the "language is a social construct, therefore linguistic misinformation is impossible. any claim about language is true if enough people say it is" misconception is of course annoying when applied to stuff like grammar because it's wrong in a nuanced way that's important to explain correctly to avoid spreading even worse ideas about language. but with etymology it's like. no that's not even the part of language that's a social construct, you're making a claim about history. this is something that you really shouldn't think you can just make up

language changes over time but a popular tumblr post claiming that a figure of speech from the bible is actually the short version of its own comeback isn't language changing

btw one of the main tells for false etymology posts online is that they often are presented as something the poster "realized", as opposed to "learned". as though historical facts about how language has evolved are things that you can figure out on your own by thinking about words hard enough

i dont know what love island is but from what ive heard its like danganronpa for people that use snapchat

fifteen year anniversary

sixteen year anniversary

nineteen year anniversary