> Suppose we were going to rate words on a scale of one to ten in two dimensions. First, we are going to rate how old fashioned a word is. Second, we will rate how funny the word seems to us.
> For example, if we wanted to rate "poppycock" we might say that it's a 9 for "old fashioned" and an 8 for "Funny". Poppycock would be 9, 8. Another word, like snail, isn't especially old fashioned or funny. Though, the word has been around a while - we could call it a 5, 2.
This is a sense of "old-fashioned" that I've never heard of. As far as I'm aware, "old-fashioned" is entirely defined by not being in current use. The age of the word is irrelevant, but if it were relevant, and "poppycock" - a word from the 19th century - were a 9 out of 10, "snail" - a word from Old English - would be something more like a 1500 out of 10.
> For example, if we wanted to rate "poppycock" we might say that it's a 9 for "old fashioned" and an 8 for "Funny". Poppycock would be 9, 8. Another word, like snail, isn't especially old fashioned or funny. Though, the word has been around a while - we could call it a 5, 2.
This is a sense of "old-fashioned" that I've never heard of. As far as I'm aware, "old-fashioned" is entirely defined by not being in current use. The age of the word is irrelevant, but if it were relevant, and "poppycock" - a word from the 19th century - were a 9 out of 10, "snail" - a word from Old English - would be something more like a 1500 out of 10.