Talk:2039: Begging the Question

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 01:12, 10 March 2020 by (talk) (added comment about english purists actually being latin purists)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

First162.158.74.231 17:17, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Of course it's also possible that the food made them so Nauseated that they also became Nauseous (i.e. they could have started vomiting or smell horrible due to eating the food, causing people around to feel unwell as well). NormanR (talk) 21:13, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I concur, I imagine Randall had an alternate ending in mind where cue-ball says "No, she's right, I'm nauseated just being around her" 19:07, 30 August 2018 (UTC) Sam

I believe the reason the two words have become confused is due to the word "noxious". which means "very unpleasant". So, someone who is "nauseated" could feel "noxious", and when wires end up crossed in the brain, they associate it with "nauseous" rather than "noxious". (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

But "noxious" means harmful, poisonous, unpleasant, which is different than "having an unpleasant feeling." Here again, the word "unpleasant" has undergone a shift in usage from "not pleasing" to something more like "displeased" as in the statement "I feel unpleasant," used to mean "I have an unpleasant feeling." 04:57, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Except that the secondary meaning of nauseous has been around for as long as the primary meaning. It is only recent pedantry that has tried to suppress the more ancient use. (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

I shall follow this argument with complete disinterest Arachrah (talk)

I looked up "Nauseous" in and I found the following usage note:

"The two literal senses of nauseous, “causing nausea” ( a nauseous smell ) and “affected with nausea” ( to feel nauseous ), appear in English at almost the same time in the early 17th century, and both senses are in standard use at the present time. Nauseous is more common than nauseated in the sense “affected with nausea,” despite recent objections by those who imagine the sense to be new. In the sense “causing nausea,” either literally or figuratively, nauseating has become more common than nauseous : a nauseating smell."

So, originally, it seems Nauseous was used to refer to both the object that causes the nausea, as well as the feeling. So this is not really a case of change of use, but more your typical snobbish people trying to appear smarter by correcting other people's language usage. The spirit of the comic remains, though. Source (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

does randall read oots?...

...because the actual oots-strip contains "nauseous". (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

I'm 41 years old, and I have never heard the usage of nauseous meaning causing nausea until today. I speak American English. -- WhiteDragon (talk) 17:01, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

xkcd is a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language. Try Google with this search phrase: "nauseated vs. nauseous". One example:
The English purists argue that, when “nauseous” entered the language from Latin, it meant only “causing nausea,” as the smell of an overfull vomit bag might, ... . “Nauseated,” on the other hand, means “afflicted with nausea,” like how that poor chap who filled the vomit bag feels, and should never, ever be substituted with “nauseous.”
Which serves to illustrate how many english language purists are actually latin language purists
It's from Reader's digest: Why Grammar Nerds Hate it When You Say ‘I’m Nauseous’, read the full article, it's funny. --Dgbrt (talk) 17:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Apparently you don't watch Big Bang Theory, :) That's the most visible example I've seen of it being pointed out that "nauseous" means "causes nausea", that the standard usage is using it when we're supposed to use "nauseated". I've seen this pointed out enough that I try to remember to say "nauseated" on the rare occasions it comes up. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 05:40, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

TIL: "Enormity" and "Begs the question" didn't originally mean what I've always known them to mean, LOL! At least with the latter the original meaning makes more sense, with that wording. NiceGuy1 (talk) 05:40, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

"Beg the question" has actually had THREE distinct meanings: originally it was to BEGGAR the question, meaning (as stated above) to void the question of any meaning by assuming the answer in advance. This morphed into "beg the question", which gradually shifted meaning into a statement which was so problematic it couldn't go unchallenged (it begs "the question" meaning it begs to BE QUESTIONED). Now we live in the era of "...which begs the question: (whatever question the referenced thing suggests)" Who knows what cool new meaning it'll have in a few hundred years? 02:20, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

A lot of the usage of the English language varies depending on region. Interestingly, I've never encountered "nauseous" being used to describe an item, only the sensation. I suspect there is some historical confusion with the word "noxious" due to the highly varied (non-standardized) spelling of early modern English. In my experience and usage, one would say that the food is either "noxious" (causing harm through unpleasant sensations) or "nauseating" (simply causing nausea), the latter of which I am surprised no one else has yet mentioned (hence my desire to comment). However, I doubt any of these constructs can really be stated to be the only correct grammatical form, as usage varies too wildly. In fact, the version suggested by White Hat seems to be going the way of the dodo anyway, as alluded to by Cueball. 10:36, 13 January 2019 (UTC)