Originally posted by Matt Black:
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Conflating 'niggardly' with the N-word is indicative more of ignorance than anything else.
quote:My answer would be that * would no more think of the word "nigger" when using the word "niggardly" than * would think of the word "whore" when using the word "hornpipe", and whilst neither "niggardly" nor "hornpipe" are words that * use terribly often, * have used both in the last year. * also have absolutely no compunction about referring to the tool that * use to weed the garden as a "hoe", despite the alternative use of that word popularized by rap culture.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
* agree, but who in the last, * don't know [* ]** years,[/* ] would use niggardly without thinking about the word nigger? At [* ]best[/* ] it demonstrates a profound lack of social awareness.
The very reason that the words are conflated is the same which should temper its use.
quote:There's more than enough ignorance to go around, not to mention competing derivations.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Conflating 'niggardly' with the N-word is indicative more of ignorance than anything else.
quote:Poor example, IMO.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
My answer would be that I would no more think of the word "nigger" when using the word "niggardly" than I would think of the word "whore" when using the word "hornpipe",
quote:Agreed. But I still posit that using niggardly without understanding that it might be misinterpreted is also ignorant. Especially from a person working in Washington D.C, the location of the man fired for its usage.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Conflating 'niggardly' with the N-word is indicative more of ignorance than anything else.
quote:Perhaps you could invite your interlocutor to join us here and explain how one goes about being Jewish without being a Jew. AFAIK, these terms (unlike "nigger" and "niggardly") do not have different derivations.
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
My interlocutor at this conference virtually spat with fury as she told me that I was quite wrong to do so, for Ms Tulchinsky was Jewish, not a Jew.
quote:The point of her fury was to demonstrate the strength of her righteousness on behalf of others and, by comparison, my defects.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I don't understand the point if getting furious about it, but I have had a couple Jewish folk gently instruct me on the fraughtness of referring to someone as a "jew" . ( my takeaway was that it was kind of like referring to someone as " a white" or " a black" -- that sounds terse and disrespectful without the addition of the word " person, right? ) I strongly suspect it is "the goyim" trying to be extra cautious that make the biggest stink about offensiveness.
In any case, the shift is very easy to make, so I made it.
quote:Now, that has me intrigued. I cannot think of any meaning of 'dog-whistle' other that that of the description of a device for generating a high pitched sound, used to attract the attention of a canine animal.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Context trumps derivation. Words are repurposed all the time, e.g. dog-whistle.
quote:What about it?
Originally posted by no prophet:
What about "nigga" as used by black kids?
quote:I find that the "best practice" is to just call people what they want to be called without asking for an explanation.
Originally posted by Porridge:
quote:Perhaps you could invite your interlocutor to join us here and explain how one goes about being Jewish without being a Jew. AFAIK, these terms (unlike "nigger" and "niggardly") do not have different derivations.
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
My interlocutor at this conference virtually spat with fury as she told me that I was quite wrong to do so, for Ms Tulchinsky was Jewish, not a Jew.
quote:In my experience, in the UK at least, those Jews whose families immigrated into the UK pre-twentieth century are more likely to regard themselves as Britons who practice Judaism, rather than Jews who happen to live in Britain. OTOH, those who entered the UK during the twentieth century are more likely to have had family members actively involved in Zionism, or to have had relatives murdered during WWII, thus being more likely to be conscious of themselves as Jewish.
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
Insofar as Jew/Jewish is concerned, locally I wonder if there be an age-cohort distinction, where older people prefer Jewish. The only one of my friends whom I heard object to the term Jew explained to me afterward that her family was Sephardic, and they did not care to be lumped in with the other sort.
quote:Is penny-pinching so foreign a concept in Washington DC that words for it are unknown ?
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Especially from a person working in Washington D.C, the location of the man fired for its usage.
quote:It's called reclaiming. The method is to adopt a term generally understood as an insult and use it in a benign, or even comradely way among your peers for the specific purpose of negating its impact when you encounter it in a malevolent way. This is where "snaps" or "doing the dozens" came from, as well.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:What about it?
Originally posted by no prophet:
What about "nigga" as used by black kids?
quote:I've wondered the same. The scolds I got were from older folk. Perhaps residue from the times when the label "Jew" was used by "goyim" to practice exclusion and discrimination in the best of circumstances and to provide the sole justification for arrest in the worst.
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
The point of her fury was to demonstrate the strength of her righteousness on behalf of others and, by comparison, my defects.
Insofar as Jew/Jewish is concerned, locally I wonder if there be an age-cohort distinction, where older people prefer Jewish. The only one of my friends whom I heard object to the term Jew explained to me afterward that her family was Sephardic, and they did not care to be lumped in with the other sort.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:Washington is full of politicians, I am quite sure they know how to pinch.
Originally posted by Russ:
quote:Is penny-pinching so foreign a concept in Washington DC that words for it are unknown ?
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Especially from a person working in Washington D.C, the location of the man fired for its usage.
quote:Note also the reclaiming of the word "Queer" to add to the alphabet soup of not-exclusively-heterosexual people. But again, as an adjective. Calling someone queer is fine, if that is how they describe themselves, but "a queer" would be a no-no.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
It's called reclaiming.
quote:(personal opinion) The nature if the joke itself would probably make the nomenclature a side issue. Meaning, if your audience us fine with those kinds of jokes, they probably won't care.
Originally posted by mousethief:
Is it determined by context, a little? If I started a joke, "A Jew, a Christian, and Muslim walk into a Starbucks," aside from the fact that many jokes that start this way play on ugly stereotypes, is my use of the words problematic? I ask for information.
quote:Depends on the joke, but you're treading on thin ice. That can make the joke, as the Robin Williams joke;
Originally posted by mousethief:
Is it determined by context, a little? If I started a joke, "A Jew, a Christian, and Muslim walk into a Starbucks," aside from the fact that many jokes that start this way play on ugly stereotypes, is my use of the words problematic? I ask for information.
quote:Well, I love you all the same, Kelly!
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Yup. Another one I've gotten in trouble for, in an attempt to be right-on.
quote:Not anymore—and that's even more the issue. Race is an insanely tense issue here in Chocolate City, and dog whistles are blown every five minutes. While it's been over 40 years since the '68 race riots burned much of the heart of the city to the ground—areas that are just now recovering—tensions are still simmering just beneath the surface, especially in gentrifying areas.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
But Washington is also ~50% Black. So an assistant to the Mayor of that city should be very conscious of word misunderstandings.
quote:I had no idea that was a trend. Where did you hear that?
Originally posted by ken:
No wonder so many supposedly liberal white Americans seem to hate Nigerians. The very name of their nation disturbs their hard-learned word-avoidance strategies. And, unlike "niggardly" it really is the same word as "nigger".
quote:.
NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, who in criticizing Williams last week said that people should not have to "censor" their language to meet other "people's lack of understanding," praised Howard's reinstatement.
"I'm happy to learn that this episode has come to some happy conclusion and that the citizens and the government of the District of Columbia can get back to talking about real issues," he said.
quote:Wait! What? Someone was fired for saying it?
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:Agreed. But I still posit that using niggardly without understanding that it might be misinterpreted is also ignorant. Especially from a person working in Washington D.C, the location of the man fired for its usage.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Conflating 'niggardly' with the N-word is indicative more of ignorance than anything else.
![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
quote:If someone uses a word which another person misinterprets as an insult, he should not be treated as if he had deliberately spoken an insult. The person who feels insulted should explain what the word means to him; then the person who spoke the word should explain what it means to him. The person who feels insulted should accept the other's explanation in good faith; the one who spoke the offending word should be very careful how he uses it in future.
NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, who in criticizing Williams last week said that people should not have to "censor" their language to meet other "people's lack of understanding," praised Howard's reinstatement.
quote:Generally, I would agree with Justinian's account of current usage but I would note that I have heard it used by Irish and older English speakers of English in what I judge to be an entirely innocent manner. I think that it is not unreasonable to move it into vocabulary limbo, resurrecting only to illustrate a certain aspect of language change.
Originally posted by Justinian:
I've never heard the term niggardly used in the past 20 years except as provocation or trolling. I've seen it in older books. And niggardly has strong synonyms so unlike e.g. the distinct meaning of disinterested* it's not a word I consider worth fighting for.
*snip*
quote:On the other hand if someone deliberately uses language they know is liable to cause insult and misunderstandings then they are responsible for the fall out. If there is no positive reason to use such a word (e.g. with miserly substituting for niggardly) then it needs to be questioned why they would do so.
Originally posted by Moo:
The article linked to in this post by Barnabas has the following paragraph.quote:If someone uses a word which another person misinterprets as an insult, he should not be treated as if he had deliberately spoken an insult.
NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, who in criticizing Williams last week said that people should not have to "censor" their language to meet other "people's lack of understanding," praised Howard's reinstatement.
quote:And this is handling the whole thing perfectly.
I explained the word and he accepted my explanation. I am not sure I have ever used the word since.
quote:I was asking because I didn't know. Kelly's clarification, and subsequent discussion about re-claiming is very helpful.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Um, yeah, I know that Kelly.
I was wondering where no prophet was going with the question.
quote:Per my policy that you call people what they want to be called, I would say that if you want to know what you can and cannot call non-white or non-Christian people, you might find a better focus group than a predominately white, predominately Christian discussion group.
Originally posted by mousethief:
Is it determined by context, a little? If I started a joke, "A Jew, a Christian, and Muslim walk into a Starbucks," aside from the fact that many jokes that start this way play on ugly stereotypes, is my use of the words problematic? I ask for information.
quote:That might be the impasse, right there. Is it a commonly used word in the UK? Because it really, really isn't in the US. I would guess that most Americans had never, ever, ever heard the word used in conversation before the gaffe incident.
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
I must have led a very sheltered existence. Until I read this conversation it had never occurred to me that there might have been any connection between the familiar 'niggardly' and the other word. But my Dear (American) Wife sighs and gives me a pitying look when I tell her this.
quote:IME, no. IMO, it is more a colour thing. If the insult has not been a big part of your life, you are less likely to hear it in other words.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
That might be the impasse, right there. Is it a commonly used word in the UK?
quote:Probably on a vocabulary list or two of mine as well, but how often did you actually hear people say it?
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
It was in my 8th grade "Wordly Wise" vocabulary book.
quote:Actually, I have to correct myself-- I have been called out on too glibly using the word "queer" as an adjective, back before it becsme a common political term. I have never in my life called anyone " a queer. "
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Yup. Another one I've gotten in trouble for, in an attempt to be right-on.
quote:Yes, that's why I find niggardly such an attractive word. Those hash consonant sounds are wonderfully apposite.
