Language desk
< January 15	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 17 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 16

"Entitled"

When and why did "entitled" switch from meaning "having a right to something" to "acting as though you have a right to something even though you don't"? Iapetus (talk) 12:14, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you expect an answer to a rhetorical question? --107.15.152.93 (talk) 13:04, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a rhetorical question. It was a genuine request for information. For most of my life, the only way I heard it used was to mean "having a right to something", and all paper dictionaries I own (dating from 1977 to 2005) give that as the sole meaning. However, in recent years, I've seen it being used frequently (possibly primarily) as the latter. The online Oxford dictionary[1] gives both meanings, with the original as the primary. Another online dictionary I checked (can't remember which) only gave the "spoilt" definition. Iapetus (talk) 13:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware that the meaning has changed at all. What has changed is people's beliefs about what they are entitled to. Wymspen (talk) 14:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your second meaning arose in the '70s, per the OED. It gives the first meaning of "entitled" as That has a legal right or just claim to do, receive, or possess something with examples dating from 1817 to 2010. For the second meaning, Chiefly N. Amer. Believing oneself to be inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment; spoilt and self-important., the earliest example is from 1977: R. Coles Privileged Ones vi. 406 It is a matter of feeling ‘entitled’. A child who has been told repeatedly that all he or she needs to do is try hard does not feel inclined to allow himself or herself much skeptical self-examination. The other examples for the second meaning are from 1994, 1999 and 2010. 184.147.116.166 (talk) 15:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EO also has some comments.[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:24, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For all the nuances of the word see British literary critic Sir Frank Kermode's autobiography, Not Entitled (1995). Djbcjk (talk) 04:47, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would say the meaning of the actual word hasn't changed, at least in US English. If you said "All citizens are entitled to vote", it has the original meaning. It can, however, be modified by adding "feeling" to it, as in "Everyone feels as if they are entitled to live on the dole". If you just said "Everyone is entitled to live on the dole", that would still have the original meaning, unless used sarcastically. I've also heard the term "a sense of entitlement", which again modifies it to have the newer meaning. StuRat (talk) 16:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's a peculiar sort of complaint going around, one you sometimes see on Facebook and the like, where people object to referring to US Social Security as an entitlement, on the grounds that they paid for it. Well, with some quibbles, but sure, that's more or less why they're entitled to it, right? This seems to be a misunderstanding based on hearing the word "entitlement" as a criticism, which it can be sometimes, but in this case it is not. --Trovatore (talk) 03:43, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that's also a misunderstanding of how U.S. Social Security works — based on intentional disinformation. No one pays their own way; ypur money isn't put aside in a "lockbox" for your own use, even though money needed for current benefits is placed in an account that is called a "trust fund"; people recieve money generated by current payroll taxes paid by other people, and from general revenues, when they meet the set of criteria (generally, age and # of years in the work force) that entitle them to it. - Nunh-huh 05:29, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I said "with some quibbles". The thing that strikes me about it is that people are complaining about a word that is not actually a criticism. That's evidence of the two meanings the OP was asking about. --Trovatore (talk) 06:01, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't noticed that (probably because I avoid Facebook political discussions). What I have seen a lot of (on blogs, forums, etc) is conservative Americans blaming ENTITLEMENTS (the capitalization seems to be compulsory) for everything wrong with the US economy and society. Iapetus (talk) 17:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Along with green crayon and liberal use of multiple exclamation marks ? StuRat (talk) 14:56, 19 January 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Hmm, I haven't really noticed that. Entitlements are a huge fraction of government expenditures, and it is not necessarily out of line to mention that in an otherwise well-crafted argument. However, using the fact that the word has taken on a secondary, negative meaning, and deliberately blurring the distinction, would be a bit naughty. If the people I was referring to are reacting to that naughtiness, though, they're doing it wrong. --Trovatore (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]