So the first person who starts a trend is illegitimate?
Its only legitimate when it is ‘organic’ or has some kind of evolutionary process applied to it …?
Can you be more precise?
All language is artificial in the sense that it is a human invention. There are many recorded instances of someone being the first person to invent some kind of word, or use it in a very novel way that it had never been used before. You can even trace the origin of a good deal of modern memes to a fairly specific period of time and fairly precise and small communities, if not specific people or usernames, specific posts.
(As a random example of someone just outright coining a term: Dan Savage basically just declared that the new word for the mixture of lube and fecal matter resulting from anal sex should just be called ‘Santorum’ after Rick Santorum was particularly heinous in his anti LGBTQ rhetoric and policies)
Almost all languages (other than conlangs or things like morse code) also go through organic/evolutionary variations over time, in certain places, as used by certain groups of people, and can thus also said to be, or to have organic/evolutionary aspects.
So, unless you can clarify with more precision, what I’m understanding you are saying is:
Its not natural and organic untill it becomes more popular and thus ‘evolves’ in some sense as more people using it leads to variations on it.
Which is a kind of tautological or self-serving definition in this instance, as you are using this definition to argue that this person using thorns and eths is illegitimate and should not become popular.
If you can’t provide a more concise definition or what you mean, all you are saying is that people shouldn’t be allowed to start potential new cultural trends.
So the first person who starts a trend is illegitimate?
Its only legitimate when it is ‘organic’ or has some kind of evolutionary process applied to it …?
Can you be more precise?
All language is artificial in the sense that it is a human invention. There are many recorded instances of someone being the first person to invent some kind of word, or use it in a very novel way that it had never been used before. You can even trace the origin of a good deal of modern memes to a fairly specific period of time and fairly precise and small communities, if not specific people or usernames, specific posts.
(As a random example of someone just outright coining a term: Dan Savage basically just declared that the new word for the mixture of lube and fecal matter resulting from anal sex should just be called ‘Santorum’ after Rick Santorum was particularly heinous in his anti LGBTQ rhetoric and policies)
Almost all languages (other than conlangs or things like morse code) also go through organic/evolutionary variations over time, in certain places, as used by certain groups of people, and can thus also said to be, or to have organic/evolutionary aspects.
So, unless you can clarify with more precision, what I’m understanding you are saying is:
Its not natural and organic untill it becomes more popular and thus ‘evolves’ in some sense as more people using it leads to variations on it.
Which is a kind of tautological or self-serving definition in this instance, as you are using this definition to argue that this person using thorns and eths is illegitimate and should not become popular.
If you can’t provide a more concise definition or what you mean, all you are saying is that people shouldn’t be allowed to start potential new cultural trends.
Which is very conservative and closed-minded.