this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2023
3 points (56.0% liked)

World News

32064 readers
936 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Interesting. I never knew that about it's etymology.

I just looked it up quickly and it seems to be way more nuanced than that. According to at least one article, it was used prior to the first electrical execution in 1899 as a means of referring to a non-fatal shock.

https://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/wc/electrocution-a-shocking-misuse/

Either way, I think it's splitting hairs. It's common and acceptable usage anymore to use that term meaning a non-fatal shock. So the clarification in the title doesn't come across as redundant to me.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Just because people have been wrong since 1899, it doesn’t mean we should put up with it.

It’s becoming, as they say, a big of a problem.