[dsp1234]

it just kind of has the wrong connotations, because it's used rigorously in mathematics

And the original use was in Philology[0]. Just because a word has two different meanings in two different contexts doesn't means it's wrong. I'm certainly glad the linguists didn't get up in arms when the mathematicians gave the 'wrong connotation' to isomorphism.

[0] - https://books.google.com/books?id=hZpeAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA711&lpg=...

[mbrock]

Well, I didn't mean to claim it's prescriptively wrong, just that to my mind, maybe because I've been around a lot of mathematicians and coded a lot of Haskell, the usage jumps out as kind of weird... and anecdotally, I've mostly heard "isomorphic JavaScript" used kind of ironically, with a wink bordering on a cringe.

By the way, for the broader point about language mutation, and prescriptivism vs descriptivism, I think there's a common stance against prescriptivism that also seems to rule out any negative opinion about language change—to which I say, hey, negative opinions are part of the whole mess too, even from a descriptivist standpoint. But this is a derail already; sorry.