To think sometimes people use words without fully understanding them?

[Oodiks]

There were a few examples in my previous AIBU thread. Including, but not limited to:

Genocide
Antisemitism
Zionism
Ethnic Cleansing

These are strong trigger words for many people, myself included, but I think they are often misused and/or misunderstood.

Thoughts?

I know what you mean. Some of my bugbears are:

Disengenuous
Denial
Mental gymnastics
Incredulity

Mine are

Nonplussed
Disinterested
Infer

Literally works great as an intensifier and it's been used in this way since literally forever. Anyone who feigns exasperation at it is just looking for things to feel superior about in my opinion.

LOL, you're the one who thinks the Hamas charter is about land not religion.

Have you tried reading it, The Avalon Project : Hamas Covenant 1988 (yale.edu)?

It was changed in 2017 but you know that, right.

Yeah, they somewhat sanitized it by saying Zionists instead of Jews.

Literally works great as an intensifier
It does now.

and it's been used in this way since literally forever.
That's literally false.

Anyone who feigns exasperation at it
I, for one, am not exasperated about it, let alone 'feigning exasperation'. Far from it. People are having a discussion.

is just looking for things to feel superior about in my opinion.
Your opinion on this is literally ridiculous. It means everyone posting on this thread, including the OP, is feigning exasperation and "just looking for things to feel superior about". This is literally the theme of the thread. Perhaps, you're exasperated at this instead.

Should also be noted that they did not in any way repudiate the original and have said it does not replace the founding charter. So, basically both are still in effect.

They sanitised it by saying that they had no problem with Jewish people and wanted land.

But I'm not arguing the toss about Hamas.

Do you mean like 'flobadob'?

Oh yes you are!!

Indeed

No I'm not.

Infer Vs imply

Alternate Vs alternative

Basically anything that has a verb and a noun version, so off the top of my head: quote vs quotation, invite vs invitation, license vs licence.

Not so much words as grammar:
My husband spoke to my sister and I
The dog bit my friend and I

I think that last one may be called hyper - correction. The person saying it has heard that you shouldn't say 'My friend and me went to the shops', so they correctly say 'My friend and I...' but then apply this rule to all sentences, including those where they're the object of the verb.

Sorry. Grammar enthusiast here, not nazi though because I don't correct people. I quietly seethe, and if I'm honest, I do consider myself to be a bit superior. Just a bit.

"ichundich
Did your last thread not go how you intended? What is happening in Gaza right now meets the definition of 'genocide'."

"You are ascribing intention where there was none.

As horrifying as the apparent death toll is, it is nowhere near the horrifying toll on Jews, Romas, and other 'undesirables' in Nazi Germany or Tutsis in Rwanda, so not at the level of genocide in my opinion."

So anything under 6 million doesn't qualify as genocide in your opinion, lol.
Who's not understanding the definition now.

This has to be a wind up. So I'll skip off. I don't play like to play with trolls.

Ps I believe dictionaries have been updated to include an informal version of literally - which is used for emphasis and is defined as actually.

Of course it's a matter or proportion; if you state your intention to kill an entire group and you kill one member it's not genocide, if you kill 70% of them it clearly is.

Hamas has stated their genocidal intentions over and over, they just haven't managed to follow through.

Also people who use 'myself' instead of 'me', as in 'Ms Bibble and myself will be conducting the interview.'

Ooh yes, your right that's a good one. 😉

I frequently see these words used incorrectly.
Nonplussed
Bemused
Mortified
Momentarily

Conflate: it doesn't mean to mix things up and think X is Y and that Y is X. It's to confuse two things into a separate thing, to think X and Y are Z.

Collide: as I understand it, for a collision to occur, both particles have to be in motion. Not sure if I have this wrong or if it's just that enough people get it wrong that the incorrect meaning has become accepted usage.

Electrocute: like decimate, electrocute has a specific meaning and it's that the shock recieved was lethal.

Majority dead are women and children. Combatants are they? Babies with skulls hollowed out? Fair game to you right?
This thread is a blatant dig at those horrified by what's happening at the hands of right wing nut jobs. Spare me the faux concern about the use of terminology.

You need to learn the meaning of genocide.

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

1. Killing members of the group;
2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

As you know, the Israeli government have stated their intention to destroy Gaza and have killed members of the group, caused serious harm to the group and inflicted conditions calculated to bring about its destruction.

Nowhere does it mention numbers needed to qualify. Now don't pretend you don't know what it means because it's been explained a few times to you already and that would be disengenuous.

I'm puzzled that lots of people have said 'mortified' - how is it used incorrectly?

I’m pretty sure “110% effort” is intended as hyperbole.