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The hard 'g's in niggardly seemed to me to resonate with the hardness of mean attitudes.
quote:And I'd add that, as I posted on the Hell thread, I don't know anyone who's uttered the word "nigger" in the last 20-30 years, and haven't heard it used by anyone in the same period. I'd be willing to bet that my children and their contemporaries only know about it as something that old folks get worked up about on the internet.
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
quote:Generally, I would agree with Justinian's account of current usage but I would note that I have heard it used by Irish and older English speakers of English in what I judge to be an entirely innocent manner. I think that it is not unreasonable to move it into vocabulary limbo, resurrecting only to illustrate a certain aspect of language change.
Originally posted by Justinian:
I've never heard the term niggardly used in the past 20 years except as provocation or trolling. I've seen it in older books. And niggardly has strong synonyms so unlike e.g. the distinct meaning of disinterested* it's not a word I consider worth fighting for.
*snip*
quote:There's an old joke (which you need to know something basic about English regional accents to understand), about the 1950s explorer Sir Vivian Fuchs, who pronounced his name 'Fooks' going to give a lecture at a City Hall in Yorkshire. The Mayor introduces him as 'Sir Vivian Fucks' so Fuchs leans over to put him right;
Originally posted by HCH:
...
I remember that when I was in high school, there was a student named "Fuchs". He was teased about this now and then.
quote:Couldn't put it better.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
I grew up in the south of England, and whilst niggardly wasn't in terribly common use, I heard it often enough that it didn't sound unusual. I don't ever remember hearing someone referred to as "a niggard" though - that seems archaic to me, whereas "niggardly" doesn't.)
quote:Indeed. And in general, however good our English is, we all occasionally run into a word we don't recognise. The first impulse should be to look it up. Only once we know what it means can we apply a context to it.
Originally posted by Moo:
I strongly believe that if someone finds someone else's choice of words objectionable, they should ask what the other person means instead of assuming that an insult was intended.
Moo
quote:All very true. However, the point of language is to communicate. If you use a word that is unfamiliar to a large segment of your audience, and sounds enough like an offensive word that it is likely to arouse some sort of negative reaction, it's prudent to use a different word. That's just good communication.
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:Indeed. And in general, however good our English is, we all occasionally run into a word we don't recognise. The first impulse should be to look it up. Only once we know what it means can we apply a context to it.
Originally posted by Moo:
I strongly believe that if someone finds someone else's choice of words objectionable, they should ask what the other person means instead of assuming that an insult was intended.
Moo
quote:Yes, but the audience should consider the possibility that the speaker had no intention to offend and the words he used did not mean what the audience thought. It is just about impossible to know exactly what words are in other people's vocabulary.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
If you use a word that is unfamiliar to a large segment of your audience, and sounds enough like an offensive word that it is likely to arouse some sort of negative reaction, it's prudent to use a different word. That's just good communication.
quote:I was thinking of the situation that got the man fired. It was a meeting of people running the DC government. This man was in charge of social services, and he said that if there was a budget cut, his department would have to be niggardly in its expenditures. He had no way of knowing that other people in the room were not familiar with that word.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I can buy that in personal conversations, but of one's profession involves getting up and addressing groups of people, isn't it on them to find rhetoric that reaches rather than alienates the crowd?
quote:AFAIK the press wasn't there. Someone else at the meeting misunderstood the word and blew his top.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Ok, fair point, for some reason I was picturing a bigger audience. However, if there were press in the room, the point still stands- sort of, as I guess it is easy (but unwise) to forget press is there.
quote:That last one about "tranny" is weird to me. Every since college when I was told tranny was better than transgendered or transexual because it avoided specifying, I've been saying that and none of my trans friends have objected.
Originally posted by romanlion:
You don't say...
quote:Sounds good in theory, but functionally impossible.
Originally posted by Moo:
As I said in an earlier post, if someone is offended by someone else's words, they should ask what the speaker means before blowing their top.
No one in the world besides me knows what words are in my vocabulary. I acquired my words from my lifetime association with others, from reading, films, etc. Everyone else's vocabulary is equally individual.
This is why you should always ask what the other person means.
Moo
quote:I don't use niggardly every day of the week, but there are days when I use it a dozen or more times. When using it, I have never thought of the N word and I doubt very much if anyone hearing my use of it has either. It's a perfectly proper word to be used on appropriate occasions.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I agree, but who in the last, I don't know 50 years, would use niggardly without thinking about the word nigger? At best it demonstrates a profound lack of social awareness.
The very reason that the words are conflated is the same which should temper its use.
quote:A Newport "Tranny".
Originally posted by Gwai:
quote:That last one about "tranny" is weird to me. Every since college when I was told tranny was better than transgendered or transexual because it avoided specifying, I've been saying that and none of my trans friends have objected.
Originally posted by romanlion:
You don't say...
quote:If you can't ask the other person what they mean, you should refrain from reacting to their words.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:Sounds good in theory, but functionally impossible.
Originally posted by Moo:
No one in the world besides me knows what words are in my vocabulary. I acquired my words from my lifetime association with others, from reading, films, etc. Everyone else's vocabulary is equally individual.
This is why you should always ask what the other person means.
Moo
quote:And that is why we have C5 on the Ship: "Don't easily offend, don't be easily offended". Once again, one of the Ship's Ten Commandments is useful in RL too.
Originally posted by Moo:
<snip>
If you can't ask the other person what they mean, you should refrain from reacting to their words.
Moo
quote:Again, sounds good in theory, but impractical in reality. I imagine the protestors thought they knew what "niggardly" meant-- the basis of the protests wasn't "he used a big word! whaaaa!" it was "he used a racist word". They were wrong, of course, but they didn't know that.
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:If you can't ask the other person what they mean, you should refrain from reacting to their words.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:Sounds good in theory, but functionally impossible.
Originally posted by Moo:
No one in the world besides me knows what words are in my vocabulary. I acquired my words from my lifetime association with others, from reading, films, etc. Everyone else's vocabulary is equally individual.
This is why you should always ask what the other person means.
Moo
Moo
quote:I don't think calling this reclaiming is strictly true. It's worth remembering that both the forbidden "n" word, as well as the equally unacceptable "y" word for Jews were originally their own names for themselves. N is just a corruption of negro, meaning black in Spanish (and Venetian Italian), and a Y was originally a speaker of the Yiddish language. In 1930, 94% of the world's Jews were Ashkenazi Yiddish speakers which made the word almost synonymous with Jew.
Originally posted by No Prophet:
What about "nigga" as used by black kids?
quote:I can accept this idea a lot more readily than, " if a word offends you, assume you are wrong to feel that way. "
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Just accept that people sometimes have communication mishaps and move on.
quote:I hope you do not ride horses. If you tighten your saddle the same way you frame your augment, you are going to fall off fairly quick.
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
It's worth remembering that both the forbidden "n" word, as well as the equally unacceptable "y" word for Jews were originally their own names for themselves. N is just a corruption of negro, meaning black in Spanish
quote:All I meant is that the origin of the word is when Spanish sailors first encountered black people along the African coast. That it was imported into the colonies as a word for slaves is not surprising when the slaves were black Africans. But if you read what I wrote, I'm not excusing its use in contempory language, just stating where it comes from.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
The word was being used by white people to describe others, typically slaves.
quote:I would say, "If a word offends you, find out whether you are wrong to feel that way."
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I can accept this idea a lot more readily than, " if a word offends you, assume you are wrong to feel that way. "
quote:Those getting hot under the collar about the correct use of a proper English word should be directing their ire to the education theorists who said that children did not need to be taught anything but allowed to be creative; and then the authorities who adopted that load of garbage. You need to beable to carry out such calculations as 2 + 2 = 4, and so forth. You need to have a basic vocabulary. You need to be able to think. You need to know that you don't carry on about the proper use of language that you don't understand. And finally, you need to know to apologise properly when you are wrong.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Again, sounds good in theory, but impractical in reality. I imagine the protestors thought they knew what "niggardly" meant-- the basis of the protests wasn't "he used a big word! whaaaa!" it was "he used a racist word". They were wrong, of course, but they didn't know that.
I would agree that once you find out you're wrong, of course, the correct response is to stop calling for blood.
It was an unfortunate misunderstanding. They happen. Suggesting that folk should ask a speaker what they mean by every word they say because people use words differently is unworkable and would reduce conversation to dueling dictionaries. Just accept that people sometimes have communication mishaps and move on.
quote:slowly moving the goalposts: best way to win a debate.
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:I would say, "If a word offends you, find out whether you are wrong to feel that way."
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I can accept this idea a lot more readily than, " if a word offends you, assume you are wrong to feel that way. "
Moo
quote:This is almost exactly what I was thinking! Except substitute the word "map" for "dictionary".
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Such should forced back to school, at the very least to learn how to use a dictionary. A kind of community service for the dense.
quote:Yes. And what were white people called? People.Or by their nationality.
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
All I meant is that the origin of the word is when Spanish sailors first encountered black people along the African coast.
quote:You're right. Ponds, plural.
Originally posted by mousethief:
Does this have to become a pond war for God's sake?
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
quote:How do you react if someone gets angry with you because they have misunderstood what you said and don't think you deserve an explanation/discussion of what the problem is.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:slowly moving the goalposts: best way to win a debate.
Originally posted by Moo:
I would say, "If a word offends you, find out whether you are wrong to feel that way."
Moo
quote:Actually, not quite so. Across North Africa, all Europeans were referred to as 'Francs' and the local population thought the northerners all looked and sounded the same. It is from this we get the term 'Lingua Franca' (lit. language of the Francs), a polyglot language used for trade in the southern Mediterranean. the term 'Franc' was pejorative (i.e. implied inferiority) in an exact mirror image of the terms 'Turk' and 'Moor' used by Europeans at the time.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:Yes. And what were white people called? People.Or by their nationality.
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
All I meant is that the origin of the word is when Spanish sailors first encountered black people along the African coast.
It is natural that a first encounter with people so remarkably different might focus on the factor most immediately identify as different. However, that identifier was never let go, never superseded by any of the criteria used for white people. Therein lies the difference.
quote:I begin to suspect that some people here subscribe to the doctrine that "the anti-racist is always right", alias "if a black person says something is racist then it's racist".
Originally posted by Moo:
I have the impression that you don't believe there is such a thing as an honest misunderstanding.
Moo
quote:Has happened. I asked what was offensive, explained what I meant, and make a mental note to be careful that choice of phrase in the future, especially around that person. Those of us who live in ridiculously diverse cities have had that conversation at least a dozen times in their lives, on both ends of it, I would guess.
Originally posted by Moo:
How do you react if someone gets angry with you because they have misunderstood what you said and don't think you deserve an explanation/discussion of what the problem is.
quote:I think that misses the point. As well as a missing an important fact about the way language actually works, which is that even when used 'correctly' words carry connotations which go beyond their meaning, and some level of awareness of these connotations is an aid to the effective use of those words.
