They were saying he was an illegal all over MAGAtard social media. Until the facts came out. Then they started deleting in mass to cover up their lies.
No I understand what en masse means. I just don’t subscribe to your inflexible interpretation.
Language is a tool for communication. It’s for the masses, not something to be gate kept or preserved by the priests lingual orthodoxy. If the words you use convey the intended meaning to the listener, then the wording is adequate.
If everyone’s use of language was as rigid as the people insisting we can only use the phrases as they existed when they were imported to an English court by a Norman conqueror a thousand years ago, then we’d all still be communicating by banging rocks together and grunting. The English language evolves every day. It’s alive.
Ok but the argument is that it might not “convey the intended meaning to the listener” because ‘in mass’ can mean multiple things in English, whereas in French ‘en masse’ specifically means ‘as a group’. It’s not a linguistic purity thing it’s literally just to prevent misinterpretation.
edit: You can’t say “English is an evolving language” and then ignore the evolution in the phrase being carried over in the first place. If there was no reason for it then we’d just be using the English term.
They were saying he was an illegal all over MAGAtard social media. Until the facts came out. Then they started deleting in mass to cover up their lies.
The truth was busy putting it’s shoes on.
“En masse”.
Which is French for in mass.
Unfortunately, you’ve misunderstood the nuanced meaning that the phrase “en masse” has acquired in the English language:
Cambridge Dictionary: En Masse
However, you can take comfort in knowing that you are not alone in this misunderstanding:
Grammar With Teeth: En Masse vs. In Mass
No I understand what en masse means. I just don’t subscribe to your inflexible interpretation.
Language is a tool for communication. It’s for the masses, not something to be gate kept or preserved by the priests lingual orthodoxy. If the words you use convey the intended meaning to the listener, then the wording is adequate.
If everyone’s use of language was as rigid as the people insisting we can only use the phrases as they existed when they were imported to an English court by a Norman conqueror a thousand years ago, then we’d all still be communicating by banging rocks together and grunting. The English language evolves every day. It’s alive.
Big “I just like saying Valentimes” energy
Ok.
Ok but the argument is that it might not “convey the intended meaning to the listener” because ‘in mass’ can mean multiple things in English, whereas in French ‘en masse’ specifically means ‘as a group’. It’s not a linguistic purity thing it’s literally just to prevent misinterpretation.
edit: You can’t say “English is an evolving language” and then ignore the evolution in the phrase being carried over in the first place. If there was no reason for it then we’d just be using the English term.
Nobody here misinterpreted it except the purists who did it intentionally to troll, show off and talk down to people.
Le niceeeeee
Not gonna lie I thought your username was Copaganda at first.
No, I do not have dyslexia lol