fossils-4
Explanation
This comic tackles the debate about linguistic prescriptivism vs. descriptivism -- the question of whether language has fixed rules or whether it evolves based on usage.
In the first panel, a linguist-type character enthusiastically explains that "linguistic evolution is a lot like biological languages: we they are today and may be tomorrow, but there's no purpose to their journey." A second character pushes back, asking about words that are "no longer even outside the original definition" -- essentially arguing that words losing their original meaning is a problem.
The linguist doubles down in the third panel with a passionate declaration: "In language, evolution there is no law! There are no illegal pronouns or gerunds. Every wonderful, dangerous, very murderous dangling participle finds its own gorgeous, incoherent niche in this ever-expanding jungle." It's an extreme version of the descriptivist position -- that there are no wrong usages, only evolving ones.
The punchline comes in the final panel, where the other character notes: "Just because it makes no sense doesn't mean it's wrong" and the linguist responds that their "seminary wouldn't an speaker of proto-Indo-European" -- deliberately mangling grammar to prove the point that language changes, while also undermining their own argument by producing something nearly unintelligible.
The humor is in the self-defeating nature of extreme descriptivism: if literally any usage is valid, then communication itself breaks down. The comic satirizes how some linguists' enthusiasm for language evolution can be taken to an absurd logical extreme.