Originally posted by Gee D:
Those getting hot under the collar about the correct use of a proper English word should be directing their ire to the education theorists who said that children did not need to be taught anything but allowed to be creative; and then the authorities who adopted that load of garbage. You need to beable to carry out such calculations as 2 + 2 = 4, and so forth.
quote:The problem with a subjective test, it seems to me, is that the views of anyone, no matter how crazy or irrational, are as equally valid as the next man's. I can't help but think that 'don't-use-'niggardly'-in-case-someone-misconstrues-the-word'-type arguments play into the hands of such people.
Originally posted by HCH:
It can be very difficult to say anything of any length without running the risk that someone, somewhere, will find some way to take offense.
quote:Bang on.
Originally posted by Eliab:
There are, for example, almost certainly occasions when you or I or anyone else here would avoid using words like "cock", "ass", "prick", "bastardise", "hoar", "gay", or even "bottom" in some perfectly correct and innocent sense, if only to avoid provoking puerile sniggers when trying to say something serious. It's not ignorance that makes me avoid the word "gay" to describe someone who is colourfully dressed - it's the common sense realisation that many people hearing that word will inevitably find that it raises other associations which I do not intend to convey. I don't think it is saying too much to note that "niggard" sometimes belongs on the same list. The sound "niggar..." will inevitably have an effect in the minds of my hearers.
It would be a distraction from the effect that I want my words to have, so I'd pick a different word. I wouldn't judge someone who used "niggard" to be a racist - it isn't in itself anything to do with race - but to use it in a context where racial issues are even capable of arising would be damned poor rhetoric, if nothing else. I wouldn't complain about English teachers encouraging creativity, if it raises awareness of the associations of words and their sensitive use. That is basic rhetoric, and is certainly part of an English teacher's job, at least as much as etymology and grammar.
quote:Then you're not reading my posts.
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:How do you react if someone gets angry with you because they have misunderstood what you said and don't think you deserve an explanation/discussion of what the problem is.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:slowly moving the goalposts: best way to win a debate.
Originally posted by Moo:
I would say, "If a word offends you, find out whether you are wrong to feel that way."
Moo
I have the impression that you don't believe there is such a thing as an honest misunderstanding.
Moo
quote:This seems to be predicated on the assumption that words have some inherently "true" meaning. But the reality is that all words are symbolic, they only mean what we all agree they mean. If the vast majority (not suggesting that is the case here) of people believe "niggardly" is a racist term, then it is a racist term, regardless of it's etymology. It has evolved to mean that despite it's prior meanings. That happens all the time. That doesn't mean that person who said it is a racist or deserves to be fired. But it also doesn't mean the people who hear it that way are "crazy" or "irrational" any more than the person who hears the word "chair" and thinks of something to sit on.
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:The problem with a subjective test, it seems to me, is that the views of anyone, no matter how crazy or irrational, are as equally valid as the next man's. I can't help but think that 'don't-use-'niggardly'-in-case-someone-misconstrues-the-word'-type arguments play into the hands of such people.
Originally posted by HCH:
It can be very difficult to say anything of any length without running the risk that someone, somewhere, will find some way to take offense.
quote:I agree. What got my goat in the original case was not just the assumption of prejudice but the way that assumption was used to bad mouth the aide. The root of prejudice is pre-judgement. Which is the problem with all forms of assumptions. They are prejudicial. And certainly were in the original case.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Again, that's no excuse for not accepting a reasonable explanation, especially when it fits the context (and the racial interpretation does not). But it's also not a radical fringe view either. It's simply a miscommunication-- the sort that happen all the time.
quote:I never intended to suggest that every word should be checked out. I meant that every word which gives offense should be checked out.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Your initial post suggested that we should check out every word said by another human being to make sure we are correctly understanding it. While that would go a long way to reducing (tho not eliminating) such misunderstandings, I pointed out that such a task was impossible-- we would be tediously stuck in a loop of definitions and definitions of definitions for all eternity.
quote:Somewhere along the line the person who is offended needs admit they were offended and explain why it is offensive, though, or else the person is going to keep walking around giving offense. Pointing out how a word lands on you is helpful`--definitely more helpful than not saying anything, muttering about it, and getting the person in trouble at work.
Originally posted by Moo:
I meant that every word which gives offense should be checked out.
quote:This may be more difficult than I think. Isn't Chocolate City seen as a racist epithet by some folks?
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
.. Chocolate City.
quote:spot on.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:Somewhere along the line the person who is offended needs admit they were offended and explain why it is offensive, though, or else the person is going to keep walking around giving offense. Pointing out how a word lands on you is helpful`--definitely more helpful than not saying anything, muttering about it, and getting the person in trouble at work.
Originally posted by Moo:
I meant that every word which gives offense should be checked out.
quote:Oy, has anyone said never use the word? What I am advocating is think before you speak. Something that is generally considered good advice.
Originally posted by Anglican't:
I can't help but think that 'don't-use-'niggardly'-in-case-someone-misconstrues-the-word'-type arguments play into the hands of such people.
quote:Then you suspect incorrectly.
Originally posted by Russ:
I begin to suspect that some people here subscribe to the doctrine that "the anti-racist is always right", alias "if a black person says something is racist then it's racist".
quote:I had thought francs was eastern description of Western Europeans. None the less, it does serve to illustrate that such terms are not descriptive as much as they are derogatory.
Originally posted by 3rdFooter:
Actually, not quite so. Across North Africa, all Europeans were referred to as 'Francs' and the local population thought the northerners all looked and sounded the same. It is from this we get the term 'Lingua Franca' (lit. language of the Francs), a polyglot language used for trade in the southern Mediterranean. the term 'Franc' was pejorative (i.e. implied inferiority) in an exact mirror image of the terms 'Turk' and 'Moor' used by Europeans at the time.
quote:Well, the conversation should have gone something like:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Somewhere along the line the person who is offended needs admit they were offended and explain why it is offensive, though, or else the person is going to keep walking around giving offense.
quote:Well, sure - the etymology doesn't matter, the fact that a word is/has been used to brand a particular group of people as effectively subhuman in what matters. But in this case, the majority of people don't believe "niggardly" is racist. The majority of people have never heard of the word, and some of those guess that it might have something to do with the most similar sounding word that they have heard of.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
If the vast majority (not suggesting that is the case here) of people believe "niggardly" is a racist term, then it is a racist term, regardless of it's etymology.
quote:See, I disagree. If I were O, I would follow up "never heard that word before" with "Gee, that word is a total sound- alike with a very racist term well all know-- are you sure you don't want to play it safe and go with 'miserly'? "
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:Well, the conversation should have gone something like:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Somewhere along the line the person who is offended needs admit they were offended and explain why it is offensive, though, or else the person is going to keep walking around giving offense.
Speaker: blah blah blah niggardly blah
Offended: What did you just say?
S: Huh?
O: I can't believe you just used the n-word. You can't say that, you despicable racist pig.
S: I didn't use that word. I said niggardly. N-I-G-G-A-R-D-L-Y. It means miserly - penny-pinching. It has nothing to do with the racist n-word at all.
O: Oh, OK - I've never heard that word before.
S: Moving on.
quote:I imagine they thought it was the adjective form of the all-too-familiar noun. Just as the first time you heard the words "geeky" or "wifely" you probably didn't ask what they meant, if you already knew the nouns "geek" or "wife". Which means that the protestors probably didn't know that they didn't know the word.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
But in this case, the majority of people don't believe "niggardly" is racist. The majority of people have never heard of the word, and some of those guess that it might have something to do with the most similar sounding word that they have heard of.
quote:Yes. I think we have all agreed on that, several times.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Being told "niggard isn't related to the racist n-word," on the other hand, should be sufficient to have the offended party revise his or her understanding.
quote:That assumes the speaker knows the etymology of the word as well as the meaning.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Being told "niggard isn't related to the racist n-word," on the other hand, should be sufficient to have the offended party revise his or her understanding.
quote:Confused right back at you. My response was not directed at you, Barnabas62, but rather to those who believe that they have nothing to learn (about context) but have only to teach others (about some imaginary world in which language is pure and context doesn't matter). Indeed, you noted this was not the case for you in the bit I bolded above.
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Leaf, I said in an earlier post that I would avoid using the word in any subsequent visit to the US, rather than risk causing gratuitous offence. That's something I've learned. Better to be careful.
But I remain convinced that in the specific back story the objections to the word, however much they were influenced by cultural sensitivities, were neither rational nor fair. The Mayor and the Chair of the NAACP both recognised this at the time. Were they both blind to potential cultural insensitivity? That seems pretty unlikely to me. That's something else I've learned from looking at the specific back story.
Surely it is possible to separate out the specific issues of justice and the more general issues of cultural sensitivity and see them for what they were and still are? There is no need to attribute blindness to other people in this discussion, just because we do not necessarily agree on which factors were most important.
quote:Yep. As with nigger, it depends on who's using it and in what context, but the stakes aren't nearly as high.
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:This may be more difficult than I think. Isn't Chocolate City seen as a racist epithet by some folks?
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
... Chocolate City.
quote:That's not a good idea. Especially not in the context of this thread.
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
Oh, and I'm being intentionally unhelpful.
quote:Maybe that's the key thing to learn here. Sensitivities vary. As we discover every day. Personally, I'd avoid Chocolate City if visiting friends who live in communities with a high Afro-Caribbean percentage population. I know some folks who wouldn't like it. And, knowing that, I guess I've learned to avoid the term altogether, just in case. It's on my personal censored list.
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
In my social circle I can get away with, but perhaps you couldn't.
quote:Basically, both are ignorant about something. And maybe ignoramus can be socially dodgy too!
English buff- "Boy that gentleman at the picnic sure was niggardly."
Ignoramus- "You said "picnic" and "niggerly"! Racist!"
English Buff- "*Sigh*! "Picnic" is from a French word that refers to what we'd call a pot luck, and "niggardly" is from an old Norse word that means "stingy". They have nothing to do with race!"
Ignoramus- "Racist!"
English Buff- "*Sigh*..."
quote:I wouldn't just shrug. I'd mentally file S as a willfully insensitive jerk. They've been told why it's a problem even if the intent was innocent. But clear communication is obviously not something they value or they'd be happy to switch to words that have less chance of causing trouble. Not accidentally offending others clearly isn't something they value (as they've just stated). Using common and easily understood language again clearly isn't something they value (miserly is a much more commonly understood word than niggardly).
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:See, I disagree. If I were O, I would follow up "never heard that word before" with "Gee, that word is a total sound- alike with a very racist term well all know-- are you sure you don't want to play it safe and go with 'miserly'? "
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Well, the conversation should have gone something like:
Speaker: blah blah blah niggardly blah
Offended: What did you just say?
S: Huh?
O: I can't believe you just used the n-word. You can't say that, you despicable racist pig.
