| Author |
Message |
Peter Boulding
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2005 9:10 pm
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 14:41:50 GMT, Harvey Van Sickle
<harvey.news@ntlworld.com> wrote in
<Xns96C9A0224C2B5whhvans@62.253.170.163>:
| Quote: | I agree with you; but the BBC's mileage clearly differs.
|
<checks>
You're right. Maybe Bush has had a quiet word with Blair: "that word's got
third world connotations and ain't doing my ratings any good, so tell 'em
African Americans reckon it's racist". The Beeb, which has been running
scared of Blair ever since Hutton, and now has executives watching every
move its journalists make, would probably jump to oblige.
--
Regards
Peter Boulding
pjb@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal music & images: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dana Carpender
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2005 10:28 pm
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
SoCalMike wrote:
| Quote: | Dana Carpender wrote:
My sister started a program for what we then called "retarded
children" at the local Y when she was in high school. The experienced
special ed teacher who acted as her sponsor/advisor said of the term
"developmentally delayed," which was then just being proposed, "We
change our terminology every time parents realize that what we're
saying is that there is something wrong with their child."
"special needs".
ive got a special need for a pastrami and havarti sammitch, with pesto
mayo.
|
The one that really drives me nuts is the whole "people first" language
thing -- heaven forfend you should say, "A blind person" rather than "a
person who is blind" or whatever -- that's not putting the *person*
first. I believe it was Amy who told us that in her classes, one
professor would flunk you for the semester if you said "developmentally
delayed person" instead of "a person with developmental delays."
What garbage. Folks, that's not how the English language works. I live
in a yellow house, not a house that is yellow, in a university town, not
a town that has a university. I'm married to a cute, geeky guy, not a
person of cuteness and geekiness. In English, we put adjectives first.
It's not a hideous disregard for the humanity of the person. It's
goddamned syntax.
Dana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Infinity
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:13 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
Once Upon A Time meirman wrote:
| Quote: | In alt.english.usage on Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:45:59 GMT
ebenONE@tampabay.ARE-ARE.com.unmunge (Hactar) posted:
I use a wheelchair, and "differently abled" is a crock. "Differently
abled" my ass -- there's nothing I can do that can't be also done
(probably easier or neater) by a mature, stock human.
How do you feel about handicapped vs. disabled?
|
I'd put 10 bucks on the handicapped, but that fight could last all
night.
**
Captain Infinity
..."CRIPPLE FIGHT!!" --Cartman
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:35 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
Peter Boulding wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 14:41:50 GMT, Harvey Van Sickle
harvey.news@ntlworld.com> wrote in
Xns96C9A0224C2B5whhvans@62.253.170.163>:
I agree with you; but the BBC's mileage clearly differs.
checks
You're right. Maybe Bush has had a quiet word with Blair: "that
word's got third world connotations and ain't doing my ratings any
good, so tell 'em African Americans reckon it's racist". The Beeb,
which has been running scared of Blair ever since Hutton, and now has
executives watching every move its journalists make, would probably
jump to oblige.
|
And yet it's still in use on the BBC website. How do you account for
that?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/americas/05/katrina/html/evacuation.stm
"States across America are taking in refugees, or making plans to do so
in the coming days ... Texas has faced the largest volume of refugees,
currently taking in more than 239,000 ... "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4215390.stm
""You gotta leave 'em - let's go," Mr Mooney shouted back at her,
knowing there was no way an overcrowded refugee shelter could take in
pets ..."
.... and more besides.
--
John Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:51 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
Dana Carpender wrote:
| Quote: |
What garbage. Folks, that's not how the English language works. I
live in a yellow house, not a house that is yellow, in a university
town, not a town that has a university. I'm married to a cute, geeky
guy, not a person of cuteness and geekiness. In English, we put
adjectives first.
|
And, if I may point out as knight errant before those here present,
have done so from time immemorial ...
--
John "poster extraordinaire" Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dana Carpender
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 6:04 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
John Dean wrote:
| Quote: | Dana Carpender wrote:
What garbage. Folks, that's not how the English language works. I
live in a yellow house, not a house that is yellow, in a university
town, not a town that has a university. I'm married to a cute, geeky
guy, not a person of cuteness and geekiness. In English, we put
adjectives first.
And, if I may point out as knight errant before those here present,
have done so from time immemorial ...
|
Bloody Normans.
Dana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 7:01 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on 6 Sep 2005 01:10:47 -0700 "Arfur Million"
<arfur_million@hotmail.com> posted:
| Quote: |
Yes, it only says "esp.", but I don't remember hearing the word when
Bengalis went inland because of typhoons, or during the last tsunami.
IIRC, "refugees" was used to describe the columns of people who fled
their war-torn cities on foot in WWII, but who were still in their own
|
I don't go back that far, and right now, I can't picture it either
way.
| Quote: | country - but I take your point, it is generally used for people who
have left their country.
from war, religious persecution, political troubles, natural
disaster, etc.; a displaced person.
