*rubs eyes* Okay, people. I really don't know how to break this to folks, but language doesn't evolve in a vacuum. There are NO words in the English language which do not have historical context, because that's how language works.

Now if you're writing historical fiction, it may be important to remember when words came into usage, because you're tying language to Earth based time periods. But second world fantasy? Well that depends. Do they speak English in your second world fantasy?

Because if they don't, then ENGLISH is anachronistic. Yup, that's right. The entire language. It's ALL tied to historical Earth events. And obviously no one expects anyone to write or read entire works written in a conlang. Mostly. (looking at you, Klingon)

Obviously different people are going to have different approaches to how to deal with this. Do you eliminate all words that have obvious historical/social/cultural origins? Do you eliminate words that are 'too modern' (esp. when that's an apples to oranges comparison)?

Because the unfortunate truth is there are a lot of useful English words which are perceived as modern (even if that's not the case). I once got called out for using a word that was deemed 'too modern' when it originated in, um, the 16th century. (Hug. The word was hug.)

This is a complicated issue. Most folks don't blink at using words like masochist or draconian, but these are words with VERY specific historical roots (and both derived from specific historical figures).

So for me, I don't worry about it. Because I'm operating from the assumption that none of the books in a Chorus of Dragons were originally written in English. They were *translated* into English. So what do I strive for? Clarity.

It's wonderfully liberating. I don't really care if teenager wasn't a word in English usage until the modern day - because it's the word that is the most accurate translation, it's the word I'm going to use. & I do that unless I feel another word, or an invented word, fits better

Does this mean I'm going to use words that some readers find too jarring? Yes, absolutely. This thread was in fact sparked by exactly one such complaint. But here's the thing: what people find jarring is hugely subjective.

And often wrong! What people think they know about modern language is often shockingly wrong. In all the time I've been writing, I've heard the same complaint only a handful of times. People keep pointing out different words as too modern, based on their own sensibilities.

So, as always, I write for what I'm comfortable reading myself. It's all you can do in the end. I try to avoid stuff that's tooo clearly grounded in history, but sometimes the best word to describe a sadist is sadist (for example).

Well goodness. I admit I didn't expect a mini-rant I wrote at 1:30 in the morning to take off like this. I suppose I should probably link my books? The Ruin of Kings & the Name of All Things are out now. Find them here: https://us.macmillan.com/series/achorusofdragons