b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » World of Random » Post 1178872 | Search
This is a question World of Random

There's a pile of scrap timber, rubble and general turds in the road opposite my work with a hand-written sign reading "Free Shed". Tell us about random, completely hatstand stuff and people you've seen

Suggested by Sandettie Light Vessel Automatic

(, Thu 21 Apr 2011, 11:38)
Pages: Popular, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Actually
I find it hard to argue with most of that. It's a shame I didn't qualift my statement by adding something like "not to know how to not know how the word 'random' is being intended and used in this QOTW"

Oh. Wait. I did.
(, Thu 21 Apr 2011, 14:34, 1 reply)

I think the point in the mini essay is that even trivial things like this can contribute to cheapening of the language, and in communication becoming less nuanced.

As another example, imagine witnesses to a shooting. Police arrive and speak to witnesses. A witness says, while in shock "it was just so random, the bloke just started shooting"

The proper usage of the word, without the bastardised colloquialism, would clearly imply that the shooter fired indiscriminately, the slang usage just implies that the witness hasn't seen a shooting before. If the witness believes that they are using random correctly, the investigation could become confused before it has started, with the idea of the shooter planning to target a specific person or people ruled out.
(, Thu 21 Apr 2011, 14:59, closed)
I think....
...that if I cared, I'd bother to read that, but I'm done.
(, Thu 21 Apr 2011, 15:08, closed)
Most people haven't seen a shooting before so the slang usage of the word would more than likely be correct


Either way, please stop going on about it now.
(, Thu 21 Apr 2011, 15:13, closed)

The slang usage almost certainly wouldn't be correct there at all.
(, Thu 21 Apr 2011, 15:16, closed)
You said:
'the slang usage just implies that the witness hasn't seen a shooting before'


And they probably hadn't
So it would be right.

So shut up guy
(, Thu 21 Apr 2011, 15:49, closed)

Yes - the slang usage implies that the witness hasn't seen a shooting before - instead of implying that there was a random element to the shooting, eg that the shooter seemed to be indiscriminate in who he was targeting. So the slang usage is misleading or confusing, which was my original point anyway.
(, Thu 21 Apr 2011, 17:09, closed)

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Pages: Popular, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1