With respect, you figured out what he meant, and then you figured out that he's not a native English speaker.

He probably doesn't need to have that fact pointed out to him.

I'm sure there's a better way you could have given the hint to the correct word for the benefit of others who didn't figure out what he meant, and done so without being condescending to the post you were replying to. Yes?

OP here, no issue, thanks for pointing it out; I even appreciate it, I'm a bit of a grammar nazi myself - but yeah people vary. I think it's ok to post that kind of comments on HN, outside of HN probably less.

The word is somewhat obsolete, but it's definitely a word and you used it correctly. Also, it obviously shares a root with "medication"; someone who doesn't know the word should be able to figure out what it means. I hate to see people discouraged from using interesting, rare words.

Honestly, one thing I like about HN is that these sorts of corrections are made, and made respectfully.

Their post was interesting because they're right: I'm a native English speaker and I paused on "medicament".

And yet it's a real word, just an uncommon one, so it's not really a correction, but a recommendation to speak differently presented as a correction. That can be fairly easy to take negatively.

Personally, if I felt compelled to point out that it was uncommon, I would have said "At first I though medicament was a misspelling or autocorrect mistake, but when I looked it up, I found out it's a real word in English, if extremely uncommon. Interesting." That's less assertive in that a mistake was made (because it might have been used for effect), and also true.

Your version comes across to me as more negative than how it was originally phrased. You trade a respectful and respectable assertiveness and directness for a passive-aggressive wishy-washiness which protects you from being wrong while simultaneously implying the other party is so tender your words can hurt them.

Yikes, this is the kind of "feedback" that ends in divorce. I would never understand your version was intended as a correction. To me, this comes across as "thanks for teaching me a new word", and I would think "you're welcome".

Because it's not a correction. An important part of what I was trying to say in my actual comment is that one should consider that there might be nothing to correct. In my version, I've conveyed my initial reaction as a point of reference in case that's something they wish to avoid in the future, and then that I discovered I was wrong.

I suspect readings of it in a negative light are because of the context of the current conversation. Otherwise, I'm not sure how something that is essentially "at first I was confused and thought you were wrong, but then I found out I was the one that was wrong" is supposed to be taken negatively.