| Author |
Message |
Peter T. Daniels
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:41 am
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
Joanne Marinelli wrote:
| Quote: | As to what makes one Shiite Persian and a Sunni Arab not Persian, (though I
|
Arabs aren't Persian. Anywhere in the world.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joanne Marinelli
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:03 am
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:4140EA37.6BB4@worldnet.att.net...
| Quote: | Joanne Marinelli wrote:
As to what makes one Shiite Persian and a Sunni Arab not Persian,
(though I
Arabs aren't Persian. Anywhere in the world.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net
|
Okay, but I do not really know the difference between Arabic and Semitic as
used to refer to Middle East, or the Islamic world. I have the same problem
with Jewish, in that sense, whether it is a cultural distinction only, or if
there are racial characteristics as well which distinguish one from the
other.
Joanne |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:03:52 GMT "Joanne
Marinelli" <Jozanny@yahoo.com> posted:
| Quote: |
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:4140EA37.6BB4@worldnet.att.net...
Joanne Marinelli wrote:
As to what makes one Shiite Persian and a Sunni Arab not Persian,
(though I
Arabs aren't Persian. Anywhere in the world.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net
Okay, but I do not really know the difference between Arabic and Semitic as
|
Semitic is really, or originally, a language category, including
Arabic, Aramaic, Hebrew, maybe Amharic???, and some others that
probably aren't spoken anymore.
IIRC, antisemite and antisemitic were coined by a hate-filled German
"scientist" or "sociologist" or something to give a
scientific-sounding term to hatred of Jews, to make it seem more
palatable to others, as if it were based on science. AFAIK, this was
the first time a meaning attached to "semitic" was divorced from the
notion of language, because he only meant Jews, not Arabs or others
who spoke Semitic languages. I don't know if he spelled it with a
hyphen after "anti" or not, but I don't use a hyphen, because
separating the two parts of the word adds to the confusion. It makes
it seem like there were Semites to be against, or that he was against
all who spoke semitic languages. At least one of those is false, and
spelling it as one word without a hyphen lessens the impression a bit.
Once in a while, someone who has in mind the de facto meaning of
antisemite uses the word to describe someone who plots or wars against
Jews and also speaks a Semitic language, and some of those times, the
person so described will object that he is a Semite too.
There are loads of examples in English where a word means something
other than its etymology would imply, but rather than argue with
someone who says "I'm a Semite so I can't be antisemitic", I would
normally just change the word to "Jew-hater"^^^^. (Although even that
can have a problem in that the meaning is pretty clear (for example
man-hater means someone who hates men.), one might imagine that Jew is
an adjective there (as in boy-millionaire, child star, Greek king etc.
Most of these are not hyphenated, but of course sometimes people will
be listening and not reading. Even though the adjective form is
"Jewish", those who hate Jews seem to use "Jew" as an adjective, in
order to sound offensive, as in "Jew-salesman".)^^
| Quote: | used to refer to Middle East, or the Islamic world. I have the same problem
with Jewish, in that sense, whether it is a cultural distinction only, or if
there are racial characteristics as well which distinguish one from the
other.
|
Jews come in all races, and so there are no racial characteristics
that differentiate Jews from non-Jews. Any child of a Jewish mother
is a Jew. And anyone who learns and accepts the beliefs of Judaism,
and commits himself to their practice can become a Jew, and people of
all races have. There have been converts, varying numbers of them each
year, for the last 3300 years. And in fact, all the Israelites and
the mixed multitude of non-Israelites who left Egypt in the Exodus
converted at Mount Sinai to what is now called Judaism.
In the USA, even though one can find Jews of all skin and hair colors
and with all facial features, most Jews are Ashkenazim and most of
them have some similarity in appearance. In Israel, Ashkenazim are
only about half the Jewish population, and groups that are small in
number in the US are not so small proportionally. The diversity is
more noticeable at first than in the US, yet after a while not noticed
at all.
"Jewish" is a more versatile word than "Jew" and "Judaism". Although
there are those who would argue for a non-traditional definition of
the latter^^^, even they have definitions, and there is a clear
traditional definition of each word.
