, so it isn't really an acknowledged word. So cheer up.

[djedhi.livejournal.com]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/

it used to be funnier because it looked exactly like dictionary.com

oh well.

"tight" bugs the hell outta me.

[jinxvamp.livejournal.com]

i like the word analinguist myself. if it's not in the dictionary it should be.

yes and no

[raoin.livejournal.com]

of course you realize i dont mind that "bling-bling" is in any dictionary. in fact i applaud the fact that someone had the audancity to put it there, especially since it is a fad culture word and not something that people will be using ten years from now. however i feel that in this rant you have contradicted yourself. you

"also think that there should be as many new words, and true understandings as possible. I think that, if we can use a word-- however inane, banal, or simply Stupid-- to truly gain a new level of understanding, in the world, then we should."

however you deny that "bling-bling" doesnt create some new understanding, no matter how inane, banal, or stupid. it does in its own frustratingly annoying pop culture way. after all, it conveys a very specific sense of who the user is and what they mean. when i hear someone using slang i mentally peg them, yes sometimes unfairly, into specific soci-political-economic class. as a writer i must protest the denial of the goodness of new words like this. any word you can come up with that helps you get your point across is good. your own damn fault if you cant chose the right ones. and further, words are like colors, you always want to be able to chose more than a monochromatic color scheme.

that said, i do agree over the despicable nature of "the use of these terms, in a serious setting." there is a time and a place for the above mentioned other colors, and there is a time when strictured, formal, true english form/word/language/syntax is not only necessary but also required and you are WRONG if you submit anything other than that. which is the only thing that really bothers me about "bling-bling" that people think that they can put slang into their formal papers as if it were correct.

[herredheart.livejournal.com]

I also think that there should be as many new words, and true understandings as possible. I think that, if we can use a word-- however inane, banal, or simply Stupid-- to truly gain a new level of understanding, in the world, then we should....

Opinion: language can only be more exact it can NEVER be exact. While that could serve every day communication very well. Think about poetic communication. Or Hemingway...or most lyrical writers. Think about the fact abstracts are exactly that...and anything worth talking about (life,death,justice,freedom,respect,love)are intangibles. They can be tangibly represented because people are solid matter. If,for example: We came up with a solid defined set definition for every type of love. Spent years on sociological research to determine and give an exact term to everything. Or every lifesytle. People would spend good portions of time trying to put multifaceted concepts into multifaceted language. I also think it would make people less capable of relating. Because language is inexact or shorthand persay to ideas the listener can interpret add or subtract from the very word said. Now this is not a beneficial process if the world is a business. Most would acknowledge at it's core it is not.

Fact: The more words the more taxing on the brain. The less will be said by virtue alone we won't have the time nor the electrochemical attention span to think-speak so precisely.

I hate the slow mauling of the English or any other Human language. I hate how we allow people to make up words that basically mean "Oooh Shiny!" and then add them to the fucking dictionary.

Either you have a vendetta against shiny objects. Or I ask you to look further into what Bling-Bling is. I am not joking when I say this. Bling-Bling is beyond "shiny" it is a coded status symbol. It in some cases whether anyone wants to admit it or not it is vocabulary representing a larger inexact social order. It may sound like a stupid word. But it's understanding that some people have the money and others don't. It's an understanding of moving up in the world.

Do you have any objections to the assimilation of
the word "ice" into pop/current/rap culture to stand for diamonds?

Re: yes and no

[wolven.livejournal.com]

The addendum was specifically to clarify. I hate it, but it is useful. No contradiction. Just how it is.

Re:

[wolven.livejournal.com]

All slang terms receive my same level of contempt and begrudged acceptance. Hatred of them, and Hope at what they can be used for, overall.

Perhaps i was Unclear

[wolven.livejournal.com]

........ See the new Entry.

where to draw the line?

[(Anonymous)]

You'd be amazed at how many "slang" words people use today to sound new and hip actually entered the language about the time the Angles, Saxons and Jutes first washed up on a beach in England. Some words, i.e. "poontang" were first used as slang before the birth of Christ! Even lexical items from "African American Vernacular English" (yes, that's what linguists tend to call it these days....no comment) are often based on a very long standing historical linguistic foundation, few words are simply "made up from thin air, with the exception perhaps of onomatopoeic words. You say you like change in every form no matter what, then you should probably be okay with linguistic change, because like it or not, this is the dynamic nature of language at work. Check your OED, (the bigass one no one can afford mind you), and you'll be amazed at how old some of the most slangy terms really are, Grimm's is even better, but it wouldn't help much with English.

Re: where to draw the line?

[wolven.livejournal.com]

I've known this, you know this, and whoever reads this comment knows this. How many others? Linguistics majors. People with sway within groups, that don't get national exposure. If people Knew these things, maybe i'd be a little less Pissed. That whole Total Understanding thing...