Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Users Search
Help Dashboard Sign In Sign Up
Q&A Resources Meta
Q&A
Posts Tags Edits
Ask Question

Post History

75%
+4 −0
Q&A Has the word "humor" shifted meaning?

The original meaning of humor of course refers to the obsolete theory of the four humors and their effect on human temperament. I'm not asking about that. It appears that initially, the meaning sh...

2 answers  ·  posted 1y ago by matthewsnyder‭  ·  last activity 4mo ago by Jirka Hanika‭

Question particular-word humor
#5: Nominated for promotion by user avatar Moshi‭ · 2023-12-03T09:14:22Z (about 1 year ago)
#4: Post edited by user avatar matthewsnyder‭ · 2023-10-12T17:46:18Z (about 1 year ago)
  • The original meaning of *humor* of course refers to the obsolete theory of the four humors and their effect on human temperament. I'm not asking about that.
  • It appears that initially, the meaning shifted from any behavior, to a specific type of behavior that we may call (or have called in recent history) "convivial", "congenial" or "agreeable". It is not uncommon to assume that a hallmark of a person who is agreeable would be a readiness to engage in jokes and playfulness, and most like to be around such people, so it is not hard to see how it came to be said that such people have "good humor" (pleasant *character*).
  • Nowadays we use *sense of humor* to mean the ability to share and appreciate funny things. It's possible in modern parlance for a person to have an excellent sense of humor and yet be an abstruse, unlikable curmudgeon. Indeed, many successful comedians are reportedly very unpleasant in private, do not have "good humor", and are bad at getting along and hard to get along with. We even have a concept of a person who tells bad jokes (annoying, offensive, unfunny) and consequently is unpleasant to be around.
  • Is this a true shift in meaning, in that the concept of *a taste for funny things* is legitimately divorced from *being a good sport*? Or is it in fact the same word (always meaning "good character") but the shift (towards dramatically more elitism and quid-pro-quo/transactionalism) has been in what society considers good character?
  • The original meaning of *humor* of course refers to the obsolete theory of the four humors and their effect on human temperament. I'm not asking about that.
  • It appears that initially, the meaning shifted from any behavior, to a specific type of behavior that we may call (or have called in recent history) "convivial", "congenial" or "agreeable". It is not uncommon to assume that a hallmark of a person who is agreeable would be a readiness to engage in jokes and playfulness, and most like to be around such people, so it is not hard to see how it came to be said that such people have "good humor" (pleasant *character*).
  • Nowadays we use *sense of humor* to mean the ability to share and appreciate funny things. It's possible in modern parlance for a person to have an excellent sense of humor and yet be an abstruse, unlikable curmudgeon. Indeed, many successful comedians are reportedly very unpleasant in private, do not have "good humor", and are bad at getting along and hard to get along with. We even have a concept of a person who tells bad jokes (annoying, offensive, unfunny) and consequently is unpleasant to be around.
  • Is this a true shift in meaning, in that the concept of *a taste or liking for funny things* is legitimately divorced from *being a good sport*? Or is it in fact the same word (always meaning "good character") but the shift (towards dramatically more elitism and quid-pro-quo/transactionalism) has been in what society considers good character?
#3: Post edited by user avatar matthewsnyder‭ · 2023-10-12T17:45:35Z (about 1 year ago)
  • The original meaning of *humor* of course refers to the obsolete theory of the four humors and their effect on human temperament. I'm not asking about that.
  • It appears that initially, the meaning shifted from any behavior, to a specific type of behavior that we may call (or have called in recent history) "convivial", "congenial" or "agreeable". It is not uncommon to assume that a hallmark of a person who is agreeable would be a readiness to engage in jokes and playfulness, and most like to be around such people, so it is not hard to see how it came to be said that such people have "good humor" (pleasant *character*).
  • Nowadays we use *sense of humor* to mean the ability to share and appreciate funny things. It's possible in modern parlance for a person to have an excellent sense of humor and yet be an abstruse, unlikable curmudgeon. Indeed, many successful comedians are reportedly very unpleasant in private, do not have "good humor", and are bad at getting along and hard to get along with.
  • Is this a true shift in meaning, in that the concept of *a taste for funny things* is legitimately divorced from *being a good sport*? Or is it in fact the same word (always meaning "good character") but the shift (towards dramatically more elitism and quid-pro-quo/transactionalism) has been in what society considers good character?
  • The original meaning of *humor* of course refers to the obsolete theory of the four humors and their effect on human temperament. I'm not asking about that.
