Ideally the answers aren’t just political soapboxing.

  • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 days ago

    Decimation means “lose 10%”, not “lose all BUT 10℅”

    If two people suddenly quit your twenty-man team you’ve been decimated. If eight or eighteen people quit you’ve been devastated.

    (Plus a bunch of “politics” and civil rights things.)

    • theherk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      Linguistics just doesn’t deal with definitions like that. It does mean that, and certainly even connotatively historically. Today, in modern parlance, it definitely means “to kill a large portion of” something, and is almost never used as a 10% reference. So your team could be correctly described as “decimated” in both scenarios.

    • plutopos@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 days ago

      Linguistics are descriptive, not prescriptive. There can be no “common misconception” in language, because the moment a misconception is common enough, it becomes true

      • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        Linguistic drift requires a considerable majority understanding, not just a large minority

        By way of example, no matter how many men think “chartreuse” is a vaguely pink color or that “trans-man” includes Caitlyn Jenner, it’ll still be lime-green and Eliot Page.

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      Worked in a company that decimated their workforce with redundancies. I word it correctly and other people wrongly assume it means something else.