| Steven Pinker and other linguists would like a word with you: https://www.google.com/search?q=steven+pinker+i+could+care+l... From Pinker's book The Language Instinct (p.377 or 389 depending on the edition): > A tin ear for prosody (stress and intonation) and an obliviousness to the principles of discourse and rhetoric are important tools for the language maven. Consider an alleged atrocity committed by today's youth: the expression I could care less. The teenagers are trying to express disdain, the adults note, in which case they should be saying I couldn't care less. If they could care less than they do, that means that they really do care, the opposite of what they are trying to say. But if these dudes would stop ragging on teenagers and scope out the construction, they would see that their argument is bogus. Listen to how the two versions are pronounced: [If viewing on mobile, turn your device sideways to avoid wrapping.] ------------------------
COULDN'T care
LE
ESS.
i
------------------------
I
CARE
LE
ESS.
could
------------------------
> The melodies and stresses are completely different, and for a good reason. The second version is not illogical, it's sarcastic. The point of sarcasm is that by making an assertion that is manifestly false or accompanied by ostentatiously mannered intonation, one deliberately implies its opposite. A good paraphrase is, “Oh yeah, as if there was something in the world that I care less about.”But I hear you and sympathize with your point of view. I have been there myself. It didn't make sense to me that people would use a word or phrase in any meaning other than its literal one. Especially a word like "literally", right? Merriam-Webster has a article on that. It's literally the best article ever written! https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/misuse-of-lite... |