These are not synonyms (why should we care?)

P.S I'm longing to sound off about misused prepositions, too

Disinterested annoys me too but I think it's a losing battle with that one. I don't think most people who use it actually know what it really means used to mean.

As I said in the other thread where people are complaining about things whose meaning is perfectly clear (because what people substitute never meant anything else), where meaning is changed I'm as pedantic as the next person.

Fat lot of good it does, though, except to make one feel good when using a word 'correctly' (and probably confusing people in the process).

English is a living language and, as such, will continue to develop. Words come into and out of fashion whilst others change their meaning e.g. gay or awful. Perhaps the misused words that are sometimes annoying are simply in the process of meaning change. The only problem arises when the usage makes no sense to the listener. I remember a child once telling me something was sick. To me that meant it was terrible but to the child it meant it was really good. Eventually though we all come to understand the new meaning even if there are mix ups at first.

Oh well, Jane Austen fought a losing battle over the misuse of 'nice' so I suppose I'm in good company

To me, the problem comes when a word is halfway between it's old meaning and it's new one.

I agree with vampirequeen. Language has always changed, and never goes back to the old meaning I think.

Cor, wicked!

other than being able to congratulate oneself on knowing the difference these words have in their meaning, it really isn't worth bothering about.

simply reading a book written only a hundred years ago will throw up words that have changed their meaning over time, it's what happens naturally.

MaizieD you sound off about anything you like, it IS pedants corner.

People using 'of' instead of 'have' is my current bugbear! Grrrrrr!

hooty I agree with "of". I just don't get why someone would use it. It's plain wrong. I get that it sounds like "have" when spoken but in writing? Noooo.

Disinterested is another one that boils my pee. And don't get me going on "haitch". .

Oooh - I've been waiting to get this one off my chest. From the BBC website (some of their spelling and misuse of words is toe-curling)

www.dropbox.com/s/eijqhvvx1dvl6fi/Screenshot%202016-03-25%2022.31.50.png?dl=0

Apparently, Graham Norton wears "gregarious" clothes!

And also on the BBC website, I just heard someone use the word "mendacity" where he meant "audacity". www.bbc.com/culture/story/20160517-ryan-gosling-plays-it-for-laughs at about 4:38.

Words evolving to mean something else is one thing - but simply saying any old word because you think it's the right one??? Eventually we shall be all talking at cross purposes and no one will understand anyone else.

MaizieD, you have every right to complain. We may acknowledge that word meanings change but we don't have to like it.

The mendacity one sounds like a mistake, either just saying the wrong word even though you know the correct one (pure mistake) or saying the wrong word out of ignorance (not knowing the correct one).

I never make mistakes like that. I know all the right words and never have a slip of the tongue [big liar emoji] ? ? ?

No, thatbags, it sounds like ignorance.

This 'language changes' mantra has become so embedded that no-one dares tell anyone that they've got a word wrong. If they do they're castigated for being pedantic and ignorant themselves because of course we all know that language changes over time and we should embrace change, not fight it.

I mentioned on another thread about Sherlock Holmes being 'infamous' on a BBC radio trailer - have since heard Rumpole described as an 'infamous' barrister

Yes, ignorance was one of the possibilities I mentioned, maizie.

But the words we now use are "wrong". Maybe through ignorance.
So we are only just trying to stop language where it is, in its wrong state.
Like trying to stop the tide.
Imagine what it will be like in another 300 years. Through ignorance.

Should have said 'just ignorance', fatbags. No other possibility. They were hardly a slip of the tongue; they were written.

Even the word "ignorant" tends to be a derogatory description of an individual theses-days rather than simply a lack of knowledge.
My knowledge of "English" is very poor, not even an "O" level, let alone an "A". Yet having gone on to achieve a degree (not in English, surprisingly), I would never consider myself "Ignorant", ill informed, quite often.

I'm guilty of using 'ignorant' in at two ways. I'm ignorant of many things but I hope I have good manners

From The Guardian comments section:

Pakistan is not going to launch a tactical nuke on India armed forces because it would get its cities raised to the ground.

You have to laugh, really. (At least the writer got 'its' correct)