S: I didn't use that word. I said niggardly. N-I-G-G-A-R-D-L-Y. It means miserly - penny-pinching. It has nothing to do with the racist n-word at all.
O: Oh, OK - I've never heard that word before.
S: Moving on.
(Oh and also I would not throw name calling into my observation that I just heard the N word, I would simply state it.)
I really would not feel right about not saying that. If S responded, "Screw that, why let the teeming millions decide my vocabulary?" then I would shrug and say "Moving on."
quote:I would agree with this, if there is some significant shade of meaning in the obscure or controversial word that the more common word lacks. For example, ISTM there is no difference in meaning between the words 'felicitous' and 'lucky' - so any use of the former would not be in order to bring out a nuance of meaning. (It might be for another good reason, mind you; e.g. as an amusing alliteration, or to gently poke fun at one's own loquaciousness!)
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
That's exactly the type of attitude that dumbs down language. It's not the fault of the idiot who jumps to conclusions about a word he doesn't even understand but the person who has a broad vocabulary. Using less well known words chanllenges others to broaden their vocabulary too which in turns benefits the language as a whole. Sorry, but you've got it all arse over tit.
quote:So in other words, you don't talk to communicate, you talk to educate your listener and elevate the culture by sharing your superior knowledge.
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
That's exactly the type of attitude that dumbs down language. It's not the fault of the idiot who jumps to conclusions about a word he doesn't even understand but the person who has a broad vocabulary. Using less well known words chanllenges others to broaden their vocabulary too which in turns benefits the language as a whole. Sorry, but you've got it all arse over tit.
quote:I'm writing a sermon. My theme is that an experience of the divine often serves to awaken us from our spiritual slumbers, and that the human need for this is universal. I'm looking for a figure of speech by which I may expressly pithily this idea.
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
That's exactly the type of attitude that dumbs down language. It's not the fault of the idiot who jumps to conclusions about a word he doesn't even understand but the person who has a broad vocabulary. Using less well known words chanllenges others to broaden their vocabulary too which in turns benefits the language as a whole. Sorry, but you've got it all arse over tit.
quote:So would I. That seems to nail the issue, really. Incidental and inadvertent offence (something I guess every single one of us has given at some stage) becomes wilful offence precisely at the point where we ignore the lesson of the revealed misunderstanding. Given the history, taking steps to avoid stoking the ancient fires is more important than sticking grimly to some purist view of 'my communication rights'.
Originally posted by Justinian:
quote:I wouldn't just shrug. I'd mentally file S as a willfully insensitive jerk.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
If S responded, "Screw that, why let the teeming millions decide my vocabulary?" then I would shrug and say "Moving on."
quote:A trivial difference, given that 'cock' has exactly one meaning in my hypothetical sermon, and that is not obscene.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Apples and oranges: 'cock' has more than one meaning including the more vulgar one; 'niggardly' does not.
quote:You're demonstrating the type of attitude that gets intellectuals a bad name. (And I'm not remotely claiming that all intellectuals are a part of this). The attitude is one of deliberate elitism and obfuscation, and often one of active obscurantism.
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
That's exactly the type of attitude that dumbs down language. It's not the fault of the idiot who jumps to conclusions about a word he doesn't even understand but the person who has a broad vocabulary. Using less well known words chanllenges others to broaden their vocabulary too which in turns benefits the language as a whole. Sorry, but you've got it all arse over tit.
quote:You consider your audience. It's not rocket science. If a word seems close to an offensive one, you might introduce it. Myself, I wouldn't know a piccalilli from a droettboom. But as it sounds like "pick a lily" I doubt very much it would cause offense. You appear to just be coming up with random shit now. An effective speaker considers their audience, and their audience's likely reaction to the things they say. "They should just know what 'niggardly' means" is bullshit, and for that reason "it's a two-way street," in this context, is a cop-out.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
If that is the case, though, where do you stop? Do you, for example, say 'piccalilli'?
quote:"I know it when I see it". I'm not sure what Piccalilli is meant to sound like except a circus in central London. When the difference is one between an "e" and an "a" most of the way through the word - and neither shapes the syllable (as for instance the difference between run and rune) it's unfortunately close. (I don't have the technical vocabularly to show how close the words under discussion are). Unlike Picallilli.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
If that is the case, though, where do you stop? Do you, for example, say 'piccalilli'?
[reply to Eliab]
quote:Which is what I've been saying the entire time.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
...which is a two-way street...
quote:Massive difference between aninn and alill for most people - you'd need to be talking in a crowded room for the two to be confused. Also there is no value weight as far as I am aware of for picallilli - and I certainly haven't seen anyone troll using it. So the situations are not the same.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
You're both missing the word it sounds like, which is 'pickaninny' and offensive in meaning. So I take issue with your assertion that this is just 'random shit'.
[ETA - so, would you use it?]
quote:And, as noted before, if every word has to be explained, it impedes conversation-- the goal of communication. At some point the listener says "it's not worth it". Even with known words, if too many obscure words are used it can impede communication simply because the listener has to work too hard to decipher the meaning. We've probably all taken an academic course filled with technical jargon. You learned the jargon the first week of class, but even though you knew the meanings, the remaining lectures were a struggle because every word had to be mentally translated-- and while doing the translation you missed the point the lecturer was making. With an academic course, you have the motivation to push through that, but with a casual conversation, at some point the listener is going to say, "it's just not worth it."
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:Which is what I've been saying the entire time.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
...which is a two-way street...
However, it is not a finely balanced equation. The primary burden is on the speaker, generally. The burden of the listener is nearly as heavy but not quite.
The example of word uttered, offence, word explained, offence removed is pretty. But it does not reflect how communication often works.
quote:Yes. Again, I think we have all agreed that was an unreasonable response.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Still hardly worth firing someone over...
quote:This is correct. It is also something no one in this conversation has advocated.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Still hardly worth firing someone over...
quote:Who's saying it is? He's even been given his job back. No one was defending the firing (unless it was deliberate trolling, exploiting the near-homophone or a repeat issue).
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Still hardly worth firing someone over...
quote:If I thought that "piccalilli" was at all likely to raise connotations of "pickaninny" in a particular context, and thereby either: (a) give offence; or (b) reduce the speed at which you might otherwise pass me a jar of tasty condiment, then in that situation I would ask for the "yellow chutney" or "yellow sauce" or whatever other alternative I judged most likely to be understood. The point of language, in this instance, is for me to get something to go on my ham sandwich. If the 'proper' word for the delicacy is likely to lead to an argument about racism, then I'd clearly be a prize berk to insist on using it. Obviously.
Originally posted by Matt Black:
You're both missing the word it sounds like, which is 'pickaninny' and offensive in meaning. So I take issue with your assertion that this is just 'random shit'.
[ETA - so, would you use it?]
quote:It's definitely the most similar, but I think we use the two somewhat differently. For instance, I could say: "That poor person is being very miserly, particularly in the way she tips" but I probably wouldn't. Since I associate being a miser with being rich, it would feel weird to say a poor person was being miserly. I would definitely prefer saying the same with niggardly, if the word were still acceptable.
Originally posted by Justinian:
And, Gwai, how is niggardly different from miserly? I'm genuinely curious.
quote:Miserly implies hoarding and places the emphasis on the personal qualities of the subject. Niggardly places the emphasis on the slight and grudging amount given (niggard can be used as an adjective or adverb in its own right). Niggardly lends itself to emotion in a way that miserly doesn't quite.
And, Gwai, how is niggardly different from miserly? I'm genuinely curious. [/QB]
quote:I don't think one can quite say someone is miserly with their admiration.
S. Richardson Clarissa (ed. 3) IV. xliv. 271 She said, For her part, she had always thought me a man of sense (A man of sense, Jack! What a niggardly praise!).
1811 J. Austen Sense & Sensibility I. xxi. 291 They came..well provided with admiration..and no niggardly proportion was now dealt out to his fair cousins.
quote:Not only Conrad. Two American masterpieces; Huckleberry Finn and the musical Showboat have problems because of the N-word. Ironically both advocate increased racial tolerance. But I would agree with you that an awkwardness with words or an awkwardness with historical literature is the least of the damages. Sensitivity to the N-word comes from a history where its use was part of a system that included lynching.
Originally posted by Gwai:
I rather lament the loss of the word niggardly because I see it as a useful word that doesn't have any perfect synonyms--mean doesn't have the same connotations at least here--but what can you do. I also find it rather sad that an excellent story by Conrad is almost undiscussable--and certainly unreadable in schools--because it uses n- in its title. Frankly though, if words (and literature) are the worst things we've lost to racism, we're doing pretty durn well.
quote:Ah, thank you. So somewhere between miserly and grudgingly.
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:Miserly implies hoarding and places the emphasis on the personal qualities of the subject. Niggardly places the emphasis on the slight and grudging amount given (niggard can be used as an adjective or adverb in its own right). Niggardly lends itself to emotion in a way that miserly doesn't quite.
And, Gwai, how is niggardly different from miserly? I'm genuinely curious.
From OED:
quote:I don't think one can quite say someone is miserly with their admiration.
S. Richardson Clarissa (ed. 3) IV. xliv. 271 She said, For her part, she had always thought me a man of sense (A man of sense, Jack! What a niggardly praise!).
1811 J. Austen Sense & Sensibility I. xxi. 291 They came..well provided with admiration..and no niggardly proportion was now dealt out to his fair cousins.
(Etymologically a miser is a wretched person, while niggard is being narrow.)
quote:How is it different from "stingy"?
Originally posted by Gwai:
quote:It's definitely the most similar, but I think we use the two somewhat differently. For instance, I could say: "That poor person is being very miserly, particularly in the way she tips" but I probably wouldn't. Since I associate being a miser with being rich, it would feel weird to say a poor person was being miserly. I would definitely prefer saying the same with niggardly, if the word were still acceptable.
Originally posted by Justinian:
And, Gwai, how is niggardly different from miserly? I'm genuinely curious.
quote:I think niggardly contains a much stronger value judgement of the grudging character of the giver. I would be happy to describe a restaurant as "nice food, but the portions were a bit stingy," whereas I can only think of one particularly nasty school dinner lady who would rate a "niggardly".
Originally posted by Gwai:
At least the way I would use the term, I think niggardly is worse than stingy.
quote:Reminds me of another famous story about a mayor, the one who had to introduce Diana Dors, maiden name Fluck......
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:There's an old joke (which you need to know something basic about English regional accents to understand), about the 1950s explorer Sir Vivian Fuchs, who pronounced his name 'Fooks' going to give a lecture at a City Hall in Yorkshire. The Mayor introduces him as 'Sir Vivian Fucks' so Fuchs leans over to put him right;
Originally posted by HCH:
...
I remember that when I was in high school, there was a student named "Fuchs". He was teased about this now and then.
