Yes yes, language changes over time. I've heard that mantra for decades and I know it. That doesn't mean there aren't language changes that aren't grating when they become fashionable (and hopefully temporary).

For me, "morals" being used as a crude catch-all application of "morality," "ethics," "integrity" or related concepts bothers me. Sentence example: "Maybe if society had morals there wouldn't be so many minorities in prison." lmayo us-foreign-policy

An even more annoying otherwise-fluent-speaker modification I see is when "conscious" is used to mean "consciousness" and "conscience" interchangeably. Sentence example: "Single mothers on welfare that steal baby formula have no conscious." It sounds like they're saying the shoplifter is not mentally aware of their own actions, not that they're lacking sufficient "morals" to let their baby starve for the sake of Rules-Based Order(tm).

There's others, but those two come up enough recently, with sufficient newness, for me to bring them up here. Some old classic language quirks are so established and entrenched that even though I hate them, bringing them up would likely invite some hatemail and maybe some mystery alt accounts also sending hatemail after that. You know, because they "could care less(sic)" about what I think. janet-wink

    • FourteenEyes [he/him]
      ·
      10 months ago

      There is almost no scenario in which using the Oxford comma fails to improve sentence clarity.

      People are just too lazy to use punctuation for its intended purpose, I guess.

    • SerLava [he/him]
      ·
      10 months ago

      both the oxford comma and the lack of an oxford comma can introduce ambiguity in different situations.

      • JuneFall [none/use name]
        ·
        10 months ago

        both, the, oxford, comma, and, the, lack, of, an, oxford, comma, can, introduce, ambiguity, in, different, situations,.,