> but it still feels to me like this idea that we will just perpetually invent new words that serve the same exact purpose to be a bit of an unconvincing assumption
> .. the word "fudge" ... considered a swear word? .. carries significantly less of a 'sting' to it ... feels too arbitrary
Yes, it's a swear word, and it has less of a string. It's exactly the way you write. It's good to have a variety of words to fit different situations. It's not anymore arbitrary than any other word.
> so to try and say anything conclusive about something that seems to be a purely linguistic artifact feels a bit premature.
It's not an artifact. I think it's pretty universal to all cultures. Toddlers will find "swear" words and use them when mad (usually related to bathroom activities). Kids who don't know swear words immediately try to learn some as soon as they hear any. And as far as I know every single culture has taboo words.
Most of the time the swear words stay pretty static. But then you have people who want to "liberate" them (and enjoy shocking people), without realizing they are actually neutering them.
I've seen people say that modern society is more accepting of swears. That's not what's happening, what's happening is the swears are losing their power. And of course then people find, and use, new ones. (Like the kerfuffle about the swear word in the movie Kick-Ass. The regular swears were too mainstream so they went with the strongest one they knew just for the shock value.)
I don't approve of using a swear for the shock value - use it where warranted by the situation, not to try to impress your listener. I will continue to criticize shock usage, and people will continue to scream about censorship.
We sure do. Check out some of the examples here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism_treadmill
> .. the word "fudge" ... considered a swear word? .. carries significantly less of a 'sting' to it ... feels too arbitrary
Yes, it's a swear word, and it has less of a string. It's exactly the way you write. It's good to have a variety of words to fit different situations. It's not anymore arbitrary than any other word.
> so to try and say anything conclusive about something that seems to be a purely linguistic artifact feels a bit premature.
It's not an artifact. I think it's pretty universal to all cultures. Toddlers will find "swear" words and use them when mad (usually related to bathroom activities). Kids who don't know swear words immediately try to learn some as soon as they hear any. And as far as I know every single culture has taboo words.
Most of the time the swear words stay pretty static. But then you have people who want to "liberate" them (and enjoy shocking people), without realizing they are actually neutering them.
I've seen people say that modern society is more accepting of swears. That's not what's happening, what's happening is the swears are losing their power. And of course then people find, and use, new ones. (Like the kerfuffle about the swear word in the movie Kick-Ass. The regular swears were too mainstream so they went with the strongest one they knew just for the shock value.)
I don't approve of using a swear for the shock value - use it where warranted by the situation, not to try to impress your listener. I will continue to criticize shock usage, and people will continue to scream about censorship.