Hacker News Reader

It may be ineffective prescriptivism. The usefulness is in the fact that we should have a word that unambiguously means "in a strict sense, without exaggeration".

What is kind of useless is a word that can mean some thing or its opposite, and there is no way to tell from the context, eg:

"When the tiger went "Rawr! Rawrrr!", I literally fouled my breeches!"

View on HN

>the fact that we should

Can't have a factual should. Shoulds are normative.

>What is kind of useless is a word that can mean some thing or its opposite

Is the word really useless or indeed useful if no one can provide a 'real' example of actual ambiguity between the two meanings? Furthermore, it's not as if ambiguity between one meaning and an opposite meaning is the greatest ambiguity there is-- if anything, it makes it particularly obvious which meaning the speaker intends.

Surely you can if a source of reference is used? i.e "fact we should" = "fact that most of society believes we should"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com