Posts from [QUESTION] Auto-translated

Perhaps it would be wiser for me to end this small dispute with Imaris, because they always end the same way, but let's clarify things where necessary.
Does the meaning change if you call one item by the name of another item? For example, if you call a dress a bra, will the meaning change?
More details can be found in this thread, starting from page 85.

Revan, a deer.
Yes, it changes. No, in that specific case, in a single instance, it doesn't change. If we reason further and delve deeper into other topics, then

Yes, it changes.

Imarisik, it is very important how you name things. I didn't bring up this conversation for no reason.

No, in that specific case, in a single instance, it doesn't change.

It is no different from any other case. Will you try to prove otherwise?

That’s it, the argument is over.

Rhein, in the case of your elf, the term "armor bra" might be appropriate, as it refers not so much to a piece of clothing (specifically, a bra), but rather to impractical female armor made purely for fan service.

At that time, the name implied a "breastplate-themed" design.

as it refers not so much to a piece of clothing (specifically, a bra), but rather to impractical female armor made purely for fan service.

And where is the evidence to support this claim?

It differs from the ones you mentioned. In this case, I was only talking about the eroticism and impracticality of the clothing, and it doesn't matter at all whether it's a breastplate or the clothing on that elf, the clothing will still remain erotic and impractical for the elf's work. That's why I simply wrote the first name that came to mind – breastplate, because I don't know what her clothing is called, and I wrote it precisely because the essence in this case will not change. It would change if, well, I don't know, we were talking about the weight of the clothing, or, I don't know, about the sunlight reflecting off it or the clinking sound, then a breastplate is a breastplate because it's armor, and her clothing is her clothing because it has completely different properties.

Added after 56 seconds

And what is the evidence for this statement?

I don't understand why this needs to be proven, but I still wrote it out. Besides, Plesen definitely described everything, what I write in a few sentences

In this case, I was only talking about the eroticism and impracticality of the clothing, and it doesn't matter at all whether it's a chainmail bra or the outfit on that elf, the clothing will still be erotic and impractical for the elf's work.

A group of people went on a hike. Forests, swamps, mountains, and so on. And one of the girls is wearing an erotic, impractical dress for these conditions. Would it be reasonable to call her outfit, for example, a corset or a bustier, just because it is also erotic and impractical?

Is it really not allowed?

I just wrote the first name that came to mind – a breastplate.

That’s the kind of stuff you find here.

I just wrote the first name that came to mind – a breastplate.

That's just how things are here.In that case, these are solely your problems, and I don't understand why you were trying to prove or explain something.

I never imagined that this would lead to such a long and pointless conversation; I thought you would immediately understand what I was talking about.

See, and I didn't understand, which just proves that things should be called by their proper names.

Rainy, your example with the swamp is incorrect. "Bronezhilet" (armor vest) is essentially a slang term. Wouldn't you be upset if the word "bandura" was used to refer to something other than a musical instrument?

Do you not get upset when the word "bandura" is used in a context other than referring to a musical instrument?

I don't remember ever hearing that word used in my presence.