I don’t think “disappear” is a transitive verb. You can’t “disappear someone”, as far as I know. I’m getting grammar squiggles for that already while typing this comment.
Edit: I guess I’m wrong, but it sure sounds stupid. Sounds like one of those TikTok censor words you put in place of the real word.
Edit 2: wow, the down votes. In my defense I’m not an English native, and the grammar squiggles damnit, they lied!!1
It’s just a colloquial thing, a grammar book will tell you it’s wrong, but people make up new words and meanings for long enough and things become commonly accepted and understood. It’s also a cynical use of the word, and the fact that it feels off is also effective in telling you that the meaning should make you feel uneasy - for this word we are talking about a fascist government abducting people and actually everybody knows what happened, after all. It’s perfectly cromulent, it doesn’t have to be Tiktok lingo (but words like unalive may very well become acceptable too).
Exactly, unalive is the word that has triggered me for a while. I think that’s why I reacted to “disappeared” as a transitive verb. It just doesn’t feel right coming out of my mouth lol.
It has long been used as a transitive verb. The Oxford English Dictionary has collected examples going as far back as 1897 using it generically to make something disappear, but this particular meaning, of government officials forcibly abducting a person and not explaining where the person went, really started to pick up by the 1960’s. The novel Catch-22, published in 1961, had a character use it in the transitive way, with the protagonist complaining that it wasn’t even proper grammar. And that novel was popular enough that it started to appear a lot shortly afterwards, in magazines and newspapers and books.
Who cares about this?
Did you know that China forcibly disappeared a 6 year old back in 1995 and they’re still holding him captive to this day?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gedhun_Choekyi_Nyima
Sure, but you could post this about anything. What does this have to do with Japan?
I care an equal amount about this.
I don’t think “disappear” is a transitive verb. You can’t “disappear someone”, as far as I know. I’m getting grammar squiggles for that already while typing this comment.
Edit: I guess I’m wrong, but it sure sounds stupid. Sounds like one of those TikTok censor words you put in place of the real word.
Edit 2: wow, the down votes. In my defense I’m not an English native, and the grammar squiggles damnit, they lied!!1
It’s just a colloquial thing, a grammar book will tell you it’s wrong, but people make up new words and meanings for long enough and things become commonly accepted and understood. It’s also a cynical use of the word, and the fact that it feels off is also effective in telling you that the meaning should make you feel uneasy - for this word we are talking about a fascist government abducting people and actually everybody knows what happened, after all. It’s perfectly cromulent, it doesn’t have to be Tiktok lingo (but words like unalive may very well become acceptable too).
Exactly, unalive is the word that has triggered me for a while. I think that’s why I reacted to “disappeared” as a transitive verb. It just doesn’t feel right coming out of my mouth lol.
Oh well, language gonna language.
It has long been used as a transitive verb. The Oxford English Dictionary has collected examples going as far back as 1897 using it generically to make something disappear, but this particular meaning, of government officials forcibly abducting a person and not explaining where the person went, really started to pick up by the 1960’s. The novel Catch-22, published in 1961, had a character use it in the transitive way, with the protagonist complaining that it wasn’t even proper grammar. And that novel was popular enough that it started to appear a lot shortly afterwards, in magazines and newspapers and books.
So it is. I believed my own research as well as I believe you. Thank you for the info!