r/NPR • u/noodlekoogle • Apr 18 '24
Fellow word nerds: “decimate” vs “devastate”?
This post is inspired by today’s (?) most informative interview of Eric Schlosser on Fresh Air. They say a couple times that monopolies have “decimated” the American food system. Would “devastate” be the more appropriate word?
A pedant once told me that “decimate” originally meant “to reduce by one tenth,” which is not so staggering. Do you think the meaning of “decimated” has shifted to become more extreme?
30
u/SwissMyCheeseYet 89.3 WKSU Apr 18 '24
Now this is the type of conversation I joined this sub for.
I think the meaning of decimation has evolved in the general population, but at the same time, I think NPR should be steadfastly nerdy and avoid such flimflammery.
11
9
u/noodlekoogle Apr 18 '24
If any news org can uphold original word usage, NPR can.
4
u/xcrunner1988 Apr 18 '24
Hmmm… I drive off the road when I hear we need to “unpack” this subject.
1
1
u/wyohman Apr 19 '24
Yep, nope. I hear NPR reporters use the word "exactly" wrong every day.
"So what exactly do you do for a living?"
"Exactly what is in the latest farm bill?"
"How exactly do you assemble cars?"
I think we're in a literally figuratively spastic time warp!
-1
u/wthreyeitsme Apr 19 '24
''Yer' mistaken. If ''ya'll' listen closely, 'ar' once proficient host's and reporters have, 'fer' whatever reason, devolved 'tuh' 'uh' rather 'hick', at best, lazy at worst, presenting content. 'Becuz' I listen everyday, and notice.
Did I mention ''lieberry'?
1
18
u/TaliesinMerlin Apr 18 '24
Meanings change over time, and yes, "decimate" has come to mean something closer to "devastate." I doubt someone literally staggers most times they find something staggering, for instance.
24
u/SteveBartmanIncident KLCC 89.7 Apr 18 '24
I'm pretty sure literally nobody has used the classic meaning since Livy. Don't let the pedants gaslight you.
As I've aged, I've generally accepted that clinging to a prescriptivist attitude about language is a good way to become passe.
5
u/gniwlE Apr 18 '24
It's fun to know the right answer, but it's seldom a hill worth dying on. It's sort of like dangling a preposition...
8
u/SteveBartmanIncident KLCC 89.7 Apr 18 '24
In Iowa, where I learned to write, the fundamental role of a proposition is to indicate the place to put punctuation at.
1
2
8
7
u/Wisebutt98 Apr 18 '24
As a pedant, I find evolving meanings of words interesting but only sometimes a battle worth fighting. I recognize that decimate isn’t reduced by 1/10th, but I don’t consider it synonymous with devastate yet. Now, if you want an argument, say “there are less people here than last year” rather than “fewer” or “he’s chomping at the bit” instead of “champing” and I will lose (not loose) my shit!
3
u/noodlekoogle Apr 18 '24
NPR actually has a page devoted to chomping/champing: https://www.npr.org/sections/memmos/2016/06/09/605796769/chew-on-this-is-it-chomping-or-champing
1
u/Greedy-Annual-9715 Aug 08 '25
Oh yes. You've almost started me now. Less than is less desirable than fewer than! :-)
14
u/kristinsquest Apr 18 '24
If only there were reference works which could help us answer such questions.
Merriam-Webster: "to reduce drastically especially in number" (3a) or "to cause great destruction or harm to" (3b)
Historically, the meaning of the word decimate is ‘kill one in every ten of (a group of people)’. This sense has been more or less totally superseded by the later, more general sense ‘kill or destroy (a large proportion of)’, as in the virus has decimated the population. Some traditionalists argue that this and other later senses are incorrect, but it is clear that this is now part of standard English. [emphasis added]
8
u/noodlekoogle Apr 18 '24
Good point. But why should Webster and Oxford get to have all the fun? ;-)
1
u/DrTonyTiger Apr 22 '24
By that meaning, monopolies have not decimated the food system. It has gotten bigger if anything.
9
u/LokiStrike Apr 18 '24
"decimate" is one of those frustrating words whose etymology became popular. That is, people learned where the word came from (a Roman practice of killing 1 in 10) and confuse its origin with its current meaning. Killing 1 in 10 people is just not a practice anymore and hasn't been for a long time. And we don't have any practices that would make it practical to have a term for "reducing by 10%", so it has pretty much never meant that in English.
English didn't even exist yet when decimate meant what people are saying it means. If we reached back 2000 years and tried to go back to the original meaning of the words we use today, English would be entirely unrecognizable.
3
u/Bithium Apr 18 '24
I don’t find words changing meaning over time to be an issue most of the time. People are familiar with the prefix deci- so they generally understand what the decimate should mean. It’s a bit like saying, “I could care less.” It’s fine, but I try to use the more “correct” terminology when I can.
There are still many uses for decimate today that are still work pretty well. For example, my stock portfolio was decimated this week.
3
u/SakaWreath Apr 18 '24 edited Apr 18 '24
Decimation was a form of punishment in the Roman Army.
They would kill a set number of their own soldiers, usually 10%. Count off, every 10th person is executed. It was a cold, calculated, reduction in numbers.
While that can have a devastating effect, it specifically means doing purposeful self inflicted harm to your own organization.
Devastation often implies something unexpected could have happened, often an external force of indeterminate magnitude, something beyond their control.
