A rogue word

From time to time, I get feedback from folks who have taken offense to one of my posts, or the language used in a post.

Take for example, the word "rogue." I used this word in a post about the dump situation. Specifically, I wrote, "rogue selectmen".

Some have suggested that I was being insulting, but that certainly wasn't my intention. Look in the dictionary, and you find that rogue has many meanings, and can be used as a noun, verb or adjective. For me, it goes without saying that I was using it as an adjective, the American Heritage Dictionary definition being, "Operating outside normal or desirable controls."

As I used it, 'selectman' is clearly the object (noun), with 'rogue' describing/modifying it (adjective). Moreover, right after using that term, I qualified it further (in parenthesis) with the statement, "rogue because they would be acting outside the authority of the quorum."

Unfortunately, others interpreted it as a noun with the definition, "An unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person; a scoundrel or rascal." While I can see why they might be upset, to believe that I was using rogue as a noun - indeed, as an insult - is to ignore both the structure of the English language AND my qualifying statement.

Language is a powerful thing. The words we use give meaning to our thoughts, but the term "lost in translation" must always be kept in mind. When we write, our words are interpreted by the reader. If they are misinterpreted, misunderstandings result.

Therein is a question, and perhaps even a debate to be hand. While there's no doubt that the writer bears a responsibility for what they write, does the reader not bear some responsibility for understanding what is written?