The placemakers themselves can evolve or disappear - like the term Whig. The ideas themselves (eg Whigs and constitutional monarchism), need quite a bit of detail to understand and an awareness of the historical implications of them and the use of them in different cultural contexts.
Like the word 'architecture' it is easier to define that which it is not, than what it actually represents. But we use the word all the time - or at least I do.
Another tendency in the evolution of words and phrases is elision: The Tottenham Hotspur Football Club becomes Spurs. This elision, if it is used with sufficient frequency, is understood by all who are interested in the subject. Acronyms like jpeg become nouns, verbs, whatever you like - are also understood by all who are interested.
But the elision and evolution of words will also mean that there are people who do not understand them or misunderstand the particular cultural reference. I am not sure what you can do about that except to exercise considerable sensitivity to context which is sometimes difficult when you are passionate ;-)
My argument is not about a specific instance of a particular word, but about a principle concerning word definitions in general. As place-markers many words are continually evolving, eliding and shifting in meaning. Some recognition of that is incumbent upon both writer and reader imo. You can't be me, I'm taken
Argue that people should have the freedom to do what they like with words or whatever, but in my view, it is unnecessary to take the word gay and use it in place of crap or rubbish. And it is tedious to deliberately swear to try to shock, or to be all hard hitting and anarchic with language (I say this in a general sense - and also as a person who lets profanities slip in plenty often in conversation with friends).
Same thing applies to 'mad' 'insane' 'nuts' 'crazy' and so on... Here's a bit from a Scottish campaign that raises awareness of stigma and portrayal of mental health in the media etc. They are not trying to be linguistic fascists but to simply point out that it is unnecessary to reinforce negative associations wrt gender, sexuality etc when there are other phrases that can be used instead.
Media guidelines: a practical guide for Stigma Stop Watchers
Eliminating the stigma and discrimination that surrounds mental ill health is an essential part of improving the quality of life and social inclusion of people who experience mental health problems. The media often perpetuates the ignorance and fear surrounding mental health problems through embellished and incorrect reporting of mental health issues.At worst, headlines sometimes carry derogatory language, for example `nutter', `manic' or `schizo,' which would be unthinkable in relation to race or physical disability. The link between violence and mental illness is also exaggerated. Millions of people have mental health problems - very few are violent. This type of media reporting often has a negative affect on people with mental health problems.
Some of the stand-ups comics and comedians that I love - and it is a wide range historically from Lenny Bruce/Dan Hicks/George Carlin to the Larry David/Ricky Gervais/earlier Billy Connolly, are more precise, more underastandable and more influential social commentary than can be found anywhere else. You can't be me, I'm taken
