this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2025
702 points (89.4% liked)
memes
18407 readers
2810 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Idioms don't have to (and often don't) make sense. How do you feel about "head over heels"?
Interesting - Wiktionary says that the phrase was originally "heels over head", which makes sense when conveying the sense of tumbling over. I guess that became corrupted, resulting in "head over heels". Maybe I should start saying "heels over head" then.
Consider the distinction between accurate and efficient. If your way of speaking becomes technically correct by some standard, but inefficient for the purpose of communication, is that really a desirable outcome? Does it have to be perfect, or just good enough to convey thoughts?
Now reading it, I never directly realized it being this (wrong) way in the english language. In German the equivalent term would be "Hals über Kopf" (Neck over head) which made sense for a feeling of the world being upside down. Funny that in English it is actually the "normal" worldview - at least how the modern expression goes.
I mean, the main point is that language doesn't have to make "logical" sense. It's not a math problem. Just look at all the inconsistencies in pretty much every aspect of a language. It's all there simply because of history and people agreeing on meanings for words and phrases. For example, you've got something like prepositions. There's literally zero logical reason why we talk or speak to someone, but we don't tell or converse to someone.
And people who are more rigid in thinking about language always seem to think the language they learned growing up is the most "correct" version, whether that has a basis in history or not. Like even though literally has been used as an intensifier for (literally) hundreds of years, that seems to be a sticking point, whereas something like very, which has a similar root (veracis meaning truth), any sentence using very doesn't have to have an exact truthful meaning.
Hell, once we go back to "original" meanings of words, where do we stop? The singular use of "they" is older than that of singular "you", but I somehow never see the "singular they is confusing" crowd advocating for a return to thee/thou.
It's still "Hals über Kopf" (neck over head) in German.