For example, The word "dog" by definition is “a domesticated carnivorous mammal that typically has a long snout, an acute sense of smell, nonretractable claws, and a barking, howling, or whining voice” - when used as a noun - and “to follow (someone or their movements) closely and persistently” - when used as a verb.
However, depending on the context, the word "dog" can mean friend, ex-boyfriend, DMX, one really good at sports, and a member of Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc.
I believe people get definitions from reading the dictionary and they get meanings from living life. And since most people spend more time living life rather than reading the dictionary, meanings mean more than definitions. So much that many words have become useless.
Christian philosopher and author of The Narnia Chronicles, C.S. Lewis speaks about words becoming useless in the introduction to his work Mere Christianity. In the following excerpt, Lewis, in defending his meaning of the word “Christian,” speaks on how words become useless using the word “gentleman.”
Far deeper objections may be felt—and have been expressed—against my use of the word Christian to mean one who accepts the common doctrines of Christianity. People ask: ‘Who are you, to lay down who is, and who is not a Christian?’ or ‘May not many a man who cannot believe these doctrines be far more truly a Christian, far closer to the spirit of Christ, than some who do?’ Now this objection is in one sense very right, very charitable, very spiritual, very sensitive. It has every available quality except that of being useful. We simply cannot, without disaster, use language as these objectors want us to use it. I will try to make this clear by the history of another, and very much less important, word.The word gentleman originally meant something recognizable; one who had a coat of arms and some landed property. When you called someone ‘a gentleman’ you were not paying him a compliment, but merely stating a fact. If you said he was not ‘a gentleman’ you were not insulting him but giving information. There was no contradiction in saying that John was a liar and a gentleman; any more than there now is in saying that James is a fool and an M.A.But then there came people who said—so rightly, charitably, spiritually, sensitively, so anything but usefully— ‘Ah, but surely the important thing about a gentleman is not the coat of arms and the land, but the behavior? Surely, he is the true gentleman who behaves as a gentleman should? Surely in that sense Edward is far more truly a gentleman than John?’They meant well. To be honorable and courteous and brave is of course a far better thing than to have a coat of arms. But it is not the same thing. Worse still, it is not a thing everyone will agree about. To call a man ‘a gentleman’ in this new, refined sense, becomes, in fact, not a way of giving information about him, but a way of praising him: to deny that he is ‘a gentleman’ becomes simply a way of insulting him.When a word ceases to be a term of description and becomes merely a term of praise, it no longer tells you facts about the object: it only tells you about the speaker’s attitude to that object. (A ‘nice’ meal only means a meal the speaker likes.) A gentleman, once it has been spiritualized and refined out of its old coarse, objective sense, means hardly more than a man whom the speaker likes. As a result, gentle man is now a useless word. We had lots of terms of approval already, so it was not needed for that use; on the other hand, if anyone (say, in a historical work) wants to use it in its old sense, he cannot do so without explanations. It has been spoiled for that purpose.Now if once, we allow people to start spiritualizing and refining, or as they might say ‘deepening’, the sense of the word Christian, it too will speedily become a useless word.
I stand with Lewis against the spiritualization and refining of words. Words must still be able to provide facts about an object. We must be able to say terrible things are terrible. We must be able to recognize the spherical nature of our existence and recognize that two things like educated and foolish can coexist.