'Actually, Your Worship, it's pronounced Fooks'
'Nay nay, Sir Vivian' replies the Mayor, 'I'll have no bad language in my town!'
quote:Um, no. But why ruin a salacious story with facts?
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
This thread also made me think of the incident a few years ago in the UK, when a moralistic mob attacked an office with Pediatrician on the door, on the grounds that there was no real difference between the word pediatrician and paedophile.
Oh well, just going off to perform a piscatorial act from a boat in full public view.
quote:OK, I was writing from memory and should have checked the story, but:-
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:Um, no. But why ruin a salacious story with facts?
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
This thread also made me think of the incident a few years ago in the UK, when a moralistic mob attacked an office with Pediatrician on the door, on the grounds that there was no real difference between the word pediatrician and paedophile.
Oh well, just going off to perform a piscatorial act from a boat in full public view.
quote:My daughter tells me that teachers at her school avoid using the number sixty-nine in maths examples. This came up in conversation when I was making a list, and my daughter told me that a list couldn't contain sixty-nine items - I had to add one to get to seventy, or remove one to stay at sixty-eight.
There are, for example, almost certainly occasions when you or I or anyone else here would avoid using words like "cock", "ass", "prick", "bastardise", "hoar", "gay", or even "bottom" in some perfectly correct and innocent sense, if only to avoid provoking puerile sniggers when trying to say something serious.
quote:I think this case of what might be said to be excessive accession to not offending one's interlocutor, and the fact that the importance of "face" in Chinese culture is so great that similar spirit remains today in some areas of modern life, is not necessarily something to strive for - without intending to offend, of course.
Originally posted by Higgs Bosun:
Chinese is a tonal language, and there is often no relationship between words which differ only in the tone. I believe polite Chinese speakers will avoid some perfectly ordinary words precisely because if the tone were misheard, the word would be a rude word.
quote:Here, in order to replace our previous now outdated and flawed delivery, have another one from the same culture group: Snawl (from Swedish "snĺl", meaning stingy or ungenerous). Smallactly (from "smĺaktig", etymologically "smallish" in order to convey of less than great generosity) might also do the trick. Does that help?
Originally posted by Gwai:
I rather lament the loss of the word niggardly because I see it as a useful word that doesn't have any perfect synonyms--mean doesn't have the same connotations at least here--but what can you do.
quote:Well they do need to grow up, and they will, only to be replaced another group who also need to grow up. Nature of the profession I'd've thought.
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Apparently one of the geography teachers thinks that the avoidance of sixty-nine is ridiculous, and is prepared to give someone a mark of 69% in an exam, on the basis that "some people need to grow up" but other teachers would try to avoid a mark of 69%.
quote:Only if his first name is Fabio.
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
Can I refer to a colleague who misses deadlines as a cunctator?
quote:One issue is the weight of the homophonic. I knew the word niggardly before I knew the word nigger. Sheltered early childhood. But that dramatically changed, to the point where every time I hear or see the former, the later is superimposed. I do not automatically become angered with the speaker/author, but that pain is there. It is reflex, it is not controlled.
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I'm with Russ on the puzzling aspect of this popular thread. What are the underlying issues which keep us banging on about an old word? I rather like Justinian's 'wilfully insensitive jerk' phrase. But I get pretty uncomfortable when I see blindness and ignorance parading as aggrieved self-righteousness. Not sure we should pander to that either.
quote:I think it must have been some other shipmate who posted on this. I know nothing of this case and did not comment on it.
Originally posted by Gee D:
There are differences in meaning between miserly, parsimonious and niggardly.
*snip*
Somewhere miles upthread, Augustine the Aleut drew attention to some strange aspects of this case. He noted that the man sacked was one very unlikely to have been racist in comment he made, but rather the converse. He also noted that there was no direct confrontation, but rather a whispering campaign against him, until he was sacked.
Now, I know nothing of the day-to-day workings of the left in the US, but here, that sort of campaign is pretty typical in left politics. You want to get rid of someone from another faction? Don't get up and say the X must be sacked. Start this sort of whispering campaign, with a (fairly flimsy) basis of truth, and in a week or so, X will be removed and you can insert your candidate. It's much more effective, as there is no real basis upon which X can mount a defence. There's nothing which can be answered, just mutterings in corridors. Very different to a direct attack, where there is a good chance of a successful defence.
quote:Maybe that's the clue to the whole thing. We all have experienced adolescent fascination with sex and giggled at any word that seemed to relate to things sexually.
Apparently one of the geography teachers thinks that the avoidance of sixty-nine is ridiculous, and is prepared to give someone a mark of 69% in an exam, on the basis that "some people need to grow up" but other teachers would try to avoid a mark of 69%.
quote:Here in the US, it's so characteristic (tho of course not unique to) conservative politics, particularly as practiced by Karl Rove/Faux News, we even have a name for it (drawn from one of the most infamous-- and successful-- examples):
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
However, Gee D must be disabused that this is exclusively characteristic of left politics. One of my few acquaintances among our local Conservatives just lost out to a campaign almost exactly as Gee D describes.
quote:I don't see what sex has to do with the word niggardly. Re things like avoiding 69, I would strongly agree with you, if you would say "kids would be kids." The implication that goofing around is allowable for males in particular however...
Originally posted by IconiumBound:
Originally posted by North East Quine
quote:Maybe that's the clue to the whole thing. We all have experienced adolescent fascination with sex and giggled at any word that seemed to relate to things sexually.
Apparently one of the geography teachers thinks that the avoidance of sixty-nine is ridiculous, and is prepared to give someone a mark of 69% in an exam, on the basis that "some people need to grow up" but other teachers would try to avoid a mark of 69%.
Maybe we should just shrug off accusations and say "boys will be boys" when PC accusations arise.
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
quote:That strikes me as an excellent example of why, in some social circles, it is wilful insensitivity to continue to use the word once any if us becomes aware if the impact.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:One issue is the weight of the homophonic. I knew the word niggardly before I knew the word nigger. Sheltered early childhood. But that dramatically changed, to the point where every time I hear or see the former, the later is superimposed. I do not automatically become angered with the speaker/author, but that pain is there. It is reflex, it is not controlled.
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I'm with Russ on the puzzling aspect of this popular thread. What are the underlying issues which keep us banging on about an old word? I rather like Justinian's 'wilfully insensitive jerk' phrase. But I get pretty uncomfortable when I see blindness and ignorance parading as aggrieved self-righteousness. Not sure we should pander to that either.
quote:She was the only person who I noticed both claim to feel personal pain or distress when hearing the word "niggardly" and to know what it meant. (Lots of other people made comments along the lines of "I know what it means, but I can see a lot of other people getting the wrong end of the stick.) But I don't mean to pick on her. I don't think I would use "niggardly" when talking to a relatively uneducated American audience, but that's just basic common sense - there's no sense in deliberately using words that your audience doesn't understand.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Well a lot of us said similar things, so don't just pick on her. (cross post, that was to Leorning Cniht.)
quote:Oh, that's what you meant. Sorry.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Ignorant misunderstandings are one thing, but lilBuddha doesn't need education to dispel her misunderstanding - she knows perfectly well what the word means, there is no misunderstanding, but she still feels visceral pain. And if this kind of feeling is widespread, rather than being a personal idiosyncrasy, it suggests that one should try to avoid the word, even with an audience that understands its meaning.
quote:I would expand the audience reference beyond America. In my experience anyway.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
American audience
quote:Your experience is that outside America, people who understand the meaning of the word "niggardly" and understand that it does not share the same origins as "nigger" nevertheless feel visceral pain when they encounter it?
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:I would expand the audience reference beyond America. In my experience anyway.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
American audience
quote:Can you give a source for this?
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
This seem to trump the other issues of the city where this tragedy occurred. It was founded so that congressmen could bring their slaves with them when Congress was in session without risking them being freed as they were in Philadelphia.
quote:From what I found, he is not correct. However, slavery was part of the changing of the shape of the district.
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:Can you give a source for this?
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
This seem to trump the other issues of the city where this tragedy occurred. It was founded so that congressmen could bring their slaves with them when Congress was in session without risking them being freed as they were in Philadelphia.
Moo
quote:Actually I doubt that. I grew up in Arlington County, which was the part of the District that was returned to Virginia in 1846.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
However, slavery was part of the changing of the shape of the district.
quote:That may or may not be accurate. The problem with Wikipedia is you never can tell. I would be interested in an article by a recognized historian.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Response to Moo
It is mentioned as a factor in this account of the retrocession.
quote:What I have learned from speaking with historians is that, when studying history, ware the edges of the axes as they are being ground.
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:That may or may not be accurate. The problem with Wikipedia is you never can tell. I would be interested in an article by a recognized historian.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Response to Moo
It is mentioned as a factor in this account of the retrocession.
Moo
quote:And a transatlantic divide, and an age-related one.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I meant nigger is used more broadly outside America than some appear to think. So, yes, the possibility for others to react as I do is broader as well.
IME, niggardly is used slightly more in the UK, but not to the degree comments on this thread would make it appear.
Again, I suspect a colour divide as well as an educational one.
quote:As well as mythical, according to a link provided earlier.
Originally posted by Russ:
Although the sort of reaction you describe is a different sort of confusion from the paedophile/paediatrician thing, which seems to be no more than ignorance.
quote:When I was a child (in the UK), the rhyme to determine who was "it" went "eenie, meenie, minie, mo; catch a nigger by the toe". None of us, aged five or so, had ever heard the word, and most thought that it was actually a "nicker" - ie. someone who nicks stuff - a thief.
Originally posted by Lucia:
But I don't think I have ever heard someone use it in real life. That probably says plenty about my own upbringing and social circles or something....
quote:Yes, but, as you say, lilBuddha's issue isn't one of confusion. She knows what niggardly means, isn't confused about anyone's racist intent, but nevertheless experiences painful feelings when she hears it. Her suspicion is that other people, both in the US and the UK, will share her reaction.
Originally posted by Russ:
But there are contexts (combinations of age, colour, nationality, education) where "niggardly" would be the more common of the two words, and in many contexts the risk of confusion would be minimal.
quote:That's not right either. The truth is that mythological colour was added to a real event.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:As well as mythical, according to a link provided earlier.
Originally posted by Russ:
Although the sort of reaction you describe is a different sort of confusion from the paedophile/paediatrician thing, which seems to be no more than ignorance.
quote:She moved. The article does not indicate whether or not the incident was a factor in the decision. The article also says the speculation (of which there is much) is that the spray painting was done by a group of adolescents, but that in fact, no one knows who did it or why.
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:That's not right either. The truth is that mythological colour was added to a real event.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:As well as mythical, according to a link provided earlier.
Originally posted by Russ:
Although the sort of reaction you describe is a different sort of confusion from the paedophile/paediatrician thing, which seems to be no more than ignorance.
