Bimonthly

[Kelly]

One of the two.

[Starfarer]

I usually assume every two months.

[ben8884]

every two months is bimonthly, twice a month is biweekly

[daveb]

Terms like that are confusing and ambiguous (many dictionary definitions say it can mean either twice a month or every 2 months), and it would be better if we used less ambiguous words for the scenarios.

 

It would be good if we had less ambiguous terms (that weren't clunky or need more words to get the idea across). Something like "fortnightly", for once in 14 days or every 2 weeks.

 

3 minutes ago, ben8884 said:

twice a month is biweekly

Not quite, because weeks don't divide into months evenly. Think about getting paid 1000 monetary units per period (to keep it simple). Biweekly would add up to 26,000 per year, while twice a month would only add up to 24,000 per year.

[Snao Cone]

28 minutes ago, ben8884 said:

every two months is bimonthly, twice a month is biweekly

Twice a month is semi-monthly, an inexact period of time that is usually designated on specific days of the month (which themselves may vary—for example, the 15th of the month and the last day of the month, which could be the 28th, 29th, 30th, or 31st).

[LeChat]

(has definition in mind...checks dictionary)

 

Oh, confound thee, dictionary! 

[J. van Deijck]

2 hours ago, Starfarer said:

I usually assume every two months.

Me too. For me, every two weeks is biweekly.

[Atreides]

Bimonthly is once every two months to me, because that’s the way I’ve seen people using its Spanish translation, bimensual. If you mean to say twice a month or every two weeks, in Spanish you usually say quinicenal, which actually translates as once every fifteen days.

 

And apparently the Oxford Dictionary accepts both definitions of bimonthly as correct, in case anyone wonders.

[Snao Cone]

4 hours ago, LeChat said:

(has definition in mind...checks dictionary)

 

Oh, confound thee, dictionary! 

See, defdebs aren't unique to the asexual community.

[Duke Not-24 Memphis]

Hmm, quite. I agree. That is truly the definition of "bimonthly".

[Philip027]

It means nothing.

 

Much like words like "literally", which has been misused to such a degree that it has come to mean two completely opposite things, and is thus literally useless as a descriptor for literally anything.

 

Hmm, I wonder what other common terminology there is around here that fits that same sort of bill... I swear I can literally put my finger on it...

[daveb]

3 hours ago, Snao Cone said:

See, defdebs aren't unique to the asexual community.

Definitely not unique to us.  

 

As I have read about such debates in any field in science, or pretty much any other human endeavor. It can be amusing and enlightening.  

Some make our little defdebs look very tame.  

[Snao Cone]

Just now, daveb said:

Definitely not unique to us.  

 

As I have read about such debates in any field in science, or pretty much any other human endeavor. It can be amusing and enlightening.  

Some make our little defdebs look very tame.  

They happen in all subsets of the LGBTQIA+ community, really. It amused me a lot when some defdebbers used to say that asexuality is the only orientation with disagreement on the definition. They happen for all orientations on at least a bimonthly basis!

[Tyke]

It's a sufficiently confusing word to be useless. So my advice is, don't use it.

 

And if someone else uses it, ask for clarification.

 

I read recently of words that can mean one thing and their exact opposite. "Dust" was a given example. To dust is to remove dust by cleaning with a duster. And one dusts for fingerprints by adding dust.

[Duke Not-24 Memphis]

3 hours ago, Tyke said:

It's a sufficiently confusing word to be useless. So my advice is, don't use it.

 

And if someone else uses it, ask for clarification.

 

I read recently of words that can mean one thing and their exact opposite. "Dust" was a given example. To dust is to remove dust by cleaning with a duster. And one dusts for fingerprints by adding dust.

And, some time ago, I used "clear" as an example. It can describe something as evident and conspicuous, or it can describe something you can see right through.

[Snao Cone]

4 hours ago, Tyke said:

It's a sufficiently confusing word to be useless. So my advice is, don't use it.

 

And if someone else uses it, ask for clarification.

 

I read recently of words that can mean one thing and their exact opposite. "Dust" was a given example. To dust is to remove dust by cleaning with a duster. And one dusts for fingerprints by adding dust.

Yer face is dust.

[daveb]

4 hours ago, Snao Cone said:

Yer face is dust.

In Kansas, yer face is dust in the wind.

[Ultima]

both

[Tyke]

10 hours ago, Snao Cone said:

Yer face is dust.

we are all dust in the end

[Snao Cone]

2 hours ago, Tyke said:

we are all dust in the end

Some people sooner than others!

[Tyke]

4 hours ago, Snao Cone said:

Some people sooner than others!

😮

[Jordan...]

To me, it is twice per month.

 

To go with the "biweekly is every two weeks" thing as an example, we have the word "fortnightly" which is a 2 week period. Biweekly is twice per week (e.g. Monday and Thursday).

 

Unfortunately, the powers which be have decided that there is no common word for "every other month". Apparently the equivalent to "fortnightly" for months is "bimestrially", but I doubt anyone has ever used that word.

 

Realistically, we should bring back a fair few of the Old English (although bimestrial is less than 200 years old) words which disappeared over time, especially when it comes to time. Overmorrow, Ereyesterday, and others would simplify speech greatly, and maybe even stop the silly bi-weekly/monthly/annual/etc. confusion.

 

 

I remember someone talking about needing to do something bidaily, and I was shook. TWICE A DAY!? No. They meant every other day. 

 

Maybe this is one of those less obvious differences between British and American English? I dunno. But there has to be a simple solution that the anglosphere can agree upon...

[Soul Searcher]

Off topic but, did I just seriously have a big spell of deja vu?

 

I don't know why but I get a strong feeling like I have seen this exact same poll before with the exact same comments from community members before as well. 

 

But it can't be possible as the date says that the poll was made last Sunday which is 2 days ago. 

 

Someone tell me what is going on😱

[Snao Cone]

2 hours ago, Soul Searcher said:

Off topic but, did I just seriously have a big spell of deja vu?

 

I don't know why but I get a strong feeling like I have seen this exact same poll before with the exact same comments from community members before as well. 

 

But it can't be possible as the date says that the poll was made last Sunday which is 2 days ago. 

 

Someone tell me what is going on😱

Polls get closed down after a year and moved to the archive, with a message that the poster has an option of creating a new thread with the same poll. Since members can't change their vote once it's submitted, this is a way of monitoring changes in the community (on very important issues like the definition of bimonthly).

[timewarp]

A bimonthly person is someone who is attracted to two months.

[Snao Cone]

2 hours ago, timewarp said:

A bimonthly person is someone who is attracted to two months.

Or more.

[daveb]

Polymonthly

Panmonthly

Demimonthly

 

(actually, semi-monthly means twice a month, and would be a good alternative that could leave bimonthly for every 2 months, if people would adhere to it )

[Kelly]

[Kelly]

I use "bimonthly" to mean every two months. But it is interesting to see that it is also used to mean twice a month.

[LeChat]

Personally, I agree that it seems problematic that English word has two different meanings, very different dates/time periods, as it can cause confusion for others, making their meaning unclear.

 

On 1/12/2025 at 6:19 PM, Snao Cone said:

On 1/12/2025 at 1:42 PM, LeChat said:

(has definition in mind...checks dictionary)

 

Oh, confound thee, dictionary! 

See, defdebs aren't unique to the asexual community.

Yes. 

 

I meant it as a sort of heightened, playful, mock frustrated version of a person thinking about the English definition in the dictionary, as though since it included archaic, old English in it, like during Shakespeare's time, that that might be the kind of language the dictionary would understand, since it seems to "speak" (i.e. have) those words.