Apparently it’s a thing. Like saying “it’s giving (cha)rizz(matic) (vibes)” aka “it’s transmiting a lot of charisma” or " it’s charismatic", you gotta infer from the context what the full sentence means.
I don’t think “washed” by itself is being used a lot, but economising sentences by removing parts and them being inferred via context IS something that is done a lot by young people. We used to just use initials, they are cutting words instead, lmfao.
Yeah, new slang is apparently mostly shorthands of actual words. Aura also is like charisma too, charisma so strong that you can see it around the person, so, aura.
Slang has always been shorthand for longer words or phrases, but I didn’t realize rizz fit that category.
Even things like “speak of the devil” were once longer phrases. It’s a natural pattern in language that common sayings are shortened over time. Really fascinating just how common it is.
You are absolutely correct, but it equally correct that you have never said “Why are you aura farming?” to your grandma and that is what is new to the english language
No, but I just want to reinforce that no one is arguing against you here, even though your wording is as if you are at disagreement with others in this thread. No one is arguing against anything you say, we are just adding onto it.
You stating how long the words exist etc are appreciated as neat facts to the discussion, but they dont really challenge anyones assertions. Very cool to to be reminded of though! Using existing words that have been around for centuries and extending the meaning, not rewriting it, is how language evolves positively :)
You are absolutely correct, but no one said the word’s meaning changed— just used in new ways that mean the same but have implications based on context ;)
Well yeah, and has been extensively used in games to express persistent area effects centered in an individual, but I’m talking about the recent use in describing someone charismatic. I’d be surprised if you found a text from 160 years ago with a semblance of “to have aura”, classically it’s a “strong aura”, “imposing aura”, “calming aura”, you need to know what the aura is about to understand. In current slang “charismatic aura” = aura.
I guess that it’s similar to the trend of saying that something is aesthetic or aesthetical when they mean that something is aesthetically pleasing.
Curious what you mean by recent use? It’s been in my vocabulary with that meaning for at least my entire adult life (~20 years). Maybe it’s just become a popular word with younger generations in the last few years?
Apparently it’s a thing. Like saying “it’s giving (cha)rizz(matic) (vibes)” aka “it’s transmiting a lot of charisma” or " it’s charismatic", you gotta infer from the context what the full sentence means.
I don’t think “washed” by itself is being used a lot, but economising sentences by removing parts and them being inferred via context IS something that is done a lot by young people. We used to just use initials, they are cutting words instead, lmfao.
Wait… rizz is short for charisma?? 🤯
Yeah, new slang is apparently mostly shorthands of actual words. Aura also is like charisma too, charisma so strong that you can see it around the person, so, aura.
They make sense.
Slang has always been shorthand for longer words or phrases, but I didn’t realize rizz fit that category.
Even things like “speak of the devil” were once longer phrases. It’s a natural pattern in language that common sayings are shortened over time. Really fascinating just how common it is.
Well, “aura” is ~165 years old, so not sure if that counts as new slang.
In the way it is used, it is.
Saying stuff like “aura farming” or “that man has aura”
That meaning is 166 years old. The word itself is around 500 years old.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/aura
You are absolutely correct, but it equally correct that you have never said “Why are you aura farming?” to your grandma and that is what is new to the english language
…Found the LLM?
No, but I just want to reinforce that no one is arguing against you here, even though your wording is as if you are at disagreement with others in this thread. No one is arguing against anything you say, we are just adding onto it.
You stating how long the words exist etc are appreciated as neat facts to the discussion, but they dont really challenge anyones assertions. Very cool to to be reminded of though! Using existing words that have been around for centuries and extending the meaning, not rewriting it, is how language evolves positively :)
Sure, “aura farming” might be a new saying, but the meaning of “aura” is not.
You are absolutely correct, but no one said the word’s meaning changed— just used in new ways that mean the same but have implications based on context ;)
Well yeah, and has been extensively used in games to express persistent area effects centered in an individual, but I’m talking about the recent use in describing someone charismatic. I’d be surprised if you found a text from 160 years ago with a semblance of “to have aura”, classically it’s a “strong aura”, “imposing aura”, “calming aura”, you need to know what the aura is about to understand. In current slang “charismatic aura” = aura.
I guess that it’s similar to the trend of saying that something is aesthetic or aesthetical when they mean that something is aesthetically pleasing.
I haven’t personally found it, but that number comes from here: https://www.etymonline.com/word/aura
Curious what you mean by recent use? It’s been in my vocabulary with that meaning for at least my entire adult life (~20 years). Maybe it’s just become a popular word with younger generations in the last few years?
Yeah, it’s gained popularity with it’s bastardization. The concept of “aura points” for example I’m certain is new lol. Thanks for the source btw.
frfr
FranceFrance
I was extremely disappointed that it wasn’t a Rizzo the Rat reference.
“Who’s that?”
-kids
Kinda like British Rhyme slang, where you have to understand what the words are rhyming with to understand what they’re talking about.
I mean look at antiquated English and how cumbersome it is. I feel like it’s the nature of language to become more compact and efficient.