"Displaced person" is a synonym or a conclusion, more than a
definition. We would need to know what a displaced person was.
I'm not crazy about evacuee either. I'd like to see a definition of
that, but am too tired to look.
The on-line dictionaries that I've looked at give a definition of
"evacuee" as "a person evacuated from a place of danger" which looks
|
That's a big part of what bothers me. If the emergency authorities
say people should leave, and someone leaves, I think it is patronizing
to call them evacuees, as if the government evacuated them. Only if
someone else provides transportation would I use the word evacuee, and
in the case of New Orleans, that was no one at first, and only 10 to
20% of those who left at most even now.
| Quote: | about right for many of the displaced people, but not (I assume) those
who left of their own accord before the hurricane struck.
|
Oh, I wrote the above before I read this.
| Quote: | I get the impression that the British media use "evacuee" more often
than "refugee", perhaps for the reasons you give, but both sound OK to
my ears, despite the little problems with both words.
Regards,
Arfur
|
Refugee comes from fugo, fugere, fugi, fugitus, iirc. To flee.
But that prefix re- changes things a bit. Back to where? I know
etymology is not proof of meaning, but I have a problem using refugee
for a lot of these people. I think they should be called fugees.
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage
--
My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences.
For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about.
When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.
If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years | Brooklyn 12 years
Indianapolis 7 years | Now in
Chicago 6 years | Baltimore 22 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 7:01 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on 6 Sep 2005 07:35:04 -0700 "Arfur Million"
<arfur_million@hotmail.com> posted:
| Quote: |
Peter Boulding wrote:
On 6 Sep 2005 01:10:47 -0700, "Arfur Million" <arfur_million@hotmail.com
wrote in <1125994247.584516.278430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>:
I get the impression that the British media use "evacuee" more often
than "refugee"
Not so.
As Nick Spalding and others have already commented, "evacuee" has specific
WW2 connotations in the UK and I'm sure it couldn't be used to refer to
those who fled a city with no prearranged haven waiting for them.
But this is exactly how it is being used in UK media reports, see
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4217034.stm> for an example
of one such report.
Of course, I cannot prove that "evacuee" is being used more often than
"refugee" (the BBC site has 15 hits for "evacuee" and "Katrina", and 14
for "refugeee" and "Katrina"), but it is certainly being used freely.
|
How many hits for "fugees' and "Katrina"?
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage
--
My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences.
For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about.
When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.
If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years | Brooklyn 12 years
Indianapolis 7 years | Now in
Chicago 6 years | Baltimore 22 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 7:01 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on Tue, 06 Sep 2005 01:40:32 GMT
ebenONE@tampabay.ARE-ARE.com.unmunge (Hactar) posted:
This is in answer to today's post by you. I wrote this yesterday, but
thought I should wait to see your answer to my question before
possibly annoying you greatly. As I have been known to do to others.
:~)
| Quote: | You can claim for yourself whatever label you like - handicapped,
differently-abled, involuntarially-rolling-resistance-improved,
...Hactar (that last one seems to work well enough) - and most people
will probably respect that, but you are differently-abled.
We all are, really.
Fine, but the label only seems to be applied to one class of people, not
"people in general". It's useless when applied to everyone (Like "he
look-a like a man". Duh, most "he"s do.), and most handicapped reject
that label. It is others who want to use it.
|
Well,
"Abled" is not a word afaik, and only appears afaicr, in "disabled".
They seem to be admitting the problem with "disabled", that it means
someone can't do some things. "Handicapped" never meant that. It
only meant that it took more time or more effort or more something.
Golfers have a handicap. It's the number of strokes they usually need
to finish the course, compared to par.
IIUC, horses have two kinds of handicap.
The simple one is weights that horses with light-weight jockies have
to carry, to avoid giving those horses and jockies an advantage.
The complicated one is related to those who keep track of the
performance of horses and try to predict which will win. I guess to
do a good job, they should keep track of jockies too.
But in both cases, they are usually describing thoroughbred horses and
talented jockies.
These examples don't have negative connotations, and no one in golf or
horse racing thinks the term relates to begging with a cap in hand.
Why is "handicapped" so disparaged among some/many/most of those that
the word was intended to describe.
well put.
I think this is
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage
--
My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences.
For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about.
When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.
If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years | Brooklyn 12 years
Indianapolis 7 years | Now in
Chicago 6 years | Baltimore 22 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:48 pm
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
Dana Carpender wrote:
| Quote: | John Dean wrote:
Dana Carpender wrote:
What garbage. Folks, that's not how the English language works. I
live in a yellow house, not a house that is yellow, in a university
town, not a town that has a university. I'm married to a cute,
geeky guy, not a person of cuteness and geekiness. In English, we
put adjectives first.