OTOH, "Jewish" can be used more broadly. It's not unreasonable (and
even if it were, people including me do it all the time) to talk about
Jewish food, or Jewish-style food, or a Jewish neighborhood, or a
Jewish sense of humor, or a Jewish outlook on the world (the last,
maybe the last two, is/are? undoubtedly influenced in whole or in part
by Judaism, but sometimes that's not obvious. Especially since
different parts of Judaism can affect various Jews more than other
parts, and other Jews less than those other parts.)
^^^Is this a proper use of "latter"? When there are 3 words and one
wants to refer to the second and third of them, is there a concise
way, without saying "second and third"?
^^^^Also worth pointing out that one is reasonably called a racist, or
a sexist, or an "agist" if s/he holds inaccurate negative stereotypes
about another race, or sex, or age group. And possibly even if he
holds inaccurate *positive* stereotypes about them. Although that
usually doesn't cause many problems, one could argue it's still racist
or sexist etc.
But the word antisemite does not include all people who hold
inaccurate negative or positive stereotypes about Jews. There are lots
of antisemites, but to qualify, they have to have stronger feelings
than many or most sexists and even racists**, who wish no harm. The
prefix "anti-" implies not just that they perceive inaccurately, but
that they are anti-Jews, opposed to Jews in some way or another, at
least in their hearts or minds, whether they act on it or not.
**I say that most sexists and racists wish no harm, because I believe
that the vast majority of Americans (and others, which exactly I don't
know) hold inaccurate stereotypes of the opposite sex or another race
-- they're sexists or racists -- but the majority of *them* might hate
their ex-spouse, if they have one, but don't wish harm on the entire
opposite sex or other race, and don't harbor ill-will against the
other sex or race, against even those they have never met and know
nothing about. The sexists would be sexist, but couldn't be called
anti-female or anti-male. The racists would be racist but most would
pity the other race or think it sad that they don't measure up. But
that doesn't mean they want them to do badly. (This is a major reason
why so many racists deny being racist. Some are just lying and some
are out of touch with their feelings or hiding from them, but many
figure since they don't *want* the other race to fail and don't do
anything to cause it to happen, they are not racist.
AFAIK there is no word parallel to sexist or racist that applies to
Jews or to members of any religion, or to most other groups as well.
But any group name can be prefixed by anti- in order to get an even
stronger meaning.
s/ meirman If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Born west of Pittsburgh Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis, 7 years
Chicago, 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
Baltimore 20 years
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:20 am
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on Thu, 9 Sep 2004 19:43:26 +0000 (UTC) Yusuf B
Gursey <ybg@TheWorld.com> posted:
| Quote: | In sci.lang Tak To <takto@alum.mit.edu.-> wrote in <2N6dnWpcRPxDD93cRVn-hQ@comcast.com>:
: Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
:> Kitay is from Eastern Turkic qIta:y , in the 11th cent and thereabouts
:> the domain of the Liao (originally qIta:*ny*, through sound changes in
:> Eastern Turkic it becomes qIta:y , xIta:y , qita:y etc.). Marco Polo
|
What do the colons, : , mean? I don't think I've seen them before.
(the next to last letter in each of the three examples above appear as
colons.) TIA.
| Quote: | :> knew eastern turkic and probably had turkic interpreters so place
:> names appear in turkic garb and agree with western mongolian and
:> persian sources of that period or shortly after.
: FWIW, the Khitans probably spoke a Mongolic language.
yes. and qIta:*ny* becomes xitan in later mongolian.
:> China is form the Qin dynasty via sanskritor sogdian and persian.
: Or Qin the tribe, Qin the Kingdom, or from <si> (silk), ...
|
s/ meirman If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Born west of Pittsburgh Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis, 7 years
Chicago, 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
Baltimore 20 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jacques Guy
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:26 am
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
Peter Duncanson wrote:
| Quote: | Kitai and China are, in effect, nicknames for the country whose proper name
is Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo.
|
Piss off. Do you know what Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo means?
