Definitions

Nowadays definitions have to be comprehensive and comprehensible, calibrated ( gender neutral, non racist, apolitical, secular - I have forgotten the meaning of this though) diplomatically and politically correct, universally useable, relevant to the context bla bla that way definitions become too elaborate but ensure to avoid controversies, ambiguities, scope for excessive scrutiny etc.

Definition are a must but they must not have hidden agenda based irrelevant extrapolations, they preferably must avoid the intrinsic attribute of the thing or concept being defined.

Further they must not carry a load of undercurrent, overtones, ulterior motives.

I tweeted this sometime back

https://twitter.com/ideasspinner/status/1224222741060050944?s=19

Senseless verbification and verbal justifications do not alter the nature of thing/ attribute/ concept being verbalized.

When certain concepts or attributes evolve ( like everything else) the words too make the necessary adjustments and create a whole carapace of connotation to convey the evolved state.

At the same time if we delve too deep into the etymology of words used and decide to stick on to only the denotation we may be surprised to know these facts.

David Crystal writes in his books WORD, WORDS, WORDS and THE STORIES OF ENGLISH wherein he shares certain interesting of information like these:- “ words science, conscience and shit all had originally common etymology”, 

" Even within a language the process of evolution causes enormous and drastic changes as has been very well documented by a great linguist David Crystal in his books WORD,WORDS, WORDS and THE STORIES OF ENGLISH.Here I would like to reproduce some bits of information like  these words science, conscience and shit all had originally common etymology.I thought for a longtime that the Britishers were obsessed with sex that’s why they have named their places like Essex, Sussex , Wessex, Middlesex etc but I learnt that they  refer to only Saxons occupying different directions with varying dialects.David crystal writes,  “It remains a lexicological puzzle why some words were accepted and some rejected. Wedo not know how to account for the linguistic ‘survival of the fittest’. Both impede and expede were introduced during the same period as well as disabuse and disadorn, but in each of these pairs the first item stayed in the language and the second did not”.

He also writes, “If English is to remain a world language, then it needs a variety as a reference standard, but as the result of process which have taken place-and which are an inevitable consequence of the nature of language-the character of building has changed. Whereas Standard English was once viewed as a cathedral or a monument, now it has to be seen more as a sky crapper, with a specific function of facilitating intelligibility, coexisting in a city of other tall buildings which perform other functions, such as the facilitation of local identity. It is no longer the only building in the city, and certainly no longer the only building  thought to be worth a visit”.

Telesis of terminology will expose the intention behind specific words being used.