[FredPret]

I was going to nitpick about your usage of the hoi polloi, because “hoi” means “the.”

But this is the wiki entry: “Some linguists argue that, given that hoi is a definite article, the phrase "the hoi polloi" is redundant, akin to saying "the the masses". Others argue that this is inconsistent with other English loanwords.[11] The word "alcohol", for instance, derives from the Arabic al-kuhl, al being an article, yet "the alcohol" is universally accepted as good grammar.[12]”

[bombcar]

We say "The La Brea Tar Pits" without a second thought.

[NobodyNada]

But the “The” applies to “tar pits”, not “La Brea”, as in “The Panama Canal” or “The Seattle Seahawks”.

[ectopod]

It translates as "The The Tar Tar Pits".

[NobodyNada]

Ah, yeah that makes sense. I just assumed La Brea was a nearby city or area; I didn’t know it translated to “tar”.

[bombcar]

I think you may be on to something however - but we do still say “I’m going to drive the El Camino down to the El Camino Real.”

[kej]

This is one of my favorite Wikipedia articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tautological_place_nam...

[giraffe_lady]

If you're learning linguistics from wikipedia maybe check out "prescriptivism" and see how many contemporary mainstream linguists work within that framework for native speaker usages.

[bee_rider]

How does prescriptivism interact with wikipedia? Since wikipedia can (in the ideal at least) be edited by anyone, I'd expect it to match common usage more closely than a normal encyclopedia.

[giraffe_lady]

I mean just reading the article about it would tell you how useless it is try to nitpick things like this.

[bee_rider]

It is useless because it is nitpicking. But still, descriptive rules for a language can still be pretty specific and complicated, so even if we toss out all prescriptivism that won't free us from corrections I think.

[giraffe_lady]

It will because no "correction" is necessary. If the speaker's intent was understood by their audience then their usage was correct. If it was not understood, the audience will seek clarification and the intended meaning will emerge that way.

This sort of unsolicited "correction" of other people's language is unnecessary and basically never helpful outside of an explicit educational/language-learning context. The goal isn't to perfectly communicate according to a specific set of rules, and trying to ossify the descriptive "rules" in that way is just prescriptivism but slower. The goal is to understand and be understood, which will always be a context-dependent moving target.

[FredPret]

There are always other factors being communicated besides the pure meaning. Shibboleths like this one can be class/education level indicators.

[bee_rider]

That's an interesting perspective, I see where you are coming from now. Thanks for elaborating.

[4ndr3vv]

Genuine question: When have you ever heard Hoi Polloi being used without being preceded by "the" ? Seems to universally be used as "the hoi polloi" (albeit, in English)