Zompist Bboard Again

Does anyone here think that wear and weary contain the same morpheme, even though it's not a productive link? Etymologically, they're unrelated.

Richard W wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2026 11:05 am Does anyone here think that wear and weary contain the same morpheme, even though it's not a productive link? Etymologically, they're unrelated.

I never had the thought that they could be related until you brought it up here.

A similar pair is sorry and sorrow, which are not etymologically related but have actually had influence upon each other in NAE nonetheless, with many NAE varieties including GA having /ɑr/ in sorry under the influence of sorrow even though it 'should' have /ɔr/ (as is the case for many in my native dialect, even though many other people here 'split the difference' by having a strange /ɒr/ that is normally impossible in sorry).

I just used “sought” as a past tense of “search” in a construction with a technological connotation. It came naturally to me. Specifically, “I sought ‘polar bear’ on Amazon”. Is this licit, or at least not highly marked, for anyone?

Man in Space wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2026 12:06 am I just used “sought” as a past tense of “search” in a construction with a technological connotation. It came naturally to me. Specifically, “I sought ‘polar bear’ on Amazon”. Is this licit, or at least not highly marked, for anyone?

It's grammatical, but it's a different verb. If I heard this I would know what you mean, but also assume that you were being playful or dramatic.

zompist wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2026 2:32 am

Man in Space wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2026 12:06 am I just used “sought” as a past tense of “search” in a construction with a technological connotation. It came naturally to me. Specifically, “I sought ‘polar bear’ on Amazon”. Is this licit, or at least not highly marked, for anyone?

It's grammatical, but it's a different verb. If I heard this I would know what you mean, but also assume that you were being playful or dramatic.

Same for me.

zompist wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2026 2:32 am

Man in Space wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2026 12:06 am I just used “sought” as a past tense of “search” in a construction with a technological connotation. It came naturally to me. Specifically, “I sought ‘polar bear’ on Amazon”. Is this licit, or at least not highly marked, for anyone?

It's grammatical, but it's a different verb. If I heard this I would know what you mean, but also assume that you were being playful or dramatic.

To me, the verb seek is quite unmarked in the sense of 'attempt to obtain', as in seeking justice. So as described, Man in Space's choice of word would be unusual for me

bradrn wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2026 4:59 am

zompist wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2026 2:32 am

Man in Space wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2026 12:06 am I just used “sought” as a past tense of “search” in a construction with a technological connotation. It came naturally to me. Specifically, “I sought ‘polar bear’ on Amazon”. Is this licit, or at least not highly marked, for anyone?

It's grammatical, but it's a different verb. If I heard this I would know what you mean, but also assume that you were being playful or dramatic.

Same for me.

Same here.

When writing about politics, should you capitalize "progressive" or "progressives"? I mean in contexts where you're not talking about the original Progressive Movement of the early 20th century USA.

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2026 6:11 pm When writing about politics, should you capitalize "progressive" or "progressives"? I mean in contexts where you're not talking about the original Progressive Movement of the early 20th century USA.

Not in general, no. In Australia this is well-established: we have a distinction between ‘small-l liberals’ (adherents of the political framework) and ‘big-L Liberals’ (members of the Liberal party).

bradrn wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2026 6:22 pm

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2026 6:11 pm When writing about politics, should you capitalize "progressive" or "progressives"? I mean in contexts where you're not talking about the original Progressive Movement of the early 20th century USA.

Not in general, no. In Australia this is well-established: we have a distinction between ‘small-l liberals’ (adherents of the political framework) and ‘big-L Liberals’ (members of the Liberal party).

Thank you!

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2026 6:11 pm When writing about politics, should you capitalize "progressive" or "progressives"? I mean in contexts where you're not talking about the original Progressive Movement of the early 20th century USA.

