We are not bemused

[Radiant]

I would defend Alanis and "Ironic" against the critics as well, though my take is a little different from Merriam-Webster's. While they seem to argue that "irony" is such a vague concept that anything goes, my argument is that many of the anecdotes in the song are clearly ironic under the strict definition, and that all the rest (which are too short to really judge) could easily be so depending on the context.

Or, you know, this:

[Snarky]

Yeah well, he's wrong.

If you live around the North Sea, rain on your wedding day is something you have got to count on. But if you live in LA (as Alanis Morissette did when she wrote the song) and get married in, say, July, rain would be an utterly freak occurrence. So if you had put a lot of effort into planning a gorgeous wedding, only to see it ruined by something beyond your control and reasonable precaution, sure, that's ironic ("characterized by often poignant difference or incongruity between what is expected and what actually is"). Absolutely.

[Dadalus]

If you live around the North Sea, rain on your wedding day is something you have got to count on. But if you live in LA (as Alanis Morissette did when she wrote the song) and get married in, say, July, rain would be an utterly freak occurrence. So if you had put a lot of effort into planning a gorgeous wedding, only to see it ruined by something beyond your control and reasonable precaution, sure, that's ironic ("characterized by often poignant difference or incongruity between what is expected and what actually is"). Absolutely.

That may be Situational Irony as defined by some dictionaries. To me its not irony, its just bad luck. It would be ironic if she were getting married to a weatherman who had predicted a sunny day. Thank you Ed Byrne (see earlier post of mine).

I think its a word thats hard to pin down, and my understanding of it may be completely wrong (would that be ironic?)

[Andail]

My position:

I'll agree that irony can be more than its strictest sense, namely to make a point by saying the opposite, just for the sake of contrast. I can accept that irony can also be the way things just happen, on a few conditions: if there's a narrative context that can be interpreted as if it were almost designed.

For something to be called ironic, there should be some kind of thought, intention or deliberate action before it. I don't think rain can be ironic just because it's not expected. In my opinion, there has to be more of a setup, the result of a decision.

1. The couple has travelled all the way from a really humid place to a some place completely arid just to avoid rain at all cost. On this particular day, however, there's sunshine for the first day in ages in their hometown, while the current destination experiences rain for the first time in recorded history.

2. The husband is a meteorologist who has always had a knack for saying exactly when there's a rainstorm coming, but on his wedding day he's of course not "on duty" so he neglects all the signs and the rest is history.

Now those would be fine cases of irony

When it comes to 'literally' I'm a bit torn. Just because it's commonly used as an intensifier ("I literally died out there!"), which of course is just natural, idiomatic English, I'm not sure the definition of the word should have 'virtually' or 'figuratively' appended to it. But anyway, there's no way to stop people from using 'literally' in its opposite meaning now, so that struggle is probably futile.

[selmiak]

http://youtu.be/nb0YoRMXIY0?t=9m6s
also relevant (but not that ironic)

[Calin Leafshade]

There are multiple kinds of irony.

A lot of the song does certainly come under what one might call "cosmic irony" even if it's not quite rhetorical or literary irony.

[Baron]

Or metally irony....

[Stupot]

Richard Dawkins has weighed in on the debate: https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/501967692921049089

[Atelier]

I'm struggling to understand why people would even care about somebody on the internet being wrong. As long as you personally speak and write English correctly, what's the big deal?

[Adeel]

I'm struggling to understand why people would even care about somebody on the internet being wrong. As long as you personally speak and write English correctly, what's the big deal?

The truth has been spoken!

[Babar]

I'm struggling to understand why people would even care about somebody on the internet being wrong. As long as you personally speak and write English correctly, what's the big deal?

Because language is not a solo activity. It is a form of communication. And if your communication is broken, it should be fixed.

EDIT:
I have been informed that my phrasing could be interpreted as being a bit harsh. Let me assure everyone that my statement was not directed at any one person, and I meant no offense. Perhaps a less acerbic way of putting it would be:
The main (possibly only?) function of language is to transfer an idea from the head of one person to the head of another person while changing as little as possible. If the usage fails at this, then it is fundamentally useless and broken, and should be fixed.

Is it ironic that my statement of the necessity of standards in language and communication to avoid misunderstandings was misinterpreted?

[Khris]

Is this the proper place to mention how much I hate it when somebody says "I wrote a blog" instead of "(blog) article/entry"? It's so bad it makes we want to slap them.

[selmiak]

you should write a whole blog about this phenomena

[Atelier]

I have been informed that my phrasing could be interpreted as being a bit harsh.

Really? It wasn't even remotely harsh or acerbic, I don't care what you fuckers think of me anyway (<- real harshness)

Seriously though, somebody simply misunderstanding the true meaning of ironic doesn't make the sentence as a whole 'useless'. We don't understand language in a mechnical manner whereby a minor error nullifies the majority; you can still understand what foreigners speaking in broken English are trying to convey, for example. If somebody appends 'isn't that ironic?!' to an anecdote and it isn't, well, you'll just think to yourself "no it isn't", and that's that. Nobody's going to die from that mistake. It doesn't need to be fixed so every single word in the sentence is perfect, and therefore you can finally understand them.

Edit: I am just talking about the 'ironic' thing here, obviously some minor errors can be catastrophic eg "cut the blue wire" when you meant to say "cut the red wire". But 'isn't that ironic' falls into a category of things where an error with it's usage is so trivial in day-to-day life it's just pointless to challenge people on. "I wrote a blog" is also another perfect example - yes it's wrong and they should be slapped, but you still understand what they mean so...

[Khris]

Sure, I know what they mean, but I would want to be corrected if I kept misusing a word. I think it is completely OK to point out those mistakes in a polite way, and if you care about how you express yourself, you'll benefit if other people point out yours.

Plus, some misused words make you sound like an idiot, and while this might not be a big deal in IRC chats or the like, it could make a lot of difference in job interviews or on dates.

[Andail]

Furthermore, I've noticed how people, at least Brits, tend to use 'literally' when there isn't a call for neither a figurative nor a literal intensifier, like when Jamie Oliver says something like "You then literally grab the union and literally squeeze it down your food processor, etc etc".

I guess when a word has deteriorated into some kind of sound filler, there's no turning back...

[Radiant]

Furthermore, I've noticed how people, at least Brits, tend to use 'literally' when there isn't a call for neither a figurative nor a literal intensifier, like when Jamie Oliver says something like "You then literally grab the union and literally squeeze it down your food processor, etc etc".

That's the same kind of hyperbole as stating "I've been waiting for a hundred years"

[Calin Leafshade]

In that sense it's used as a replacement for "simply" really. He's saying "Then you can just do X, that's all you have to do, there's nothign else."

[Dadalus]

A form of emphasis, rather than the pet peeve of mine when someone says something along the lines of 'I literally fell to pieces'.

I'm being pedantic. 'The pedants are revolting' .. 'Let them eat books on grammar' (exits stage left)

[Snarky]

Is it any worse than, e.g., "this really is the last straw!" when in reality there are no straws involved?