How far back it dates? Come on, out with it, tell us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jacques Guy
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:01 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
Peter Duncanson wrote:
| Quote: | If it is not the current offical name of the country then I
apologise.
|
It has been the official name of the country for... count'em
50 years. Not even one fiftieth of the age of China. As
for "republic" (gongheguo) it had been a republic before
it was a "people's republic" (renmin gongheguo)--ask
Sun Yat Sen. And long before that it was, like Greece,
like Italy, like Germany, an agglomerate of warring
states, sharing a common language (well, closely
related languages) and a common culture,eventually
united as China. Kitai and China are perfectly
good names, borrowed by different countries at different
times, just like the Romans of Julius Caesar's times
called Gallia what today's Romans call Francia. The proper
name for China is Zhongguo (Chung-Kuo in Giles-Wade).
But since here we are using English, it is "China".
Do you know what the word for "England" is in Chinese?
Would you insist on the Chinese using E.N.G.L.A.N.D.
instead of what they are using? So say "China" for
China. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Odysseus
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:45 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
| Quote: |
Joanne Marinelli wrote:
As to what makes one Shiite Persian and a Sunni Arab not Persian, (though I
Arabs aren't Persian. Anywhere in the world.
|
But just to be confusing, Persian, although an Indo-European
language, is written using the Arabic alphabet (with just a few
additional or modified characters IIANM).
--
Odysseus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:45 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
Jacques Guy wrote:
| Quote: | meirman wrote:
What do the colons, : , mean? I don't think I've seen them before.
(the next to last letter in each of the three examples above appear
as colons.) TIA.
When you use the International Phonetic Alphabet a colon that
the previous sound is pronounced long. So qita:y has a long "a"
|
To the average American, a "long vowel" means something very different from
what it means in the International Phonetic Alphabet. In the IPA, "long"
means the vowel takes more time to pronounce than the ordinary version of
the vowel. In the traditional American system, which was the first one that
I learned, and most likely the first one that meirman learned, a "long 'a'"
is the diphthong [eI], the "a" of "Kate," while a "short 'a'" is [&], the
"a" of "cat."
By the way, I was recently researching the pronunciation of the word "pin's"
(meaning "lapel pin or badge") in French. It's shown as being pronounced
[pins] in several dictionaries, although yesterday I came across one which
showed it as [pinz].
One of those dictionaries was particularly interesting in the light of a
discussion which had gone on in fr.lettres.langue.anglaise . I had asked if
the average French person knew IPA very well. The response was that he did
not. When researching the pronunciation of "pin's," I consulted André
Jouette's *Dictionnaire d'Orthographe et d'Expression Écrite,* published by
Dictionnaires Le Robert. Jouette decided to forgo the use of the IPA in his
dictionary, saying that it was "commode, mais malheureusement encore trop
peu connu du grand public," that is, "useful, but unfortunately still too
little known to the general public." He used his own system, in which [in]
represented IPA [E~] and [in'] represented IPA [in]. He used [s'] to
represent an "s" being pronounced in a final position. As a result, the
pronunciation which Jouette gave for "pin's" was [pin's']!
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yusuf B Gursey
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:47 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
In sci.lang Yusuf B Gursey <ybg@theworld.com> wrote in <222ae656.0409100538.9fbc3ff@posting.google.com>:
: Odysseus <odysseus1479-at@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote in message news:<41414E06.DC49A08E@yahoo-dot.ca>...
: the first attestations of Afrikaans (as opposed to Church Dutch) was
: written in Arabic characters, by Cape Malays.
or modified arabic (don't have my notes but perhaps arabic based malay) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Duncanson
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:59 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 22:06:27 -0400, meirman <meirman@invalid.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Jewish" is a more versatile word than "Jew" and "Judaism". Although
there are those who would argue for a non-traditional definition of
the latter^^^, even they have definitions, and there is a clear
traditional definition of each word.
snip
^^^Is this a proper use of "latter"? When there are 3 words and one
wants to refer to the second and third of them, is there a concise
way, without saying "second and third"?
|
How about "the latter two"?
--
Peter Duncanson
UK (posting from a.e.u) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter T. Daniels
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:06 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
Odysseus wrote:
| Quote: |
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
Joanne Marinelli wrote:
As to what makes one Shiite Persian and a Sunni Arab not Persian, (though I
Arabs aren't Persian. Anywhere in the world.
