Words you can't use any more

[CoalTit]

I know language evolves and all that. I accepted that "nonplussed" is now an unusable word because so many people take it to mean its opposite. I didn't really have much occasion to use it anyway. But now it turns out that "lame" and "literally' have suffered the same fate.

I've hurt my foot. I tried to explain to a friend on WhatsApp that I won't be going dancing this week, by writing: "I'm literally, technically lame". I got a long voice message in return expressing sympathy for my lack of confidence, saying how intimidating the dance scene can be.
So I tried, "No, lame, like a horse" and that seemed to work.
Then I messaged my upstairs neighbour to say I can't help her with her work in the light well today because I'm lame. I hurt my foot helping her so I thought she'd understand.
She replied asking me to get up the ladder so she can pass things down to me. I tried " I can't help you today; I can barely walk", and she seemed to understand.

I thought I could use "lame" to save myself typing out "I hurt my foot; it's badly swollen and I can barely walk". I thought I could use "literally" to make it clear, but no.

Just putting this here:

“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.”

• Terry Pratchett, Lords and Ladies

That's sick, man.✌

Generic words used to be used for illnesses that weren’t well understood or easily described. Like melancholy, senile, failure to thrive, lame.

Now we have better knowledge, so ability to describe illness and its causes e.g. types of mental illness; of dementia; of allergies and other illnesses in babies; of bones, joints, muscles and causes of ‘lameness’.

So we use those, than saying ‘he was a sickly baby who went lame as a child’, as if we’re in a Dickens novel.

Well yes and nobody has stopped Brains selling their tinned faggots so this supports my point.

‘Expecting’ for pregnant isn’t really used anymore. To the extent I think it would be misunderstood; ‘expecting what?’.

Oh yes, the glamour of the elves!

https://www.etymonline.com/word/glamour

I’ve heard it used about people, so that’s not quite true.

TP was a proper logophile. But he would never have used such an obscure word!

Really? In what context? Surely it stood out as unusual rather than you hear it frequently?

A doctor or medical professional wouldn't say it.
A person who had a disability in their legs wouldn't say it.
A friend or family or acquaintance of a person with a mobility issue wouldn't say it.

Tying myself in knots? That was the whole point of my post: that the word is generally considered so offensive in most contexts nowadays.

Expecting a baby, obviously. You could also same the same about the word pregnant being assumed to mean 'having a baby', when it can refer to other things too!

I may be wrong, but I always understood that 'expecting' came into usage as a kind of 'euphemism' for 'pregnant', which was considered rude - maybe because you use 'expecting' for all kinds of everyday things - a letter, a delivery, a train or whatever; whereas 'pregnant' is generally used to mean having a baby, which to those with prudish minds, probably automatically forces them to think about the nasty, rude, disgusting thing that happened in order for the woman to become pregnant!!

My mother still uses it, and my aunts.

And isn’t the book What to Expect When You’re Expecting still in print?

‘Tom was walking with a lame step. I wonder did he hurt his ankle?’
That sort of context.

I’d never say it to a younger person. ‘Did you know, Daphne’s expecting?’

I’d expect them to be a little nonplussed. Must try it.

If I heard someone say this I would assume English wasn't their first language, it sounds off to me. I'd understand what they meant obviously but "Tom was walking with a limp" is more natural sounding.

Hmmm. It isn't something I've ever heard. Of course some people must say it. But not frequently or recently?

And your example is different. You're not saying 'Tom is lame' and expecting someone to know you mean he hurt his foot. You're explaining it, 'he's walking with a lame gait'. It's not calling him lame with no context.

You can have a pregnant pause ...

Yes, that's why I said 'generally'. It's true that a pause - or maybe other things - can be described as 'pregnant'; but if somebody just said the word 'pregnant' to you in isolation, you would surely instantly think of a woman who was going to have a baby.

Whereas with 'expecting', that's just one of the numerous contexts in which the word is regularly used. When the Bond villains said "I've been expecting you, Mr Bond", it was very clear they didn't mean that they'd just given birth to him

Surely that title was mainly chosen because it was snappy and flowed nicely in a clever way - rather than just to avoid saying 'pregnant'?

But either way, although it's a bit old-fashioned, 'expecting' is still a valid term for pregnant... in fact you're far more likely to hear somebody described/describing herself as 'expecting' rather than as 'gravid'!

I suppose, also, people will often use the phrase 'expectant mother' - the word 'expectant' doesn't tend to be used nearly as often as 'expecting' apart from to mean pregnant.

Yes, I’ve not suggested otherwise — I just don’t think the book would still be in print under that title if it were likely to cause mass bafflement.

Bastard is another old word that has lost all of its original understanding nowadays. It used to be a neutral word, meaning 'born out of wedlock' - OK, often with an unpleasant undercurrent of judgement with it; but now, nobody ever uses it to refer to the wedded status of a person's parents when they were born - it simply means a nasty person and nothing else, really.

Yes, I agree - it was chosen as a snappy title, but it still works because the word is still commonly understood to have that meaning. If it didn't, they would have changed the title by now.

English is the first language so your assumption is wrong though 🤷‍♀️

Sorry I was unclear - I didn't think it wasn't in your case but you weren't using it in natural conversation. It works ok as an example of a use of lame it just doesn't sound like a native speaker's first choice to describe someone who was limping.

The people I’m thinking of who use it like this are first language English speakers. Mostly older people though, so that probably makes a difference.