fox: angry face: you have misused that comma for the last bloody time! (comma (by Sam))
fox ([personal profile] fox) wrote2005-12-10 05:51 pm

MEMO

to:  ALL ENGLISH SPEAKERS EVERYWHERE
from:  ME
re:  RAAAR

ATTENTION EVERYONE:

UNIQUE ≠ UNUSUAL.  THE WORD MEANS 'ONE OF A KIND' AND THAT IS ALL IT MEANS.

i'm sorry to raise my voice, but honestly.  this has gone on long enough.

[identity profile] king-chiron.livejournal.com 2005-12-11 05:37 am (UTC)(link)
What? Obviously I haven't been debating the fact that unique is binary, but rather your claim that unusual isn't a proper definition for unique.

Maybe you're right and the leading dictionaries I checked are all wrong, but I doubt it.

[identity profile] darthfox.livejournal.com 2005-12-11 05:48 am (UTC)(link)
i'm saying that because 'unique' is binary, 'unusual' is an imprecise and therefore incorrect definition of it. as [livejournal.com profile] jgesteve points out downthread, actually anything unique is naturally unusual. it's just that something that's one of a kind isn't just unusual; it's unique. conversely, using 'unique' to describe something that isn't one of a kind is wrong. it's like saying someone is a graduate of a university just because he used to be a student there and now he isn't. all graduates were once students, that is, but not everyone who was once a student is a graduate.

and dictionaries say a lot of things. they give 'flout' as one acceptable definition of 'flaunt'. doesn't make it right. :-)