  • It appears that initially, the meaning shifted from any behavior, to a specific type of behavior that we may call (or have called in recent history) "convivial", "congenial" or "agreeable". It is not uncommon to assume that a hallmark of a person who is agreeable would be a readiness to engage in jokes and playfulness, and most like to be around such people, so it is not hard to see how it came to be said that such people have "good humor" (pleasant *character*).
  • Nowadays we use *sense of humor* to mean the ability to share and appreciate funny things. It's possible in modern parlance for a person to have an excellent sense of humor and yet be an abstruse, unlikable curmudgeon. Indeed, many successful comedians are reportedly very unpleasant in private, do not have "good humor", and are bad at getting along and hard to get along with. We even have a concept of a person who tells bad jokes (annoying, offensive, unfunny) and consequently is unpleasant to be around.
  • Is this a true shift in meaning, in that the concept of *a taste for funny things* is legitimately divorced from *being a good sport*? Or is it in fact the same word (always meaning "good character") but the shift (towards dramatically more elitism and quid-pro-quo/transactionalism) has been in what society considers good character?
#2: Post edited by user avatar matthewsnyder‭ · 2023-10-12T17:43:59Z (about 1 year ago)
  • The original meaning of *humor* of course refers to the obsolete theory of the four humors and their effect on human temperament. I'm not asking about that.
  • It appears that initially, the meaning shifted from any behavior, to a specific type of behavior that we may call (or have called in recent history) "convivial", "congenial" or "agreeable". It is not uncommon to assume that a hallmark of a person who is agreeable would be a readiness to engage in jokes and playfulness, and such attitudes are popular, so it is not hard to see how it came to be said that such people have "good humor" (pleasant *character*).
  • Nowadays we use *sense of humor* to mean the ability to share and appreciate funny things. It's possible in modern parlance for a person to have an excellent sense of humor and yet be an abstruse, unlikable curmudgeon. Indeed, many successful comedians are reportedly very unpleasant in private, do not have "good humor", and are bad at getting along and hard to get along with.
  • Is this a true shift in meaning, in that the concept of *a taste for funny things* is legitimately divorced from *being a good sport*? Or is it in fact the same word (always meaning "good character") but the shift (towards dramatically more elitism and quid-pro-quo/transactionalism) has been in what society considers good character?
  • The original meaning of *humor* of course refers to the obsolete theory of the four humors and their effect on human temperament. I'm not asking about that.
  • It appears that initially, the meaning shifted from any behavior, to a specific type of behavior that we may call (or have called in recent history) "convivial", "congenial" or "agreeable". It is not uncommon to assume that a hallmark of a person who is agreeable would be a readiness to engage in jokes and playfulness, and most like to be around such people, so it is not hard to see how it came to be said that such people have "good humor" (pleasant *character*).
  • Nowadays we use *sense of humor* to mean the ability to share and appreciate funny things. It's possible in modern parlance for a person to have an excellent sense of humor and yet be an abstruse, unlikable curmudgeon. Indeed, many successful comedians are reportedly very unpleasant in private, do not have "good humor", and are bad at getting along and hard to get along with.
  • Is this a true shift in meaning, in that the concept of *a taste for funny things* is legitimately divorced from *being a good sport*? Or is it in fact the same word (always meaning "good character") but the shift (towards dramatically more elitism and quid-pro-quo/transactionalism) has been in what society considers good character?
#1: Initial revision by user avatar matthewsnyder‭ · 2023-10-12T17:42:55Z (about 1 year ago) 
Has the word "humor" shifted meaning?
The original meaning of *humor* of course refers to the obsolete theory of the four humors and their effect on human temperament. I'm not asking about that.

It appears that initially, the meaning shifted from any behavior, to a specific type of behavior that we may call (or have called in recent history) "convivial", "congenial" or "agreeable". It is not uncommon to assume that a hallmark of a person who is agreeable would be a readiness to engage in jokes and playfulness, and such attitudes are popular, so it is not hard to see how it came to be said that such people have "good humor" (pleasant *character*).

Nowadays we use *sense of humor* to mean the ability to share and appreciate funny things. It's possible in modern parlance for a person to have an excellent sense of humor and yet be an abstruse, unlikable curmudgeon. Indeed, many successful comedians are reportedly very unpleasant in private, do not have "good humor", and are bad at getting along and hard to get along with.

Is this a true shift in meaning, in that the concept of *a taste for funny things* is legitimately divorced from *being a good sport*? Or is it in fact the same word (always meaning "good character") but the shift (towards dramatically more elitism and quid-pro-quo/transactionalism)  has been in what society considers good character?
particular-word humor