Data leads a life of its own quite independent of datum, of which it was originally the plural. It occurs in two constructions: as a plural noun (like earnings), taking a plural verb and plural modifiers (such as these, many, a few) but not cardinal numbers, and serving as a referent for plural pronouns (such as they, them); and as an abstract mass noun (like information), taking a singular verb and singular modifiers (such as this, much, little), and being referred to by a singular pronoun (it). Both constructions are standard. The plural construction is more common in print, evidently because the house style of several publishers mandates it.
According to Merriam-Webster, 'data do not lie' and 'data does not lie' are both technically correct. But I didn't know datum is the singular form of data. I always looked at 'data' as synonymous to 'information', so thanks for sharing your knowledge!
I make those comments not as an attack, but in the hope that they make an impression on a soul or two. Looks like you're the lucky winner.
In Politics and the English Language, George Orwell explains how imprecise language makes critical thought impossible. Granted that incorrect usage of "data" has little potential for thought manipulation. The word data is generally interchangeable with the word information, because they are both composed of individual datum (i.e., a known fact).
Your Merriam-Webster quote reads like it was pulled from a fairly recent edition. My 1993 Webster's has: "data pl of DATUM". That's it. Definitions in newer, and on-line dictionaries are laced with subtle propaganda. I use the word "gender" as a test. If the book equates it to sex, I throw it out. Church sales are a good place to find older versions.
One can argue that the definition has been modified to reflect popular usage. But has it? Or is the reverse closer to the truth? Namely, that the definition was changed in order to nudge people towards accepting that "sex" is like "gender," that is to say, completely arbitrary. It is very useful for those who want to destroy the traditional family to have folks think that way. More obvious examples are the WHO changing the definitions of "vaccine" and "pandemic." Words matter.
Another one that gets me is, "could care less," which, if you think about it, is the reverse of what's meant to be implied. So then, if you could care less, then why don't you?
BOOMMMMMMMMMMMM
I love it when fools bring people on and then are made to look like morons themselves
https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1843680982676676608/vid/avc1/1282x720/FkrCYzOai_eLHg1j.mp4
SHUT HIM UP
We don't recognize your authority or gaslighting opinion dillweed mocking bird!!!
Actually, data do not lie. Data are plural, datum is singular.
Either way, 2020 was still stolen.
I think she was talking about the Star Trek character ;-)
Maybe! But it looks like he was misnamed. Unless his preferred pronouns were they/them, of course.
According to Merriam-Webster, 'data do not lie' and 'data does not lie' are both technically correct. But I didn't know datum is the singular form of data. I always looked at 'data' as synonymous to 'information', so thanks for sharing your knowledge!
I make those comments not as an attack, but in the hope that they make an impression on a soul or two. Looks like you're the lucky winner.
In Politics and the English Language, George Orwell explains how imprecise language makes critical thought impossible. Granted that incorrect usage of "data" has little potential for thought manipulation. The word data is generally interchangeable with the word information, because they are both composed of individual datum (i.e., a known fact).
Your Merriam-Webster quote reads like it was pulled from a fairly recent edition. My 1993 Webster's has: "data pl of DATUM". That's it. Definitions in newer, and on-line dictionaries are laced with subtle propaganda. I use the word "gender" as a test. If the book equates it to sex, I throw it out. Church sales are a good place to find older versions.
One can argue that the definition has been modified to reflect popular usage. But has it? Or is the reverse closer to the truth? Namely, that the definition was changed in order to nudge people towards accepting that "sex" is like "gender," that is to say, completely arbitrary. It is very useful for those who want to destroy the traditional family to have folks think that way. More obvious examples are the WHO changing the definitions of "vaccine" and "pandemic." Words matter.
Another one that gets me is, "could care less," which, if you think about it, is the reverse of what's meant to be implied. So then, if you could care less, then why don't you?
Belive the science.
Unless you don't like it....
Show me a court case.
These Commies from Pravda know damn well the judges have been on their side and have not allowed any real evidence to be presented in a court case.