Here is what happened, plus some account of the myth growth around the actual incident.
The real event was unpleasant enough to persuade Dr Yvette Cloete to move out of the neighbourhood, but basically it was an act of hate-vandalism perpetrated by a small gang of adolescents.
quote:I read about in a book about Jefferson which is not to hand. The 1780 Pennsylvania
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:Can you give a source for this?
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
This seem to trump the other issues of the city where this tragedy occurred. It was founded so that congressmen could bring their slaves with them when Congress was in session without risking them being freed as they were in Philadelphia.
Moo
quote:Congress decided to move out of Philadelphia into a federal district after a riot which the Governor of Pennsylvania did not stop.
By the early 1790s, the market had soaked up the local population of former slaves and Philadelphians were importing indentured blacks from other states and even overseas. The labor force got a big boost in 1791 when rebellion erupted in the French slave-owning colony of St. Dominique. Refugees began arriving in Philadelphia by the shipload in 1792, and they found that the state would not extend the clause that allowed non-resident slave owners to dwell no longer than six months in Pennsylvania with their human property.
quote:Yes that rhyme with the word "nicker" was certainly around during my childhood. But as you say it had no connotation to me of the original meaning. It just sounded like a nonsense poem to me. If you'd actually asked me what it meant I don't think I would have had a clue. Only as an adult did I realise the implication and have taught a new, inoffensive version to my own children. (Thanks CBeebies for the rhyme!)
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
When I was a child (in the UK), the rhyme to determine who was "it" went "eenie, meenie, minie, mo; catch a nigger by the toe". None of us, aged five or so, had ever heard the word, and most thought that it was actually a "nicker" - ie. someone who nicks stuff - a thief.
quote:That rhyme was commonly used when I was a small child in Australia in the Fifties, as was the expression "work like a nigger", and Nigger Boy was a brand of licorice into the early Sixties.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
When I was a child (in the UK), the rhyme to determine who was "it" went "eenie, meenie, minie, mo; catch a nigger by the toe".
quote:Moo
The act that abolished slavery in Pennsylvania freed no slaves outright, and relics of slavery may have lingered in the state almost until the Civil War. There were 795 slaves in Pennsylvania in 1810, 211 in 1820, 403 or 386 (the count was disputed) in 1830, and 64 in 1840, the last year census worksheets in the northern states included a line for "slaves." The definition of slavery seems to have blurred in the later counts. The two "slaves" counted in 1840 in Lancaster County turned out to have been freed years before, though they were still living on the properties of their former masters.
quote:Really? A former vice-presidential candidate didn't know about "language and history"? Anyone really believe that?
“We have to be cognizant of how people hear things,” Ryan said. “For instance, when I think of ‘inner city,’ I think of everyone. I don’t just think of one race. It doesn’t even occur to me that it could come across as a racial statement, but that’s not the case, apparently … What I learned is that there’s a whole language and history that people are very sensitive to, understandably so. We just have to better understand. You know, we’ll be a little clumsy, but it’s with the right intentions behind it.”
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
... I was in junior high school in 1946 when the centennial was celebrated, and we studied the history of the transaction. ...
quote:So one person's memories of a high school class over half a century ago are more historically accurate than a current Wikipedia article with citations. That must have been some high school.
Originally posted by Moo:
That may or may not be accurate. The problem with Wikipedia is you never can tell. I would be interested in an article by a recognized historian.
quote:But again, it's just another illustration of the emotive connotations that surround even benign word choices. As per your example, when I was admitted to a US hospital for a D&C following a miscarriage, I was similarly dismayed to see that the diagnostic category for my procedure was "incomplete abortion". Of course, I understood in this sense the word "abortion" was used in a clinical sense to mean "termination of pregnancy" regardless of whether the termination was voluntary/induced or whether it was involuntary/natural. Yet, given the circumstances (and no doubt a fragile emotional state), I found the term distressing.
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
Another wrongheaded piece of linguistic confusion, almost as bizarre as the nigger/niggardly example, appeared in a conservative Christian newspaper some years ago, when someone proposed a ban on the use of any cognate of the word abortion, as in an aeroplane's aborted take-off or landing.
quote:That's the same link I referred to earlier in the thread. As I mentioned, the law did prevent enslavement of the children of slaves, and with the exception of Congressman, didn't allow visitors to keep slaves for more than six months.
Originally posted by Moo:
As far as slavery in Pennsylvania is concerned, here is a site that deals with it.
The site discusses the actual effects of the law in these words.quote:Moo
The act that abolished slavery in Pennsylvania freed no slaves outright, and relics of slavery may have lingered in the state almost until the Civil War. There were 795 slaves in Pennsylvania in 1810, 211 in 1820, 403 or 386 (the count was disputed) in 1830, and 64 in 1840, the last year census worksheets in the northern states included a line for "slaves." The definition of slavery seems to have blurred in the later counts. The two "slaves" counted in 1840 in Lancaster County turned out to have been freed years before, though they were still living on the properties of their former masters.
quote:I'm willing to believe he wants to slash the budget for spending that helps the poor and cut taxes for the wealthy of all races.
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
In other news, Rep. Paul Ryan is being called out for his racist dog-whistle about "inner city" culture. His explanation is that when he says "inner city", he means everyone, not just black people. Anyone really believe that?
quote:Really? A former vice-presidential candidate didn't know about "language and history"? Anyone really believe that?
“We have to be cognizant of how people hear things,” Ryan said. “For instance, when I think of ‘inner city,’ I think of everyone. I don’t just think of one race. It doesn’t even occur to me that it could come across as a racial statement, but that’s not the case, apparently … What I learned is that there’s a whole language and history that people are very sensitive to, understandably so. We just have to better understand. You know, we’ll be a little clumsy, but it’s with the right intentions behind it.”
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/paul-ryan-meet-black-lawmakers
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote:I looked at the site again, and it's definitely incorrect. It says
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
So one person's memories of a high school class over half a century ago are more historically accurate than a current Wikipedia article with citations. That must have been some high school.
quote:Alexandria was never part of the District of Columbia. Arlington County was the only territory returned to Virginia.
If Alexandria were returned to the state of Virginia, the move would have added two additional pro-slavery representatives to the Virginia General Assembly.
quote:"Urban poor"? It has the double benefit of being a direct echo of the phrase you used above-- and therefore logical-- and not having history as being a replacement term for "ghetto."
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Sorry, I wasn't clear. The issues that affect the poor in rural areas are often significantly different from the issues that affect the poor in cities. "Poor people" is both kinds. "Rural poor" is presumably OK for one kind. What set of words describes the other kind without carrying racial, or racist, connotations?
quote:Even if the governor of Pennsylvania was willing to have Philadelphia as the national capital, many of the Constitutional Convention delegates were not. They did not want the capital located in one state because that would give that state an advantage over all the rest. The only way they would have accepted Philadelphia as capital was if Pennsylvania had ceded it, which they certainly wouldn't have done.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
The impetus to move from a state to a federal district came from governor of Pennsylvania refusing to protect Congress from the war veterans marches. The choice of Federal district was primarily between a Northern site in Pennsylvania and a Southern site.
quote:Except that Palimpsest says that's a euphemism.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
"Urban poor"? It has the double benefit of being a direct echo of the phrase you used above-- and therefore logical-- and not having history as being a replacement term for "ghetto."
quote:But not here. The newspapers here extol the virtues of living in the inner city as being smart etc. Why, I can't understand, but they do, and some people seem to believe them.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
That's odd, since nobody said it was wrong to call "poor people" "poor people". The phrase "inner city" has long been a synonym for "ghetto," and therefore has the kind of stereotypical associations that you would expect from that word.
quote:Does "replacement term" not work as well as "euphemism"? because I will state for the record that I agree that "inner city" can be a euphemism for "ghetto."
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:Except that Palimpsest says that's a euphemism.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
"Urban poor"? It has the double benefit of being a direct echo of the phrase you used above-- and therefore logical-- and not having history as being a replacement term for "ghetto."
quote:No, Palimpsest said that "urban" was also a euphemism.
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Does "replacement term" not work as well as "euphemism"? because I will state for the record that I agree that "inner city" can be a euphemism for "ghetto."
quote:Derogatory isn't really my issue - I'm looking for a set of words that an American would understand to mean low income urban communities, without carrying any extra implication of race.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Urban is more complicated. It is used as a euphemism/replacement/proxy for Black. It's need not be derogatory.
quote:As the link I cited earlier on the Residence Act said;
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:Even if the governor of Pennsylvania was willing to have Philadelphia as the national capital, many of the Constitutional Convention delegates were not. They did not want the capital located in one state because that would give that state an advantage over all the rest. The only way they would have accepted Philadelphia as capital was if Pennsylvania had ceded it, which they certainly wouldn't have done.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
The impetus to move from a state to a federal district came from governor of Pennsylvania refusing to protect Congress from the war veterans marches. The choice of Federal district was primarily between a Northern site in Pennsylvania and a Southern site.
Moo
quote:So Pennsylvania was willing to give the land for the capital district from the state of Pennsylvania.
Two sites were favored by members of Congress: one site on the Potomac River near Georgetown; and another site on the Susquehanna River near Wrights Ferry (now Columbia, Pennsylvania). The Susquehanna River site was approved by the House in September 1789, while the Senate bill specified a site on the Delaware River near Germantown, Pennsylvania. Congress did not reach an agreement at the time.[
quote:But they were not willing to give Philadelphia.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
So Pennsylvania was willing to give the land for the capital district from the state of Pennsylvania.
quote:How is that important?
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:But they were not willing to give Philadelphia.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
So Pennsylvania was willing to give the land for the capital district from the state of Pennsylvania.
Moo
quote:They are always going to see it as being tainted with racial colour, because demographically that's how American cities are. Or many of them. "White flight" to the suburbs made it so.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:Derogatory isn't really my issue - I'm looking for a set of words that an American would understand to mean low income urban communities, without carrying any extra implication of race.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Urban is more complicated. It is used as a euphemism/replacement/proxy for Black. It's need not be derogatory.
It sounds like "urban poor" is a better bet than "inner-city poor", but still not free of racial colour.
quote:Yeah, seeing it was only the once.
Originally posted by orfeo:
Meanwhile, Jeremy Clarkson is now in trouble for reciting the version of Eeny Meeny Miny Moe that both he and I learnt as a child, mumbling uncomfortably when he got to the offensive word, IN UNAIRED FOOTAGE.
Cor blimey, but the thought police are out in force aren't they? I'm sorry, but making a news story out of it when the person knows it's a bad word but can't pull out of the rhythm of a childhood rhyme is just getting ridiculous. If it's about changing minds, his mind is already changed.
quote:I'm well aware of his history. That doesn't mean it's justified to jump on him on every occasion. That's rather like police going around to hassle the ex-cons every time there's a crime committed.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:Yeah, seeing it was only the once.
