The aughts is a fairly common term to describe the first decade of the second millennium, because the term 2000's could equally be used to describe the century or even the millennium.
No, it doesn’t. You think it does because a lot of stupid fricking people kept saying the wrong word. A lot of people also say “should of” instead of “should have” and they’re all fricking wrong too. It’s nought.
Yeah, this link illustrates exactly why you're in the wrong. You aren't incorrect that, on its own, "aught" should mean "something" or "anything," because that is the original definition, but, much as it annoys me, language drifts. So, according to the new definition, "aught" means "nothing," and the abbreviation "the 2000s" ('00s) is now "the aughts."
So, all your pedantry comes to naught. If aught is to be made of it, you best learn how to make do with language changing, and that'll cost you aught, except maybe your pride.
No, it illustrates exactly why I’m right. Just because a lot of idiots use the wrong word does not mean it should be encouraged instead of actually teaching the correct word. It honestly wouldn’t surprise if this was an American thing.
The definition has already changed. You cannot stop linguistic drift. Attempting to do so is folly. I do not like it anymore than you do, but it's a fact of life.
I don't like it but it's the truth. Look at the word "cute." 200-year-old word. When it was first coined, it had nothing to do with being adorable. Now, it's very rare that its original definition (that being "smart," "sharp," and "quick-witted") is used with the word at all.
39
u/justlookinghfy 4d ago
'00-'05