The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this

Hello There, Guest! Welcome to The CardBoard!

Feel free to Register and discuss on various topics with likeminded people. Already have an account? Please Login!

Thread Rating:

2 Vote(s) - 1 Average
1
2
3
4
5

The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this

qwerty49
New Age Dinosaur

Posts: 2,633
Threads: 53
Joined: Dec 2016

#19

12-20-2022, 02:35 PM

Usage is a funny thing. I'm not sure there is a well-defined standard as to when something slips into the semantic equivalent of the public domain.

Case in point would be "dumb." I venture that at least 95% of the time it's used to mean "stupid, silly" and not "unable to speak." As in Red Forman on That 70's Show calling his son a dumb-ass.

#19

qwerty49

12-20-2022, 02:35 PM

Usage is a funny thing. I'm not sure there is a well-defined standard as to when something slips into the semantic equivalent of the public domain.

Case in point would be "dumb." I venture that at least 95% of the time it's used to mean "stupid, silly" and not "unable to speak." As in Red Forman on That 70's Show calling his son a dumb-ass.

Find

Reply

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Messages In This Thread

The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by gailtate - 12-20-2022, 09:01 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by winflop - 12-20-2022, 09:14 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 12-20-2022, 12:23 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by winflop - 12-20-2022, 06:53 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 12-20-2022, 09:55 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by martyup - 12-20-2022, 10:29 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Bampa - 12-20-2022, 10:43 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by SamuelMcF - 12-20-2022, 10:47 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by martyup - 12-20-2022, 11:08 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Bampa - 12-20-2022, 11:11 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by JohnR34231 - 12-20-2022, 10:59 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Beeg_Dawg - 12-20-2022, 11:04 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 11:24 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by McKenwood - 12-20-2022, 11:34 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by murky - 12-20-2022, 05:05 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 09:16 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by M T - 12-20-2022, 12:08 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 01:25 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by lex24 - 01-07-2023, 09:59 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Snorlax94 - 12-20-2022, 01:56 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by cardcrimson - 12-20-2022, 02:15 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by dabigv13 - 12-20-2022, 02:25 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by cardcrimson - 12-20-2022, 02:33 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by dabigv13 - 12-20-2022, 03:18 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by CompSci87 - 12-20-2022, 03:33 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 03:45 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by qwerty49 - 12-20-2022, 02:35 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by CTcard - 12-20-2022, 09:45 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-20-2022, 10:01 PM

MVCard - by MVCard - 12-20-2022, 02:36 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by dabigv13 - 12-20-2022, 03:43 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Phogge - 12-20-2022, 05:05 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Leftcoast - 12-20-2022, 07:09 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 82lsju - 12-21-2022, 08:19 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by winflop - 12-21-2022, 08:53 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 12-21-2022, 10:46 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by CTcard - 12-21-2022, 10:07 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Phogge - 12-21-2022, 01:19 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-21-2022, 05:29 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by terry - 12-21-2022, 06:27 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by cardcrimson - 12-21-2022, 07:27 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Madera86 - 12-21-2022, 10:11 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Leftcoast - 12-21-2022, 10:42 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by M T - 12-21-2022, 08:51 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 12-22-2022, 08:56 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 12-22-2022, 07:09 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by dabigv13 - 12-22-2022, 07:31 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 2006alum - 12-22-2022, 07:38 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 82lsju - 12-22-2022, 09:45 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 81alum - 12-23-2022, 11:13 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by murky - 12-23-2022, 02:07 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Phogge - 12-23-2022, 03:06 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Canalejas - 12-23-2022, 03:40 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by TreesAndBirds - 01-07-2023, 10:07 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by winflop - 01-13-2023, 08:30 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by lex24 - 01-07-2023, 10:42 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Goose - 01-07-2023, 11:34 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 01-12-2023, 06:24 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by M T - 01-13-2023, 02:17 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by 2006alum - 01-17-2023, 05:31 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by lex24 - 01-17-2023, 08:10 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Mick - 01-27-2023, 06:23 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by Phogge - 01-12-2023, 06:32 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by martyup - 01-13-2023, 09:34 AM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 01-13-2023, 02:45 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by cardcrimson - 01-13-2023, 02:51 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by lex24 - 01-13-2023, 08:35 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by martyup - 01-13-2023, 10:00 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 01-16-2023, 04:07 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by jacket3ree - 01-16-2023, 06:22 PM

RE: The "old" LSJUMB would've had fun with this - by BostonCard - 01-26-2023, 10:08 PM

View a Printable Version