Semantics.

[zetlander]

I used to have a colleague of oriental parentage whose first name was Luckin (I shan't mention his second name as he is, to the best of my knowledge, still alive) ... is that the exact opposite of luck out?

(And I remember once asking a girl in my O level music class, whose surname was Newall, "what's the past tense of know-all?" She replied "Knew-all" without thinking ... but she was a lovely unassuming girl, who could NEVER have been a know-all ... )

My niece was fortunate to survive a traumatic birth and her parents wanted to call her 'Lucky' but were advised against doing that by some older relatives who said that giving someone the name 'Lucky' would guarantee a life of bad luck!

[DianaCanada]

We say "lucked out" in Canada, too. I've never really thought about it until now.
[/quot

I have heard it both ways here...to be lucky or unlucky.  We have a British/American/Canadian hybrid English.

[pharmaT]

I agree. The English language is constantly evolving and words and phrases often become the opposite of their original meaning. 

I make a point of deliberately misunderstanding when an American tells me he has "lucked out" - when he means that he is in luck! 

Most people in medical professions would consider a natural child to have been conceived without the aid  of any external procedures, or medication. 

Regards 

Chas

Not sure I agree re medical professionals as most that I know would be able to apply context to their interpretation and be aware that the same phrase could mean different things depending on where it is used. 

I will only ask for an explanation if I either feel someone is being bigoted or abusive or I am genuinely unclear what the person has said.  If it is a phrase particular to their area of the World but I know what they mean then I won't ask even if it is not a phrase I wouldn't use myself. 

[Kiltpin]

Most people in medical professions would consider a natural child to have been conceived without the aid  of any external procedures, or medication. 

Not sure I agree re medical professionals as most that I know would be able to apply context to their interpretation and be aware that the same phrase could mean different things depending on where it is used. 

 

I could, of course, be wrong pharma, but isn't natural childbirth considered to be without interventions? 

Regards 

Chas

[pharmaT]

Most people in medical professions would consider a natural child to have been conceived without the aid  of any external procedures, or medication. 

Not sure I agree re medical professionals as most that I know would be able to apply context to their interpretation and be aware that the same phrase could mean different things depending on where it is used. 

 

I could, of course, be wrong pharma, but isn't natural childbirth considered to be without interventions? 

Regards 

Chas

Since we're talking semantics "natural child" and "natural childbirth" are two different phrases and we were initially discussing the former.  Furthermore natural childbirth is a laypersons term for what you refer to.  With regard to childbirth the correct term for childbirth without any interventions would be "spontaneous vaginal delivery".  We don't tend to divide childbirth into natural and unnatural. 

[jbml]

The alternative to "natural" isn't invariably "unnatural" ... it can sometimes be "artificial".

We don't, for instance, refer to "unnatural pearls" or "unnatural watercourses".

Mind you, I'm not sure that "artificial childbirth" sounds any better ....


(Actually, of course, the "artificial pearl" isn't a pearl at all, whereas the "artificial watercourse" IS a watercourse ... but then there are cultured pearls, which ARE pearls, just not naturally occurring ones ... so I guess that means that there is more than one alternative to "natural" besides "unnatural" ... )

[andrewalston]

Language changes over time, but there are those who decide to use use words to have meanings other than their accepted ones, whether by design or ignorance. This 'sick' has been appropriated to mean a good thing rather than a bad one, presumably intentionally. The internet is full of people who confuse 'of', 'off' and 'have', to the point that the sentences lose their meaning. However, others then go on to treat the 'wrong' versions as correct, and go on to use the same horrendous style.

This has always gone on. The burial register for one of my relatives, who died in 1788, says he was "Casually poisoned".

'When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'