I would say no. Note that in some cases there is a clear distinction between uncapitalized and capitalized versions of a word ─ for instance, communist refers to supporters of communist economic systems in general while Communist refers to supporters and members of Communist parties, and similarly libertarian originally referred to opponents of authoritarianism (especially anarchists) while Libertarian has come to mean supporters of the ideology of the American Libertarian party.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2026 6:51 pm

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2026 6:11 pm When writing about politics, should you capitalize "progressive" or "progressives"? I mean in contexts where you're not talking about the original Progressive Movement of the early 20th century USA.

I would say no. Note that in some cases there is a clear distinction between uncapitalized and capitalized versions of a word ─ for instance, communist refers to supporters of communist economic systems in general while Communist refers to supporters and members of Communist parties, and similarly libertarian originally referred to opponents of authoritarianism (especially anarchists) while Libertarian has come to mean supporters of the ideology of the American Libertarian party.

Thank you, too!

What, exactly, id the difference between a barber and a hair stylist? I've somehow got the impression that it might be a bit of a combined political/cultural thing: If you're a woman, a gay man, or a politically progressive straight man, you go to a hair stylist, while, if you're a politically conservative straight man, you go to a barber. But to be honest, that sounds a bit weird to me.

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2026 7:06 pm What, exactly, id the difference between a barber and a hair stylist? I've somehow got the impression that it might be a bit of a combined political/cultural thing: If you're a woman, a gay man, or a politically progressive straight man, you go to a hair stylist, while, if you're a politically conservative straight man, you go to a barber. But to be honest, that sounds a bit weird to me.

In Illinois there's a legal difference: a stylist can't shave beards, and a barber can't wash your hair. This may not be true of other states.

Barbers mostly specialize in shorter cuts-- those associated traditionally with men.

Hair stylists will handle anyone; maybe because of that, there seem to be more of them. But as the name suggests, they handle more styles, and they're better with long hair.

When I learnt English, "hair stylists" were called hairdressers; is this word even still in use? AFAIK, a barber is where you go for a shave, and they do haircuts as well, while haidressers are for haircuts mainly. That's why barbers have that masculine association. And native speakers may correct me, but the difference between a haidresser and a hair sylist is only in percieved fanciness and price; same as for a time, every German Friseur with pretenses called themselves Coiffeur, or like now they're styling themselves (ha!) Hair Stylists in Germany as well.
Edit: Ninja'd by zompist.

Thank you both!

zompist wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2026 2:16 am
In Illinois there's a legal difference: a stylist can't shave beards, and a barber can't wash your hair. This may not be true of other states.

So if you're someone with facial hair and you want to get your hair taken care of, the law says that you can either go to someone who can't shave your beard or to someone who can't wash your hair? Weird.

hwhatting wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2026 2:19 am When I learnt English, "hair stylists" were called hairdressers; is this word even still in use?

That’s the usual term in Australia, where usually barbers serve men while hairdressers serve women.

Raphael wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2026 5:11 am

zompist wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2026 2:16 am
In Illinois there's a legal difference: a stylist can't shave beards, and a barber can't wash your hair. This may not be true of other states.

So if you're someone with facial hair and you want to get your hair taken care of, the law says that you can either go to someone who can't shave your beard or to someone who can't wash your hair? Weird.

Yep. This came up with my father, in his 90s— I had to take him periodically to get his hair cut, and faced just this choice. I took him to the stylist, because he could still shave himself, but was apt to neglect to wash his own hair.

Interesting, in the Netherlands there's the traditonal "kapper" (hairdresser) which employs mostly women, but there's increasingly more "barbers" that are focussing mostly, but not exclusively on men, and employ men, typically of North African or Turkish descent.


JAL

In Germany, the term "Friseur" can be made more specific as either "Herrenfriseur" or "Damenfriseur", but many places offer both kinds of services. They might sometimes use different corners of their main room or different specific employees for each function, though, but often they don't.

That's what confuses me - I'm not sure about how to talk in English about the people who've cut my hair in my life. And the apparent cultural aspects worry me even more - if I would talk about my hair stylist, would people assume I live in a mansion?