And, if I may point out as knight errant before those here present,
have done so from time immemorial ...
Bloody Normans.
|
Exqueeze ME but Norman Wisdom is venerated in Albania.
--
John Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dana Carpender
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 12:39 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
John Dean wrote:
| Quote: | Dana Carpender wrote:
John Dean wrote:
Dana Carpender wrote:
What garbage. Folks, that's not how the English language works. I
live in a yellow house, not a house that is yellow, in a university
town, not a town that has a university. I'm married to a cute,
geeky guy, not a person of cuteness and geekiness. In English, we
put adjectives first.
And, if I may point out as knight errant before those here present,
have done so from time immemorial ...
Bloody Normans.
Exqueeze ME but Norman Wisdom is venerated in Albania.
|
I thought Norman was in Ireland.
Dana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hactar
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 1:28 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
In article <LtGTe.91204$084.74153@attbi_s22>,
Dana Carpender <dcarpend@kivanospam.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
John Dean wrote:
Dana Carpender wrote:
John Dean wrote:
Dana Carpender wrote:
What garbage. Folks, that's not how the English language works. I
live in a yellow house, not a house that is yellow, in a university
town, not a town that has a university. I'm married to a cute,
geeky guy, not a person of cuteness and geekiness. In English, we
put adjectives first.
And, if I may point out as knight errant before those here present,
have done so from time immemorial ...
Bloody Normans.
Exqueeze ME but Norman Wisdom is venerated in Albania.
I thought Norman was in Ireland.
|
Maybe, but there's also no mayonnaise there.
--
"Never go off on tangents, which are lines that intersect a curve at only
one point and were discovered by Euclid, who lived in the 6th century,
which was an era dominated by the Goths, who lived in what we now know
as Poland." - Unknown from Nov. 1998 issue of Infosystems Executive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick Spalding
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 1:31 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
Dana Carpender wrote, in <LtGTe.91204$084.74153@attbi_s22>
on Wed, 07 Sep 2005 18:39:39 GMT:
| Quote: |
John Dean wrote:
Dana Carpender wrote:
John Dean wrote:
Dana Carpender wrote:
What garbage. Folks, that's not how the English language works. I
live in a yellow house, not a house that is yellow, in a university
town, not a town that has a university. I'm married to a cute,
geeky guy, not a person of cuteness and geekiness. In English, we
put adjectives first.
And, if I may point out as knight errant before those here present,
have done so from time immemorial ...
Bloody Normans.
Exqueeze ME but Norman Wisdom is venerated in Albania.
I thought Norman was in Ireland.
The Isle of Man the last time I heard. |
--
Nick Spalding |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Bishop
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 3:06 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
In article <dfl8rv$59d$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk>, "John Dean"
<john-dean@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Peter Boulding wrote:
[refugee in reference to, well, refugees] |
| Quote: | You're right. Maybe Bush has had a quiet word with Blair: "that
word's got third world connotations and ain't doing my ratings any
good, so tell 'em African Americans reckon it's racist". The Beeb,
which has been running scared of Blair ever since Hutton, and now has
executives watching every move its journalists make, would probably
jump to oblige.
And yet it's still in use on the BBC website. How do you account for
that?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/americas/05/katrina/html/evacuation.stm
"States across America are taking in refugees, or making plans to do so
in the coming days ... Texas has faced the largest volume of refugees,
currently taking in more than 239,000 ... "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4215390.stm
""You gotta leave 'em - let's go," Mr Mooney shouted back at her,
knowing there was no way an overcrowded refugee shelter could take in
pets ..."
... and more besides.
|
I was wondering-how much more trouble and money would it take to allow
refugees to bring pets with them? I can see pet owners being given maybe a
separate section, and the pets kept in kennels rather than with the rest
of the population.
This would help convince people to leave where, without their pets they
might want to stay. It would also give them some deserved mental health
while they are relocated and make this easier for them. There will always
be volunteers to help with the pet section and their needs.
I heard about a private citizen who chartered a helicoptor, filled with
pet food, then landed on the roof of a hospital where he offloaded it for
the man (people?) who were in the hospital taking care of animals after
the hospital had been abandoned. There were several dozens of dogs and
cats there.
--
chalres |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 3:37 am
Post subject: Re: "Refugees"? |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 21:06:25 GMT, ctbishop@earthlink.netttt (Charles
Bishop) wrote:
| Quote: | I was wondering-how much more trouble and money would it take to allow
refugees to bring pets with them? I can see pet owners being given maybe a
separate section, and the pets kept in kennels rather than with the rest
of the population.
|
I'd hate to be separated from my dog, but - at the same time - I don't
want to be in a shelter where someone's pit bull or Rottweiler could
get loose. You can't have a policy where this dog is admitted, but
that dog isn't.
I'm not at all sure that I'd want to be the helicopter pilot or
airboat driver that has a terrified cat on board, either.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in