• brown567@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s like what I say to bother botanists:

    If half of the fruits with “berry” in their name don’t fit your definition of berry, you need a new definition

    • Klear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      Pretty sure botanists are aware that the same word can have different meaning outside of their scientific field. The people actually bothered by this are pedants who read about it on the internet, not people who studied botany.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        A slight distinction:

        The people actually bothered by this are the friends of pedants who read about it on the internet, not people who studied botany.

        The pedants aren’t bothered, they’re elated they get to display faux superiority, I’m the one bothered by them!

        Lol

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      What if I told you that words can have different meanings in different contexts? Just because the same word can be used to refer to different things depending on whether its used in everyday or scientific speech doesn’t mean either usage is “wrong”.

      • Comment105@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Doesn’t change that it was a bad idea to borrow a generic term for small sweet fruits to refer to a specific botanical feature. Not just bad, but completely unnecessary and frankly, simply, a bit stupid.