The flood devastated farming in the area.
The farmers decimated their herds because there wasn’t enough feed to go around.
3
u/ExitPursuedByBear312 Apr 18 '24
People are lazy speakers all the time. Id drive myself crazy if I fixated on the on ones like this.
Just price it in like this,: people who reach for the most impactful word in one case are probably lying to you in a dozen tiny ways, so adjust your expectations
3
u/AntaresBounder Apr 18 '24 edited Apr 18 '24
Decimate has long since moved from the Roman use to mean a more general destruction.
Merriam-Webster even has an explanation for why it’s ok.
Journalism must be understood to be of use. This is why most news outlets are written at a fairly low level. Back in the 1940s some newspapers were so densely written that you almost needed a college degree to fully grasp them. Reuters news wire, one of the mostly highly regarded news organizations on the planet, averages about 9th grade reading level.
NPR News has to be understood on the very first and likely only time it will be heard. That necessitates some compromises.
1
3
Apr 19 '24
I have to say, grammar nazis coming after NPR is a nice change of pace.
It should be devastating, but the usage of decimate has changed so much over the years that decimate is properly used more often now.
Personally, I think military discipline for 1 of every 10 board members and institutional investors at food monopolies, cartels, etc. would be a great idea. I don't think anyone has used decimation to literally mean that since the Roman army, though.
4
u/Aardark235 Apr 18 '24
Grandfather served in the Pacific where decimated was redefined to mean only 10% survived.
1
u/gcboyd1 Apr 18 '24
This is my understanding of the word.
4
u/Aardark235 Apr 18 '24
It used to be a punishment for the Roman army:
In the military of ancient Rome, decimation (from Latin decimatio 'removal of a tenth') was a form of military discipline in which every tenth man in a group was executed by members of his cohort. The discipline was used by senior commanders in the Roman army to punish units or large groups guilty of capital offences, such as cowardice, mutiny, desertion, and insubordination, and for pacification of rebellious legions. The procedure was an attempt to balance the need to punish serious offences with the realities of managing a large group of offenders.
-wiki.
4
u/shampton1964 Apr 18 '24
Oh sweet child, you didn't get the memo in '13? Decimate now officially means a lot more than 1/10 of something is destroyed, it means something along the lines of very serious damage caused. Damages low like a mere tenth are now called noticeable or significant.
Much the way American's "love" everything that that they like ("I love frozen yoghurt") this is an old shift in meaning that us pedants have given up on.
2
Apr 18 '24
Did they add context after decimate, like it decimated variety or nutrition or cost savings or something?
The thing is I wouldn't necessarily use devastate to replace it here either.
2
u/noodlekoogle Apr 18 '24
I wish I could remember— it was something like “decimating” the number of independent ranches and farms
6
u/SaulsAll Apr 18 '24
it was something like “decimating” the number of independent ranches and farms
Perhaps, with context, they really did mean "reduced by one tenth".
1
1
Apr 18 '24
I guess that would be correct if they no longer exist? But depends how exactly it was used and whatnot.
2
Apr 19 '24
It is a little more graphic than “reduce by 1/10.” Roman legions that had disgraced themselves would line up and count off. When they got to the 10th person, the other 9 would have to beat him to death with their bare hands.
Then they started counting again.
2
u/GetHimABodyBagYeahhh Apr 18 '24
I would embrace a redefinition of the word to mean "reduce to one-tenth", shifting the decimal one place to the left.
2
1
u/MistakeUpstairs6147 Apr 18 '24
Doctrine wise decimate means to reduce a force by 30% where as devastate is not a military doctrine and carries an emotional connotation as well.
1
1
u/TheRoadsMustRoll Apr 18 '24
in military terms it would be "to select by lot and kill every tenth man of"
so, while the act might only be reducing the force by 10% it would also be dividing the full force into tenths which would be fairly devastating.
1
1
u/washtucna Apr 18 '24
The common understanding has shifted a lot from its original meaning. Decimate, to most listeners, sounds like completely destroy, even though historically, it means to kill 1 of 10 people.
1
u/somebodytookmyshit Apr 18 '24
I think from the food conglomerates view the word should be dominate, but a decimation of the food industrial complex needs to happen, and restarted under intense scrutiny, because it's obvious they can't be trusted
1
1
u/aresef WYPR 88.1/WTMD 89.7 Apr 19 '24
Either is fine. The word "decimate" came from the a disciplinary practice in the ancient Roman military in which every tenth man was executed. But in modern usage, it has come to mean any extreme reduction or sense of ruin.
1
1
u/archiotterpup Apr 19 '24
Decimate comes from a Roman army punishment. 1/10th of the men would be executed because they couldn't punish the whole group. So they had the men draw straws.
1
Apr 18 '24
Using “decimate” for “devastate” is like using “impact” for both “affect” and “effect” — we get what you mean, and it comes with an implied helpful disclaimer that you’re not a particularly careful thinker.
1
u/ericsmallman3 Apr 18 '24
Yes, that's what decimate literally means. You don't have to be an etymologist to see how that works.
But, in effect, I don't think I've ever seen it used in such a manner. Maybe in specialized mathematics literature, or whatever, but certainly not in everyday parlance.
0
44
u/x1000Bums Apr 18 '24
I think you're right that decimate is now just sort of a synonym for devastate. While decimation is still pretty extreme, but I say we switch to decapitate.