this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2026
396 points (98.1% liked)

memes

22607 readers
2075 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 43 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] darkdemize@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 month ago

You keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 31 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Unlock-able versus un-lockable

[–] Equinox1289@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's mental bracketing for you.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 month ago

TIL the thing I do when I’m trying to understand an ambiguous sentence has a name

[–] TabbsTheBat@pawb.social 18 points 1 month ago (21 children)

Ahh, I've been speaking english for over a decade, and I still sometimes get caught up with these and say the opposite thing of what I want

Like the whole thing of flammable and inflammable meaning the same thing.. just why?

[–] folekaule@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (4 children)

"flammable" actually has an interesting story:

Since 1980s use of the word, especially in safety warnings, has been sometimes discouraged lest it be misunderstood as "non-flammable" through confusion of the two prefixes in-.

Ref: inflammable on Etymonline

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Equinox1289@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

Cause the verb is inflame and means to place a flame in on on something, as opposed to not flame. The problem being in both inflammable and the issue the OP of the image is the notion of re-bracketing. Rather than think of it as [inflame]able it gets converted into in[flammable] in the minds of new readers/listeners which flips the in- prefix meaning to not rather than in/on like it is supposed to be.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] 5ibelius9insterberg@feddit.org 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Let me present to you a genre-classic from Germany:

umFAHREN -> to drive around something or somebody.

UMfahren -> to drive against something or somebody in a way it/they fall over.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 month ago (3 children)

making up the rules as we go

You seem unaware at how, while French is steered by a committee of linguists, English is steered by a mob of autofellatic influencerati fame-whores, all looking for differentiation and trends to manufacture. So fetch.

[–] Knossos@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Stop trying to make fetch happen.

[–] stormeuh@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

The Académie Française is absolutely not a "committee of linguists". They're a bunch of rich conservatives who are way too high on nationalism, and they are infamous for going against the consensus of linguists (who they supposedly consult).

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Psh, English is like half French, and prescriptivism is bad linguistics.

[–] EffortlessGrace@piefed.social 7 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Are we just making up language rules as we go?

Yes, throughout history, in fact.

And to answer the meme's question, it can have either definition based on the context of usage.

[–] Tacky4092@feddit.org 6 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

You are able to undo the locking. It's almost like reading comprehension is shit nowadays.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Why can it not mean unable to be locked?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

un-lockable implies it is unable to be locked.

unlock-able implies that it is able to be unlocked.

It's a homonym.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago
[–] Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

At the end, both are the same.

You end up with something that isn't locked.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

The issue is the fact that the opposite action of locking is called unlocking and not something like delocking.

[–] TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz 5 points 4 weeks ago

Sokath, his eyes uncoverable.

[–] Zgierwoj@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago

When you say that something is easily unlockable the second way sounds clunky, but both convey the same message that whatever it is, it is not secure

[–] khanh@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 weeks ago

almost always "able to be unlocked". "not able to be locked" is usually "non-lockable" or "not lockable".

[–] devfuuu@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago
[–] weps@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

could be both

maybe it's a homonym

[–] Rokin@leminal.space 3 points 1 month ago

Nice shower thought.

[–] Wataba@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Non-lockable feels like the right term.

'Un-' directly implies undoing, an action. 'Non-' implies a status, a non-possibility.

That's my two cents.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

to unambiguously say "unable to be locked" would be "nonlockable"

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I would say "non-lockable" means can't be locked, and "unlockable" means can be changed from locked to unlocked, implying also being lockable.

But to answer the question, yes we are making up language as we go along. For one thing we've always done that, but recently the trend has accelerated as people strive to reduce complex ideas to simple, overgeneralized slang to avoid having to think as much or do as much thumb-typing.

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

Curse you! 🙃

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Highly illockable

[–] _skj@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Depends on emphasis. Said with normal stress on the first syllable is "able to be unlocked".

But if you pronounce it with extra emphasis on both of the first two syllables with a bit of a pause between, I think most people would think "not able to be locked". Very context dependent though

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 4 weeks ago

Literally yes, we are.

Cause language is a toolkit to communicate ideas, and a toolkit frozen in glass is a useless toolkit.

You need to swap out that hammer when it starts getting damaged, or put back a screwdriver when you find out you need it again, or add new tools when you find that the tools you have now aren't fit to purpose.

And sure, there's some loose screws at the bottom of the bag, but they don't harm anything, and very occasionally they come in useful.

[–] Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Both. It is already been locked and therefore cannot be "locked"; simultaneously because it is locked, it is able to be unlocked.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bitteroldcoot@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago

It means it gives the illusion of being locked, until an Israeli tech company plugs into it and unlocks it for the cops.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-tech-company-says-it-can-break-into-all-iphones-ever-made-some-androids/

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

I'm pretty sure one of those has a hyphen

[–] Orangenkuchen@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Redminds of the German "umfahren" (run over) which is the exact opposit of "umfahren" (drive around). (First is pronounced with a tiny pause after the second letter; the other is not.)

[–] Chaf@slrpnk.net 4 points 4 weeks ago

Even better is "Haare wachsen lassen". One meaning is letting your hair grow, the other is waxing your hair. Pronounced exactly the same

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

*None-lockable

load more comments
view more: next ›