I agree with the OP. A laugh is a natural human reaction to something funny. It isn't necessarily voluntary and is a pretty open sign that somebody found something amusing. Now if somebody were to not laugh but instead say "I'm laughing" when I told a joke I'd be pretty certain there was no genuine amusement being had. The same goes for saying lol. It's used online to convey that you are laughing because without a camera or mic nobody can tell if you're laughing or not. To say it in person is just plain autistic. So emotionally removed from the scenario you may as well be on the other end of an internet tube.
You seem to like taking points and attempt to make them depending on some personal idea of normality. Perhaps the circles I tend to frequent are of a different sort to your own? I fully expect people who tell me they're "laughing out loud" to be doing just that, otherwise they're essentially talking pointless bollocks and should learn to express themselves properly. You're claiming my point was meaningless when you, yourself have just sat there and tried to claim that "Laughing out Loud" does not in fact mean "Laughing out Loud" Whether you like it or not the analogy I made stands. If a person wants to convey mild amusment which does not make them laugh then they'd be better served by saying something else. On another note: http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=epic Somewhat pertaining to the subject matter and a fairly funny read.
I'm saying if something is genuinely funny you usually don't have a choice to laugh or not. It just happens in the same way that we sneeze, or fart. Laughing as a physical response and provides us with actual health benefits as people. It's a natural human behaviour and is there for a good reason.
You tell me I'm ascribing random personal opinions of normality to expression and then you say: But a word which is used as slang that doesn't strictly mean what it means is hardly a new thing. Bad can be good or bad. I can say something's "pretty interesting" but it might not be pretty at all. People say things like "I couldn't care less" when they mean the opposite, and that someone is "all but dead" when that would imply they live. Head over heels, for example, is a corruption of heels over head. I mean, I thought about it for a few seconds and came up with all these problems with language, how things contradict themselves, say what they don't mean, say other things. This is true for single words too, as with "pretty" or "bad". Language evolves. It was by pure chance that we use the word "funny" instead of "lol" anyway In fact, as pointed out and as far as I know, lol IS a term used for fun in Dutch. Yeah, I guess their usage of it didn't come from expressing emotions via a keyboard, but who really cares as long as meaning is conveyed. And I'm not gonna say "lol" if I'm laughing hard at something, or probably even laughing a little. But if I find something amusing, but not to the point of laughter, I'll smile and say it, and most others in the same situation use it similarly.
saying lol out loud in conversation to me feels sterile and cold, like half arsed or kind of like 'good effort son, you are a fool'. I find it rude to be honest. I explained this to the friend in question today and she actually said its probably because she uses it so frequently online it just rolls off the tounge but point is she understands that it can come accross as cold, she feels all sorted and back to reality, she thinks an intenet break is in order, job done
hahaha, that makes better sense if it was used sarcasticly but it wasnt so thats why I started this thread to get a clearer view.
The problem here being "LOL" as far as the English language goes, is not a word. It's an acronym, a collection of words with specific meaning. "Laugh out loud" is pretty straight forward no matter how you try to take it out of context for use in slang or even with the argument that language evolves. While I see the point you're making with "Bad" (Though its been many, many years since I heard that used in the context of "Good") - that use of the word did not stick. It was generational slang, not an actual evolution of language. Were I to try to use it in that context with the vast majority of people today they'd not understand my meaning. While in contrast the word "Gay" did evolve into a different/additional meaning. The point I'm trying to make is that just because a group of people do use language in a certain context, that does not mean they should, or that people should adopt that usage. In the case of "lol" I'll be highly suprised if that is adopted in the long term as meaning anything other than: Laugh Out Loud. I have not adopted it as meaning any different, and outside of this thread I do not know anyone that has, or would.
The thing is that "lol" has taken on a meaning besides what the acronym proposes. When you type "lol," you generally are not laughing out loud. The same translates over to speech. There's an alternate meaning to "lol," something along the lines of "I recognize this is supposed to be funny but its not funny enough for me to laugh so I shall acknowledge it with a known and understood utterance." No other single word or widely recognized sound conveys the same meaning, so... why not? It's not a replacement for an established word or phrase that does the same job, so I don't see the problem. And it's not like we don't already pronounce acronyms during speech, that's part of the purpose of acronyms.
I only ever type lol when I'm genuinely laughing, after reading the previous comments I guess I'm a rare case It does explain why some things that are barely amusing get lots of lols in the comments What are people typing when they are really laughing?
When something on the internet genuinely makes me laugh I usually have to express it in more than just an acronym. It has to be really good for something on the internet to get a laugh when alone, so a "rofl" or "lmao" hardly seems fitting. Presumably if something genuinely made you laugh you wouldn't be typing at that very moment anyway...
Oh no...... what happened to the AVs? Quick Fact: LOL originated in the Marvel comics I used to read as a kid, not the internet (more accurately: The World Wide Web), as everyone thinks; along with the really naff FOOM (friends of ol' Marvel). I'd never heard of it before then. Byeeeee!! Off to the other side of the Galaxy............ Zoom!!
Having been in the US Army, acronyms and single letter at a time enunciations were widely used daily by everyone to refer to specific things. Example: "We have an FTR NBC NCO!" Or "Where is the NCOIC?" and I was even a part us USAREUR the list goes on exhaustively. It was a part of my daily speech for a handful of years. It's no big thing at all really. So the arguments I read of people against it really do make me LOL.....sorry, I meant "L O L"
What does that have to do with "lol" ? NCOIC works fine there, because you cant really ask for that (non commissioned officer in charge) without using verbal communication.
Funnily enough that what I do, if I really laughing IRL when reading things I write 'hahaha', if really funny I put it in capital, sometime in big 'LOOOOOL' or 'LOLOLOL' style. If I just write 'lol', it either mean 'har har, hardy har har' or 'lame' in sarcastic manner.
I think were looking at different points. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't say "l o l" when someone says a joke or whatever. I'll laugh. But to comment on their joke I may say something like, "dude, that was funny! Good one! It gave me the lol's!" It's not a part of my everyday speech however. It's once in a while and where appropriate. But where I was coming from was that to say such things and abbreviated for of spoken speech to include letter acronyms, isn't a big deal to me. But I do see where when people use it exhaustively in their normal common speech, yeah, it comes off like they are exhibiting a tad of stupidity.
