Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sinister used to mean left handed. "A shambles" used to mean a slaughterhouse. Sanction used to mean allow, now it means not allow. It is fine for words to change meaning, even to their own opposite. Natural language has done that forever.

Edit: you're all right, sanction has both meanings.



While it's natural, I'm sure most words didn't change their meaning within a few years of introduction.

> Natural language has done that forever.

We've also "retired" words. On a large scale, as a matter of fact, so it's not really an argument against getting rid of "agile".


"Ell" used to mean arm.


> Sanction used to mean allow, now it means not allow.

It still means both, at least as a verb.


It still means both as a noun, at least in the singular.


> Edit: you're all right, sanction has both meanings.

And autoantonyms are not good. They're confusing and lead to confusion.


"Sanction" has to be an autoantonym. To explicitly allow something is to implicitly forbid whatever is not that something, and to explicitly forbid something to implicitly allow whatever is not that something. Or, at minimum, the not that something in both cases exists in some ternary in-between state.

Thus, any word that exists in this vein is going to end up meaning what is forbidden and what is allowed.

One can sanction a country by only allowing it to trade oil, or one can sanction a country by forbidding it from trading food, clothes, and manufactured goods.


What’s your thoughts about the term “literally”? It’s one of my bugbears, because the term lost its meaning and I don’t know of any good replacement…


It's just the latest in a long line of adverbs for truthfulness that morph into something else. "very" (from latin for true), "really" (from real), "honestly", "truly" and so on. "Actually" seems to still hold on to some meaning but is now on the verge of becoming socially unacceptable. I guess this says something about human nature.


> I don’t know of any good replacement…

My Chambers dictionary suggests these alternatives: actually, really, absolutely.

It also says, "literally is in common use to intensify an idiom, and this is not incorrect".

My general rule is that usage defines meaning. If lots of people use literally as an idiom intensifier, then I'd be wrong to argue. However, my GCSE English teacher said that we need to consider the intended audience and form. Me saying, "They literally flew down the road" to my mates in the pub is fine. It is not fine in formal writing.


It lost it’s meaning in as early as 1876 apparently so you can’t blame kids these days.

But I don’t like its use as a hyperbolic no-op.


I like this definition, from wikipedia:

"Pragmatic sanction, historically, a sovereign's solemn decree which addresses a matter of primary importance and which has the force of fundamental law"

It has just been corrupted in various ways. It's no longer only a sovereign's decree, but any authority. It doesn't necessarily have primary importance. And the force it carries depends on the authority.


> Sanction used to mean allow, now it means not allow.

I can't sanction that description I'm afraid.


"Sinister", still left in Italian ("sinistra").




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: