this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2025
550 points (100.0% liked)

memes

16161 readers
2502 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I'm too dumb to get this one...why is this funny?

[–] [email protected] 139 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Merriam-Webster is literally the dictionary, and Brian is trying to correct them on what is and is not a word.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 hours ago

Although it is an American dictionary, so it’s only going to be correct some of the time.

[–] [email protected] 58 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yes that part I get, but I don't get the reply from the Merriam Webster account and why that is funny

[–] [email protected] 113 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because they’re being like “bro please, come on“

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Huh...what they actually write in the response in no way suggests that to me, it's just completely nonsensical like they started typing the response but accidentally hit send too soon and just didn't bother fixing it.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 days ago

The punctuation is pretty clear tho.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

Mate, I felt the same way. Made no sense to me. Give me an "..." or something.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 2 days ago

Well, then you learned something new today. Be glad and enjoy your enlightenment 🤗

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Mom: Ok, let's get in the car, time to go.

Child named Brian: But there is no car.

Mom: Brian!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (5 children)

You've excellently demonstrated how different contexts makes different things work...you scenario has no similarities to the image

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I think you were correct in your top comment

It's a joke. You don't get it.

That's okay

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago

You can't act like a precise robot that is always right and also beep your red sirens when other people are seeing humor that you don't see. If you're being a robot then chances are you are wrong about the jokes.

In this case the juxtaposition of the natural in-person way of speaking and the unnatural asynchronous text chat if twitter is the source of the humor. When you say that the two scenarios are not similar, that is part of the engine that drives the joke and makes it funny. It's as if you see shutting everyone down for misunderstanding that it was not a sports bar but in fact a metal pipe that the two men walked into when the one man ducked.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

I am merely intending to show how 'just saying someone's name' can be taken as a reprimand/mild reproach. Which is what is happening in the original image.

At this point so many people have explained this that I feel you might be willfully ignorant. Cut it out.

[–] And009 2 points 2 days ago

Needs context for it to work

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Given the period, there is an unwritten sigh at the beginning. With maybe a presumed pointing at their name that Brian either missed, or doesn't know.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Their response is "Brian....". Like "let me hold your hand whole I say this"

It looks weird because they tagged him first

[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago

Ah, that was a tag. I'm too unfamiliar with Twitter lol.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Alternatively, he's saying that these are not in fact unprecedented times.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Dude's arguing with the dictionary.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Like I already wrote in a different reply, that part I get, it's the Merriam Webster response that doesn't make sense to me.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 days ago

So you've learned today that you can just say someone's name as an equivalent to an exasperated "bro.. "

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I feel bad you're getting down voted, because I was thinking the same thing. If the reply was just "Brian." I suppose it would have made more sense to me. But since they tagged his full name first, it was throwing me off.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The difference is you’re acknowledging it now that you get it. Other person is just being deliberately obtuse. The downvotes are entirely appropriate.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

It's a bit refreshing to see a red arrow, tho. Gotten bored of blue.

[–] Epp2 12 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Because Merriam Webster creates and produces the dictionary of the English language. They're literally the one who decides if a word is official. Their retort is succinct.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Nope. They document what words are in common use. English is a "form follows usage" kind of language, where popularity of a word makes it correct. That's why "literally" can mean its own antonym and influencers get to make up new meanings for Fetch and Mid.

Less architectural, more suicide note.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

This is true, they describe themselves as descriptive rather than prescriptive: https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/descriptive-vs-prescriptive-defining-lexicography

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

They did say "official" though.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Partly right, but they don't decide if a word is "official" (whatever that's supposed to mean). For a word to be a so-called "real" word it only has to be in common use among some group, dictionaries simply document words that have been in common use. Merriam-Webster is an authoritative record of words in use specifically in US English (with some records for other English variants and dialects, I think? ) but they are not a prescriptivist organisation. A word which appears in their dictionary is almost certainly a word that is or was in use in US English but a word that doesn't appear might also be a real word, particularly if it's a relatively new word or meaning.

So with that in mind, arguing that a word is real when it doesn't appear in the dictionary can be valid in some cases, but arguing that a word isn't real when it does appear in a dictionary (like Brian did) is generally not smart.

tl;dr, a dictionary, not the dictionary; not all English; "official" doesn't make sense here; in some (but not this) cases disagreeing is valid.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

How is just tagging him by name, and repeating his first name succinct? I don't get any sort of meaning from that response, it reads like a mistyped response.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Just imagine your mom saying your full name with an audible full stop, right after you said/did something a bit dumb

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

But it wasn't just saying his first name. It was "First Last First"

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oooh, I wonder if that's part of what's confusing the other guy. At this point I just completely filter out the tag when I'm reading a post like this, since very few people intend to incorporate it into the comment.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

As someone who's managed to never use Twitter, it was very confusing. I guess it's one of those things you pick up subconsciously and never really think about once you've used the system enough.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

the 'first last' is just how tagging a user works.