Originally posted by orfeo:
Meanwhile, Jeremy Clarkson is now in trouble for reciting the version of Eeny Meeny Miny Moe that both he and I learnt as a child, mumbling uncomfortably when he got to the offensive word, IN UNAIRED FOOTAGE.
Cor blimey, but the thought police are out in force aren't they? I'm sorry, but making a news story out of it when the person knows it's a bad word but can't pull out of the rhythm of a childhood rhyme is just getting ridiculous. If it's about changing minds, his mind is already changed.
quote:But in this case he did it this time and every time. So it is more like the cops going to hassle an ex-con every time he actually committed a crime.
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:I'm well aware of his history. That doesn't mean it's justified to jump on him on every occasion. That's rather like police going around to hassle the ex-cons every time there's a crime committed.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:Yeah, seeing it was only the once.
Originally posted by orfeo:
Meanwhile, Jeremy Clarkson is now in trouble for reciting the version of Eeny Meeny Miny Moe that both he and I learnt as a child, mumbling uncomfortably when he got to the offensive word, IN UNAIRED FOOTAGE.
Cor blimey, but the thought police are out in force aren't they? I'm sorry, but making a news story out of it when the person knows it's a bad word but can't pull out of the rhythm of a childhood rhyme is just getting ridiculous. If it's about changing minds, his mind is already changed.
quote:Until threads like this one, I wouldn't have known any alternative word for nigger in that rhyme.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
There are many alternates to the word nigger for currently in use, alternates for all the words or, gasp not using the rhyme at all.
quote:Circus thread
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:Until threads like this one, I wouldn't have known any alternative word for nigger in that rhyme.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
There are many alternates to the word nigger for currently in use, alternates for all the words or, gasp not using the rhyme at all.
And *gasp* exactly what else besides Eeny Meeny Miny Moe comes to mind for choosing between several options randomly on the spot? Seriously, I want to know. What would you do if someone said 'pick one'?
quote:And think of "The cat sat on the mat". We all know that "cat" was a derogatory term for gays. So here, we have more denigration of gays. Lazy, because they sat and did not do anything. Elitist, because rather than just sit on floorboards, they had to sit on a mat.
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
The reference to "cunctator" upthread is provocative, because it suggests Fabius Cunctator, which suggests Hannibal, which suggests Hannibal the Cannibal, which suggests cannibalism, of which some subaltern groups have been falsely accused in an attempt to denigrate (!) them.
quote:But if we follow this list (and this line of argument) we're comparing use of the word 'nigger' with i) smoking a pipe and ii) having an alcoholic drink while off-road driving. Are we sure that's wise?
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:But in this case he did it this time and every time. So it is more like the cops going to hassle an ex-con every time he actually committed a crime.
quote:I'm well aware of his history. That doesn't mean it's justified to jump on him on every occasion. That's rather like police going around to hassle the ex-cons every time there's a crime committed.
Yeah, seeing it was only the once.
On the telly and everything.
He says he tried to avoid saying the word as best he could to avoid that version being broadcast. Oh, wait, except not filming it in the first. There are many alternates to the word nigger for currently in use, alternates for all the words or, gasp not using the rhyme at all.
quote:It wasn't included in the show, no. So sacking him for it would be inappropriate. Warning him is not, IMO, due to his track record. The bizarre bit is him muttering. If one has the presence of mind to mutter, one has the presence of mind to substitute.
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I thought the Clarkson story was utterly bizarre. If the BBC had sacked him, that would be grounds for tearing up my license. And that bit of the film wasn't actually shown!
quote:No, no, no, dear Anglican't. orfeo employed a device known as an analogy. And I responded in kind. He was not actually calling the incident a crime.
Originally posted by Anglican't:
But if we follow this list (and this line of argument) we're comparing use of the word 'nigger' with i) smoking a pipe and ii) having an alcoholic drink while off-road driving. Are we sure that's wise?
quote:I learned 'catch a Chinaman'. I also learned a very revolting anti-Chinese rhyme where the context made it clear that 'Chinaman' was the original word.
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
My parents taught me "catch a tiger by the toe."
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:No, no, no, dear Anglican't. orfeo employed a device known as an analogy. And I responded in kind.
Originally posted by Anglican't:
But if we follow this list (and this line of argument) we're comparing use of the word 'nigger' with i) smoking a pipe and ii) having an alcoholic drink while off-road driving. Are we sure that's wise?
quote:
He was not actually calling the incident a crime.
quote:The comprehensive school system has a lot to answer for. Hopefully its days are numbered.
Harrumph, the state of British education these days.
quote:Well, as CK's circus thread is demonstrating, their are several options. Which would I use? I don't know, so I'd have to flip a coin to decide.
Originally posted by orfeo:
And *gasp* exactly what else besides Eeny Meeny Miny Moe comes to mind for choosing between several options randomly on the spot? Seriously, I want to know. What would you do if someone said 'pick one'?
quote:Yes, several options exist, but each individual person has more or less one rhyme that was/is standard.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Well, as CK's circus thread is demonstrating, their are several options. Which would I use? I don't know, so I'd have to flip a coin to decide.
quote:First, the Circus Thread is a game and one of the loose rules of such is to avoid "Me Too" responses and multiple replies in one post.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:Yes, several options exist, but each individual person has more or less one rhyme that was/is standard.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Well, as CK's circus thread is demonstrating, their are several options. Which would I use? I don't know, so I'd have to flip a coin to decide.
quote:For white Britons. For those with a bit more melanin, you will find the standards change a bit.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
For me, for Clarkson, and for millions of other Britons, "eeny meeny" is the archetypal counting rhyme.
quote:But it actually is. If Clarkson had done one take and given it up, you might be correct. He made a conscious decision to continue, through several takes.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
It seems to have a similar resonance for orfeo. It is not at all the "free choice" that you seem to imply.
quote:Actually, you are incorrect. How I choose to greet someone is quite contextual. And at times complicated. I find it strange you would have one, standard greeting.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Equally, I would be prepared to bet that if somebody introduces you to a new person, there is a standard greeting that you always use. You won't stand there and go through a list of all possible greetings (although you would recognize them all), you'll just come out with whatever is your default.
quote:Any term is not going to work when it's being selected as a code for Black. "Densely located people on welfare" is going to have the racial implication not because it has a history, but because it was a grouping which was unrelated to the attribute being discussed.
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:They are always going to see it as being tainted with racial colour, because demographically that's how American cities are. Or many of them. "White flight" to the suburbs made it so.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:Derogatory isn't really my issue - I'm looking for a set of words that an American would understand to mean low income urban communities, without carrying any extra implication of race.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Urban is more complicated. It is used as a euphemism/replacement/proxy for Black. It's need not be derogatory.
It sounds like "urban poor" is a better bet than "inner-city poor", but still not free of racial colour.
quote:And you typically learned and used the version with "nigger"? I ask because growing up in California in the 70s I learned it with "tiger", and wasn't even aware there was another version until I heard it in high school (in a public service announcement video, a mother is shown singing it to her infant, demonstrating how prejudice can be started early.)
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
For me, for Clarkson, and for millions of other Britons, "eeny meeny" is the archetypal counting rhyme. It seems to have a similar resonance for orfeo.
quote:Just shutting your mouth when you know you're about to say something that is stupid and offensive is simply not an option.
Originally posted by orfeo:
Meanwhile, Jeremy Clarkson is now in trouble for reciting the version of Eeny Meeny Miny Moe that both he and I learnt as a child, mumbling uncomfortably when he got to the offensive word, IN UNAIRED FOOTAGE.
Cor blimey, but the thought police are out in force aren't they? I'm sorry, but making a news story out of it when the person knows it's a bad word but can't pull out of the rhythm of a childhood rhyme is just getting ridiculous. If it's about changing minds, his mind is already changed.
quote:I think I mentioned this earlier, but yes, we used the "nigger" version, although a good fraction of us thought the word was "nicker", and none of us had any knowledge of "nigger" as a word meaning black person.
Originally posted by Dave W.:
And you typically learned and used the version with "nigger"?
quote:You were being sarcastic? Because it certainly is an option.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Just shutting your mouth when you know you're about to say something that is stupid and offensive is simply not an option.
quote:Again, sarcasm? Because they do not have special permission.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
And offensive words that were part of your childhood have a special permission in general discourse.
quote:"Cat"?
Originally posted by Gee D:
We all know that "cat" was a derogatory term for gays.
quote:1. It certainly was here. You're in SA aren't you- may be different there.
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:"Cat"?
Originally posted by Gee D:
We all know that "cat" was a derogatory term for gays.
quote:And also for anyone who is much younger than about 40, I'd imagine. There are millions of white Britons over 40, though.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
For white Britons. For those with a bit more melanin, you will find the standards change a bit.
quote:It doesn't matter, though does it? Had Clarkson tried the rhyme once and then gave it up, you would have a point. But he does it 4 or 5 times, on camera, for an international programme. Credit for not using it in the final edit, yeah, so no sacking. But a warning is more than appropriate.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Maybe Clarkson's kids never taught him the tiger rhyme.
quote:No. I gave an example of why the word pulled memory of offence. I do not recall anyone saying it should have been considered so by everyone, everywhere.
Originally posted by Gee D:
Just as the "we" who took offence to "niggardly" grew up somewhere that that word was not used.
quote:The report I read suggested that during one take he said "nigger", or something that sounded a bit like it. His story is that he was intentionally mumbling through those syllables to avoid saying the word, and on one occasion didn't do a good job. I have seen the recording published by the Mirror "newspaper", and it seems to fit these facts - he mumbles his way through the bulk of the 'catch' line.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It doesn't matter, though does it? Had Clarkson tried the rhyme once and then gave it up, you would have a point. But he does it 4 or 5 times, on camera, for an international programme. Credit for not using it in the final edit, yeah, so no sacking. But a warning is more than appropriate.
quote:Yes I was being sarcastic in both cases.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:You were being sarcastic? Because it certainly is an option.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Just shutting your mouth when you know you're about to say something that is stupid and offensive is simply not an option.
quote:Again, sarcasm? Because they do not have special permission.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
And offensive words that were part of your childhood have a special permission in general discourse.
quote:Whilst I do not agree with your reasoning, I am also not sure he was trying to be deliberately racist. I see Clarkson as more casually racist. The "Oh it was in fun, no harm intended." with a dose of pushing the boundaries.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Clarkson's detractors claim that he was obviously being racist, and trying to slip a "nigger" in there in a comic fashion. I'm not so sure, for exactly the reason I have been discussing.
quote:Again, I will mention this is about again.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
I think he was unwise to attempt the "mumbling" strategy - I think the only way to acceptably say the eeny meeny rhyme out loud is to clearly enunciate a different word, and I would give Clarkson that advice in rather strong terms.
