The Mandela Effect

[UltraBudgie]

Okay, I'm done with this whole "confusion" and "understanding" thing for now, and maybe can resume other forms of writing here on my next visit.

My apologies. I was merely trying to use as many compound "every-" words as I could, to explore the issue. I didn't mean anything personal by it. In fact I had to look up the list myself, to see where I was "confused".

Here is an interesting idea, then (to me, anyway): I think that natural languages, like English, are not regular in grammar and structure for a deeper reason. That, in fact, they wouldn't work as well for humans if they were self-consistent and always followed the same rules. That some ambiguity and "confusion" is not a flaw of the language, but a benefit. I'm not sure how to really express why this is, but I think it somehow adds depth to the human experience, or something. This, for example, shows why languages like Esperanto, which are artificially consistent, have never really become popular.

This applies to spoken language, too, the ambiguity of homophones and regional patois can be hilarious, and confusing. My father once ordered a side of fries at a restaurant in the south, and they brought him rice.

As far as the Mandela effect, there do seem to be several effects that are unexplainable. For example, I've gotten well-educated literary fans freaked out by mentioning that "dilemma" is not spelled "dilemna":