• @thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    19
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    ah yes, ignoring that it should actuality be a polygon, implying a closed shape with straight sides much like this ignores the “weapon” and “used for thrusting or striking” parts of the definition.

    not hard to make strange things fit a definition when you just ignore parts of it.

    • @ameancow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      The idea isn’t literal, it’s to show that our language is entirely just noises that we’ve made into increasingly complicated levels of agreed-upon abstraction. We don’t mine words out of the Earth, we develop them to create clear explanations that we can all agree on, and yes, the more you peel away or dig in, the more challenging it can be to create words that encompass all variations of an idea.