As someone speaking from the field of linguistics, I'd say yes, language change is an important part of the discipline. It happens constantly in all actively spoken languages. Spoken usage errors are not equivalent to being "illiterate," although a semiliterate person reading from a teleprompter is likely to make such errors, much to the delight of the news media. We have to compartmentalize our reactions to the language we hear, especially if we are old and automatically get annoyed at quickly spreading changes, such as the vowel shifts occurring in American English, or the spread of Estuary English in Britain. The important thing is that a change can't abruptly impede understanding, and we're pretty adaptable there too. We will continue to have our pet peeves (like "track record," always misused now), but we still understand our interlocutors and email correspondents, whether or not they know what "regale" means. Jane McGary, Portland, Oregon, USA, where it's finally raining. On 9/18/2020 9:22 AM, Cody H via pbs wrote: > Hahaha! Exasturbated is definitely a new one for me. > > I believe there are branches of study within the field of linguistics > dedicated specifically to understanding how words and lexicons change over > time—an important, natural, and inevitable process that contributes to the > development of language diversity. So I try to channel my inner > dispassionate linguist every time I hear someone who I otherwise wish to > respect say “fustrated” or “nukular” in a non-ironic way. > > _______________________________________________ pbs mailing list pbs@lists.pacificbulbsociety.net http://lists.pacificbulbsociety.net/cgi-bin/…