= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
LauralH comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, February 2015, chapter 108 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (352)
Sure. 'Lovers' isn't contemporary English at all, is it? But if a semantic shift / euphemistically-useful pattern of meaning is found in one place, that means it can occur elsewhere.
(Which reminds me: I've heard that 'dating' meaning 'in a relationship with' is a recent development, and that in the '50s or so, 'in a relationship with' would have been 'going steady' and 'dating' wasn't committed or exclusive. Is that true?)
Hell, it wasn't even considered committed in the 80s. Although I suppose different regions may have changed faster, in the South in the late 80s/early 90s, "going out" was what we said for "going steady", while "dating" implied a more casual relationship. (And the actual term 'dating' was rarely used - I remember being asked, "you guys messin'?" after a couple dates with a boy.)
So yes, true.