But just to be confusing, Persian, although an Indo-European
language, is written using the Arabic alphabet (with just a few
additional or modified characters IIANM).
|
No, it's written with the Persian alphabet, which is an adaptation of
the Arabic and in turn formed the basis of many others throughout the
Muslim world.
It's not confusing in the least.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yusuf B Gursey
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:34 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
meirman <meirman@invalid.com> wrote in message news:<ko32k0tebi9kcianeisnssepeqkeuu85fi@4ax.com>...
| Quote: | In alt.english.usage on Thu, 9 Sep 2004 19:43:26 +0000 (UTC) Yusuf B
Gursey <ybg@TheWorld.com> posted:
In sci.lang Tak To <takto@alum.mit.edu.-> wrote in <2N6dnWpcRPxDD93cRVn-hQ@comcast.com>:
: Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
:> Kitay is from Eastern Turkic qIta:y , in the 11th cent and thereabouts
:> the domain of the Liao (originally qIta:*ny*, through sound changes in
:> Eastern Turkic it becomes qIta:y , xIta:y , qita:y etc.). Marco Polo
What do the colons, : , mean? I don't think I've seen them before.
(the next to last letter in each of the three examples above appear as
colons.) TIA.
|
long vowels. Turkic had them in the 11th. cent. later they disappeared.
it is attested for this particular word.
| Quote: |
:> knew eastern turkic and probably had turkic interpreters so place
:> names appear in turkic garb and agree with western mongolian and
:> persian sources of that period or shortly after.
: FWIW, the Khitans probably spoke a Mongolic language.
yes. and qIta:*ny* becomes xitan in later mongolian.
:> China is form the Qin dynasty via sanskritor sogdian and persian.
: Or Qin the tribe, Qin the Kingdom, or from <si> (silk), ...
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yusuf B Gursey
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:38 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
Odysseus <odysseus1479-at@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote in message news:<41414E06.DC49A08E@yahoo-dot.ca>...
| Quote: | "Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
Joanne Marinelli wrote:
As to what makes one Shiite Persian and a Sunni Arab not Persian, (though I
Arabs aren't Persian. Anywhere in the world.
But just to be confusing, Persian, although an Indo-European
language, is written using the Arabic alphabet (with just a few
additional or modified characters IIANM).
|
so what?
Maltese, "although" a Semitic language and a derviative of Arabic, is
written in modified roman script.
the first attestations of Afrikaans (as opposed to Church Dutch) was
written in Arabic characters, by Cape Malays. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jacques Guy
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 4:23 am
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
meirman wrote:
| Quote: | What do the colons, : , mean? I don't think I've seen them before.
(the next to last letter in each of the three examples above appear as
colons.) TIA.
|
When you use the International Phonetic Alphabet a colon that
the previous sound is pronounced long. So qita:y has a long "a" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pat Durkin
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 9:00 pm
Post subject: Re: More stupidities |
|
|
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:4140E9B8.731E@worldnet.att.net...
| Quote: | meirman wrote:
And today the Republicans played politics with a resolution
commemorating the third anniversary of 9/11. Despite well-spoken
opposition, they insisted on inserting a "whereas" that said that the
war in Iraq was against terrorism.
|
Yeah.
They get so clever with words and mixed messages to fool the people that
they find themselves all discombobulated.
Cheney the other day talked about Saddam being hidden and perhaps dead in
the mountains of Pakistan. The announcer said he missed saying Osama's name
twice. The TV clip showed the master of ceremonies helping the VP realize
he had gotten it wrong.
Now, I know that extemporaneous speech does lend itself to spoonerisms and
other errors in reference, but sometimes it gets a bit teejous.
What was that old spoken song with these words? "Life gets teejous, don't
it?" It comes to mind along with the other two lyrics recently mentioned
here: "Cigareets n Whuskey n Wild Wild Women", and "Jack o' Diamonds".) I
think T Texas Tyler recited one of them (as well as the "Deck of Cards".) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in