But I don't think that the recording I heard warrants any kind of disciplinary proceeding.
quote:But this is getting circular. The point of Leorning Cniht's question is: what term do you use if you actually want to talk about urban poor because both the poverty and the urban location are relevant to what you're saying?
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
quote:Any term is not going to work when it's being selected as a code for Black. "Densely located people on welfare" is going to have the racial implication not because it has a history, but because it was a grouping which was unrelated to the attribute being discussed.
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:They are always going to see it as being tainted with racial colour, because demographically that's how American cities are. Or many of them. "White flight" to the suburbs made it so.
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:Derogatory isn't really my issue - I'm looking for a set of words that an American would understand to mean low income urban communities, without carrying any extra implication of race.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Urban is more complicated. It is used as a euphemism/replacement/proxy for Black. It's need not be derogatory.
It sounds like "urban poor" is a better bet than "inner-city poor", but still not free of racial colour.
quote:Well, they could try talking to people, rather than about them. Listening would be even better. How is it possible to create a solution without the participation of the people they are intended to help?
Originally posted by orfeo:
... If that's the case, it's actually a barrier to solving the problems of poor people in the inner city. If politicians aren't allowed to talk about them, how are any solutions going to be created?
quote:Yes - the same applies with terms for learning disabilities. Special Needs is the latest to lose its meaning. 'Special' in now a derogatory term in schools around here.
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
So you create a neutral term and use it, and it gradually acquires a derogatory meaning and so it becomes necessary to create a new term.
quote:This is true, but it's also a separate issue that affects absolutely everything that politicians do, not just situations like this one.
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
quote:Well, they could try talking to people, rather than about them. Listening would be even better. How is it possible to create a solution without the participation of the people they are intended to help?
Originally posted by orfeo:
... If that's the case, it's actually a barrier to solving the problems of poor people in the inner city. If politicians aren't allowed to talk about them, how are any solutions going to be created?
quote:And this is what you recommend ? This is a good thing, the way language is supposed to work ?
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
So you create a neutral term and use it, and it gradually acquires a derogatory meaning and so it becomes necessary to create a new term.
The Euphemism treadmill is a continuing problem with many descriptive terms.
quote:Since what we're talking about in this case is often understanding non-face-to-face communication (televised, written, etc) there's often no reliable way to know the speaker's intent. You're asking people to read someone else's mind. That's a recipe even more disastrous than the admittedly vexing problem that it's seeking to correct.
Originally posted by Russ:
quote:And this is what you recommend ? This is a good thing, the way language is supposed to work ?
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
So you create a neutral term and use it, and it gradually acquires a derogatory meaning and so it becomes necessary to create a new term.
The Euphemism treadmill is a continuing problem with many descriptive terms.
Isn't this rather an indication of a failed strategy ? That the Orwellian project of changing attitudes by changing "accepted" vocabulary just doesn't work ?
That an alternative approach - such as encouraging people to listen for the speaker's intention rather than hunt around for any conceivable insult - might increase the general level of harmony in interpersonal relations ?
quote:Not wishing to rebuff your graciousness in looking forgivingly on those age groups and parts of the world that are "a few beats behind the flow" of the evolving English language.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Of course, in an evolving landscape of acceptable terminology, someone somewhere is bound to caught a few beats behind the flow of where the language is heading, which is why we need to take most such errors with a dose of grace-- as most everyone here has advocated.
quote:As is indeed your right.
Originally posted by Russ:
quote:Not wishing to rebuff your graciousness in looking forgivingly on those age groups and parts of the world that are "a few beats behind the flow" of the evolving English language.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Of course, in an evolving landscape of acceptable terminology, someone somewhere is bound to caught a few beats behind the flow of where the language is heading, which is why we need to take most such errors with a dose of grace-- as most everyone here has advocated.
But to describe less-than-up-to-the-minute usage as "errors" seems to reflect an underlying attitude for which "cultural imperialism" is the best label I can find off the top of my head. Others can probably do better.
New usages emerge all the time from the froth of media. Some will become mainstream and make it into published dictionaries; others will wither. Evolution is a trial-and-error process. There is no moral superiority in being an "early adopter". But maybe it's a forgivable mistake...
Some of us choose to live in backwaters.
quote:And then you must endure the wrinkled noses of those offended by the odours produced by the stagnate, festering pools encouraged by unmoving water.
Originally posted by Russ:
Some of us choose to live in backwaters.
quote:Don't think anyone's opposed to empathy and kindness. And, for example, that empathy and kindness may result in one choosing one's words very carefully should it become necessary to raise with an overweight friend/acquaintance/neighbour the subject of his or her weight.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
fyi: I don't think what I am describing has anything at all to do with "age groups" or geography, although those may or may not be complicating factors in the mutual give-and-take of good communication. It's all about attitude and characteristics like empathy, kindness, and generosity and how those things (or the lack thereof) shape our language.
quote:Don't think anyone's opposed to empathy and kindness. And, for example, that empathy and kindness may result in one choosing one's words very carefully should it become necessary to raise with an overweight friend/acquaintance/neighbour the subject of his or her weight.
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
fyi: I don't think what I am describing has anything at all to do with "age groups" or geography, although those may or may not be complicating factors in the mutual give-and-take of good communication. It's all about attitude and characteristics like empathy, kindness, and generosity and how those things (or the lack thereof) shape our language.
quote:You're ripping my quote from the context. In the context, I'd already covered that, as had others.
Originally posted by Russ:
quote:As for age and geography, do you really think that as many new usages move westwards as eastwards across the Atlantic ? That the 60-80s coin as many new usages as the 20-40s ? That rural areas change as fast as urban ?
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
fyi: I don't think what I am describing has anything at all to do with "age groups" or geography, although those may or may not be complicating factors in the mutual give-and-take of good communication. It's all about attitude and characteristics like empathy, kindness, and generosity and how those things (or the lack thereof) shape our language.
quote:You don't have a duty, of course. But, again, we're talking about known offense here, not unknown. At the point when a term is known to be offensive, if you continue to use it, you are being a jerk. You are demonstrating that your goal is not good communication, your goal is not understanding, but rather something else entirely.
Originally posted by Russ:
Nothing wrong with vibrant culture. But the fact that a usage becomes well-established in some group of people who are "ahead" in terms of the flow of new ideas, new words, new usages doesn't impose any duty on those "behind" to keep up.
quote:This term is unfamiliar cross-pond.
Originally posted by Russ: Speaking tabloid English - chav and bling - is no virtue.
quote:Which is precisely what we have been saying all along.
Originally posted by Russ:
Freedom to coin new usages is matched by freedom to reject them. If some community wishes to speak the language of Dickens and Trollope, there's no innate immorality there. And broadcast and blog in that language (although how to refer to the process of blogging in Dickensian English might prove interesting).
Should someone from such a fictitious community encounter and desire to communicate with someone from a New York slum, then clearly some empathy and goodwill may be needed. Equally on both sides.
quote:At a family party, where my sister was doing more than her fair share of passing round food and drinks and generally looking after everybody, my mother-in-law (in her 80s at the time) said to my mother "Your eldest daughter is working like a [incredibly long pause, as she doubtless considers and rejects "nigger" and "slave"] Trojan!"
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:Until threads like this one, I wouldn't have known any alternative word for nigger in that rhyme.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
There are many alternates to the word nigger for currently in use, alternates for all the words or, gasp not using the rhyme at all.
quote:See my story upthread about how my mom's less edited usage of that phrase led me to have to change the Bible translation I use when preaching on the parable of the prodigal son...
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
quote:At a family party, where my sister was doing more than her fair share of passing round food and drinks and generally looking after everybody, my mother-in-law (in her 80s at the time) said to my mother "Your eldest daughter is working like a [incredibly long pause, as she doubtless considers and rejects "nigger" and "slave"] Trojan!"
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:Until threads like this one, I wouldn't have known any alternative word for nigger in that rhyme.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
There are many alternates to the word nigger for currently in use, alternates for all the words or, gasp not using the rhyme at all.
quote:hmmm... and yet that "absolute truth" approach seems to be precisely what you have been arguing for here. What am I missing?
Originally posted by Russ:
One of the ways of getting it wrong is to treat the relative politeness of a word within one's own community as an absolute truth that should be heeded by people in other communities.
quote:Which is EXACTLY what pretty much everyone on this thread has said-- repeatedly.
Originally posted by Russ:
Nothing wrong with a friendly well-intentioned warning "here in Kansas City if you talk about inner city problems people will tend to think you mean racial problems". That's unobjectionable and could be useful data if one happened to be planning a business trip in that direction.
But rephrase it as "These days anyone who talks about inner city problems is a closet racist; this is accepted usage where I live - if you in the rest of the world don't adjust your usage accordingly then you're a jerk" and you come across as someone with an exaggerated sense of the importance of your own place of residence. It's to do with tact and empathy...
quote:Try harder then, because I'm not seeing it. So far, I hear you arguing vehemently that I am wrong, wrong, wrong, and then giving me an impassioned argument for exactly what I and everyone else has said.
Originally posted by Russ:
Trying hard here to agree with what's right in what you say, and make it clear to you what's wrong.
quote:This bloody well annoys me. Neither the UK nor America are homogeneous in language usage. Expressions, slang, pronunciations and overtones all vary within national boundaries as much as between them. And, as has many race related issues raised on SOF, experience is different dependent also on the hue of one's skin or the origin of one's ancestors.
Originally posted by Russ:
Was it GBS said that the Americans and English are two nations divided by a common language ?
quote:I disagree, for all the reasons we've mentioned upthread.
Originally posted by Pancho:
I don't think the us of the word "niggardly" in the U.S. is as problematic as it's being portrayed by some on this thread. Anybody who has been through the U.S. school system would've encountered the word a number of times between the 7th and 11th grades through Dickens, or Austen, or Melville or a number of different authors. In this case the solution isn't "be careful with what you say", it's "here's a dictionary and here's a subscription to the Book-of-the-Month Club for you".
quote:That's true. I've indicated that there's an age dimension, and suspect there are rural/urban issues also, as well as regional variations.
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:This bloody well annoys me. Neither the UK nor America are homogeneous in language usage. Expressions, slang, pronunciations and overtones all vary within national boundaries as much as between them.
Originally posted by Russ:
Was it GBS said that the Americans and English are two nations divided by a common language ?
quote:True, but a bit off-topic as no one here is doing that.
Originally posted by Russ:
If you go around labelling this usage as "acceptable" or that usage as "offensive" without any qualifier as to which people in which places might find it acceptable or offensive, then it can sound awfully like saying that American usage or Guardian-reader usage (sorry - don't know the US equivalent - national left-leaning newspaper) is normative for the rest of the world.
