On Sat, April 11, 2015 8:14 pm, Trent W. Buck wrote:
Lev, this makes me wonder: when it comes to linguistics, do you favour prescription or description? ;-)
I think prescriptive rules inspire description and description informs prescription. Take this discussion of the ownership of the word "libertarian". A pure descriptive approach would say that the use of the word has become associated with a sort of radical individualism combined with a particular model to economic ownership and exchange. But the problem with the descriptive approach is that it cedes the ground of meaning far too readily, losing the etymological trajectory by which we can understand the narrative of history. When the meaning of a word changes, that change will (a) be contested but also (b) result in either more or less precision or more or less moral rights (e.g., the 'change' of meaning to the word 'marriage'). Because there is a historical and continuing association with the word 'libertarianism' with politics associated with socialistic economic models, it is hardly surprising that advocates will attempt to discourage appropriation of the term to an opposite economic model. But for the purposes of greater precision and clarity, perhaps it would be best for some who are describing themselves as "libertarianism" that they more accurately describe such ideas as "propertarian". -- Lev Lafayette, BA (Hons), GradCertTerAdEd (Murdoch), GradCertPM, MBA (Tech Mngmnt) (Chifley) mobile: 0432 255 208 RFC 1855 Netiquette Guidelines http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt