| Author |
Message |
james
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:20 pm
Post subject: Re: Difference between descendent and descendant |
|
|
X-No-Archive: yes
In message <1131345834.384953.222950@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Raymond S. Wise <mplsray@my-deja.com> writes
| Quote: |
JF wrote:
Too right. What's wrong with Negro or Negroid?
Most educated English-speaking people now find "Negro" offensive in
most cases and "Negroid" offensive in all cases, that's what.
|
Well I'm all in favour of patronising groups to preserve their feelings
of alienation -- to maintain their perception of being marginalised and
different from the superiority of the dominant group that decides what
are suitable or unsuitable names for them, but this constant changing of
names is annoying. I've got a CD featuring Paul Robeson "20 great Negro
spirituals from the master" -- which is how it's billed on the sleeve
and on QVC. I've not been aware of any hoo-ha about the billing from
negros and none from Mr Robeson. Nevertheless I'm willing to keep in
with the rulings of the white majority who decide such things by
sticking a label over the word 'negro spirituals' but what should I
write in its place? There's not enough room for: "Religious songs by
tinted ex-slaves with deep voices".
I can understand countries such as Zambia or Zimbabee wanting to change
their names to Azania or something like that because their United Nation
staff are getting pissed off at being tail-end charlies in the canteen
queue, but did those Indian chappies who decided to change the name of
Bombay to something unpronounceable give a moment's thought about the
endless trouble they would cause millions of restaurant chefs who've
given the best years of their lives developing regional names for
dishes?
--
James Follett
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 5:21 am
Post subject: Re: Difference between descendent and descendant |
|
|
james wrote:
| Quote: | X-No-Archive: yes
In message <1131345834.384953.222950@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Raymond S. Wise <mplsray@my-deja.com> writes
JF wrote:
Too right. What's wrong with Negro or Negroid?
Most educated English-speaking people now find "Negro" offensive in
most cases and "Negroid" offensive in all cases, that's what.
Well I'm all in favour of patronising groups to preserve their feelings
of alienation -- to maintain their perception of being marginalised and
different from the superiority of the dominant group that decides what
are suitable or unsuitable names for them, but this constant changing of
names is annoying. I've got a CD featuring Paul Robeson "20 great Negro
spirituals from the master" -- which is how it's billed on the sleeve
and on QVC. I've not been aware of any hoo-ha about the billing from
negros and none from Mr Robeson. Nevertheless I'm willing to keep in
with the rulings of the white majority who decide such things by
sticking a label over the word 'negro spirituals' but what should I
write in its place? There's not enough room for: "Religious songs by
tinted ex-slaves with deep voices".
|
Interestingly, here again there is a parallel situation in French. The
term "negro" is a pejorative term in that language, as offensive as,
and perhaps more offensive than, "nègre." But "Negro-spiritual,"
borrowed from English, is not only perfectly acceptable, it is, as far
as I can see, the only standard French term for that type of song.
If you object that these distinctinctions between acceptable and
unacceptable are illogical, I am quick to agree with you. They are. It
all comes down to a question of usage. There is no logical reason why
"Polack" should be one of the most offensive ethnic terms in English,
while the word itself is simply the Polish word for "Polish person."
But it is. There's no logical reason why "colored people" should be a
quite unacceptable term while "person of color" is not only acceptable,
but in fact marks the user as an anti-racist (and guilty of the sin of
"political correctness" according to some opposed to the term). But it
is, and that's the reality we face when speaking the language. (And the
only human language which might make a claim to being strictly
logical--although how well that claim might stand up under scrutiny--is
Loglan/Lojban.)
| Quote: |
I can understand countries such as Zambia or Zimbabee wanting to change
their names to Azania or something like that because their United Nation
staff are getting pissed off at being tail-end charlies in the canteen
queue, but did those Indian chappies who decided to change the name of
Bombay to something unpronounceable give a moment's thought about the
endless trouble they would cause millions of restaurant chefs who've
given the best years of their lives developing regional names for
dishes?
--
James Follett
|
I think the whole business ceased decades ago to be a matter of one or
another group's decisions about the language. Now some members of all
groups in society, both members of the majority and members of
minorities, are sensitive to the question of acceptable terminology.
(And yes, I am well aware that some people frown on that particular use
of "minorities.")
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the Omrud
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 5:53 am
Post subject: Re: Difference between descendent and descendant |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise <mplsray@my-deja.com> spake thusly:
| Quote: | If you object that these distinctinctions between acceptable and
unacceptable are illogical, I am quick to agree with you. They are. It
all comes down to a question of usage. There is no logical reason why
"Polack" should be one of the most offensive ethnic terms in English,
while the word itself is simply the Polish word for "Polish person."
But it is. There's no logical reason why "colored people" should be a
quite unacceptable term while "person of color" is not only acceptable,
but in fact marks the user as an anti-racist (and guilty of the sin of
"political correctness" according to some opposed to the term). But it
is, and that's the reality we face when speaking the language. (And the
only human language which might make a claim to being strictly
logical--although how well that claim might stand up under scrutiny--is
Loglan/Lojban.)
|
Things may be different in London and its area, but to me, "person of
colour" is not yet well enough established enough in UK English to go
unnoticed as a straightforward term. It sounds either as though the
speaker has wimped out from saying "black/asian", or as though it
relates to a member of the Blue Man Group. "coloured person" just
sounds old fashioned - it's what one's elderly parent might say, but
it's not entirely unacceptable.
--
David
=====
replace usenet with the
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:12 am
Post subject: Re: Difference between descendent and descendant |
|
|
Tony Cooper wrote:
| Quote: | On 8 Nov 2005 20:09:28 -0800, "Raymond S. Wise" <mplsray@my-deja.com
wrote:
Your time estimate is off, I think. I know a fellow of around 80 years
old whose mother, he reports, said "nigger" as a neutral term--he's
originally from southern Indiana.
Too bad we can't ask the mother if the term was considered neutral to
her and to the person she was describing, or only neutral to her.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
|
Well, by "neutral" I meant, simply, "non-racist." It's like the word
"niggardly": It may well be offensive no matter what the intent of the
speaker, but the intent of the speaker is nevertheless a true aspect of
the situation.
I've read a couple of anecdotes that look at it from the other side,
from the point of view of a black man who was offended.
I've told both stories before, the first of which I read many years
prior to my introduction to the Internet, and one which I read on the
Internet. Just now, I was fortunately able to locate a version of the
first one, which is said to come from Hayakawa's *Language in Thought
and Action.* I've read that book, so it's likely that was where I first
read it:
| Quote: | From a post to rec.arts.sf.fandom by Marty Helgesen which can be read
in Google Groups archive at |
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.fandom/msg/e09b52ab93ba57b5
[quote]
As I was typing this I suddenly remembered a passage in Hayakawa's
_Language in Thought and Action_. It's been years since I read it, so
I'm fuzzy on some of the details, but Hayakawa, then a professor, wrote
that a black colleague once told him that when he was a young man,
probably when he was in college, he was hitchhiking in a rural area in
the West or Midwest. This probably would have been in the 1920s or 30s.
He stopped at a farmhouse seeking food and shelter. Instead of turning
him away or giving him some food at the door and letting him sleep in
the barn the farmer and his wife invited him in. They gave him a room
in their house to sleep in and let him eat with them at the table. The
only problem was that the farmer kept referring to him as a "nigger",
saying things like, "Imagine that. We've got a real nigger staying with
us." Finally the young man could take it no longer and said, "You've
been very kind to me, and I appreciate it, but why do you keep calling
me a nigger?" The farmer replied with some puzzlement, "What do you
mean? You are a nigger, ain't you?" Was the farmer a racist because he
called the black man a nigger? No, his actions showed he was not a
racist. He used the word "nigger" because that was the word he knew for
a black man and he was unaware of its derogatory connotations.
[end quote]
The other story was told by a black American Peace Corps worker who
tried to convince Haitians speaking Creole not to use the term "neg,"
since it is derived from "nègre." The Haitians did not see the point:
To them, "neg" meant nothing more than "fellow," "man," and on some
occasions, "black man."
As for the offensiveness of words, back in June, Steve Hayes said,
"I've sometimes been mildly exasperated at Raymond Wise's occasional
priggishness in being offensive while rebuking other people for
offensiveness that exists only in his own imagination[...]" Since I am
a descriptivist, Steve's comments are absurd on their face: I have
never, ever, identified something as being offensive which someone else
had not already identified as being offensive to them. However, I'd
like to make a point which was made within the last few months in a
letter to the editor in either the St. Paul Pioneer Press or the
Minneapolis Star Tribune. The letter writer said that his father told
him any word which someone finds offensive is by definition an
offensive word. The real question in such a situation is whether the
person offended has the power, whether political power or the power of
persuasion, to convince others that his point of view is one they
should adopt themselves.
So, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a neutral term. The
point of view of the speaker and the audience are always involved.
(I've mentioned this before, but it seems to me that the term "nigger"
in *The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn* was not a neutral term, but
instead a euphemism for "slave.")
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:12 am
Post subject: Re: Difference between descendent and descendant |
|
|
Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | Raymond S. Wise wrote:
[...]
It's not only the case in English, either. In French, "nègre" is
almost as offensive as the English "nigger." The word used instead
is
"Noir" (that is, "black"). [...]
Nonetheless, "noir" was, I understand, once as rude in French as
"black" was in English. Plus ca change, quoi? And French was slower
than English: I remember a perfectly respectable Frenchwoman saying
"petit-nègre" to describe her grasp of English in about 1980, when
only jerk-offs had said "nigger" in English for about a hundred
years.
--
Mike.
|
Your time estimate is off, I think. I know a fellow of around 80 years
old whose mother, he reports, said "nigger" as a neutral term--he's
originally from southern Indiana.
I did some research about "nègre" and associated terms in French.
First, I asked a French friend of mine whether "petit-nègre"
(literally "little Negro," this is probably best translated as "broken
French" in its original sense and "bad French" in its extended,
metaphorical sense) and "nègre" (meaning "ghost writer") were still
terms in good standing. She said that they were.
So I went to a library at the University of Minnesota and checked with
a number of recent French-French and French-English dictionaries. Only
one indicated that "nègre" in the sense of "ghost writer" was
pejorative, while another indicated that it was an informal term:
However, I was unable to find in these dictionaries any reference to
another term for the same thing. (The Canadian site
www.granddictionnaire.com has some other terms, but no French-French
site does.)
One dictionary identified "parler petit nègre" as informal, but it was
the only one. No dictionaries showed it as offensive.
Another term based upon "nègre" which was not identified as offensive
is "nègre en chemise" ("Negro in a shirt") which is the name of a
chocolate dessert covered in whipped cream.
There are also some technical terms which go by the name of "nègre,"
one of which is a type of light-blocking screen in moviemaking which is
called in English a "gobo." The Grand Dictionnaire identifies "nègre"
in this sense as a "terme normalisé par un organisme international,"
that is, "a term standardized by an international organization."
I was wrong about "negro spiritual" in French not having a synonym.
According to the *Dictionnaire des difficultés du français
d'aujourd'hui* ("Dictionary of difficulties in today's French") by
Daniel Péchoin and Bernard Dauphin, Paris, Larousse, (C) 1998, "negro
spiritual" [my translation follows] "is a bit old-fashioned. One says
instead 'gospel' or 'gospel song.'"
Another surprise is that the etymologists for the *Grand Robert* (the
closest thing in French to the OED) consider the offensive French term
"négro" to come not from English or Spanish, but from the French
"nègre" plus the popular ending "-o." The would appear to be the same
"o" with which one makes the informal terms such as "dico" from
"dictionnaire" and "franco-américain" from "français-américain." The
related terms "négro-africain" and "négro-américain," which also are
considered to come from "nègre" plus "-o," are not considered
offensive.
And here, from the Grand Robert, is another case of parallelism: From
the entry for "nègre, négresse" [my translation]: "Dated, pejorative
(Racist term except when employed by Blacks among themselves.)"
Under the entry "négro," the Grand Robert has the following remark [my
translation]: "While 'nègre' was normal usage, 'négro' was simply an
informal usage. Now that 'nègre' itself has become, at least in
certain usages, pejorative and racist, replaced by 'noir'), 'négro' is
insulting and racist."
The dictionary, which dates "négro" to 1888, gives an example from
Proust. From *À l'ombre des jeunes filles en fleurs,* page 536: A
woman addresses a black man, saying,
« Bonjour, négro ! » - C'est un rien ! - En tout cas, ce
qualificatif ne plut pas au noir : « moi, négro, dit-il avec colère
à Mme Blatin, mais toi, chameau ! »
My translation:
"_Bonjour, négro!_" - It was nothing! - In any case, this term did not
please the black man: "Me, _négro,_" he said angrily to Madame Blatin,
"but you, bitch!"
"Chameau" is an insulting term usually used against women. One of my
friends translates it as "a bitch on wheels." Literally, it simply
means "camel." And the black man is speaking broken French (or perhaps
a French-based pidgin), that is "petit-nègre."
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:12 am
Post subject: Re: Difference between descendent and descendant |
|
|
On 8 Nov 2005 20:09:28 -0800, "Raymond S. Wise" <mplsray@my-deja.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | Your time estimate is off, I think. I know a fellow of around 80 years
old whose mother, he reports, said "nigger" as a neutral term--he's
originally from southern Indiana.
Too bad we can't ask the mother if the term was considered neutral to |
her and to the person she was describing, or only neutral to her.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JF
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Difference between descendent and descendant |
|
|
X-No-Archive: yes
In message <1131517505.582450.163310@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Raymond S. Wise <mplsray@my-deja.com> writes
| Quote: | "Imagine that. We've got a real nigger staying with
us." Finally the young man could take it no longer and said, "You've
been very kind to me, and I appreciate it, but why do you keep calling
me a nigger?" The farmer replied with some puzzlement, "What do you
mean? You are a nigger, ain't you?" Was the farmer a racist because he
called the black man a nigger? No, his actions showed he was not a
racist. He used the word "nigger" because that was the word he knew for
a black man and he was unaware of its derogatory connotations.
|
I was recently approached by a British Airports Authority security
munchkin and requested to put away the book I was reading: Agatha
Christie's "Ten Little Niggers". At least he had the decency not to tell
me who the villain was.
Funny old world.
--
James Follett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bertel Lund Hansen
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:07 pm
Post subject: Re: Difference between descendent and descendant |
|
|
Mike Lyle skrev:
| Quote: | Nonetheless, "noir" was, I understand, once as rude in French as
"black" was in English.
|
That is a common tendency. My Danish teacher had a small verse to
remind us of this point: Basically the rhyming verse said that no
matter what you call a sausage, the taste will remain the same.
In Danish we have a succession of names for people who are less
intelligent than the average person. The politically correct word
changes from time to time, but after a few years the new one is
just as derogative as the old one(s), and the race starts all
over.
--
Bertel
Denmark |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in