Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Re: 'manned/unmanned' and gender neutralisation #148358
09/28/05 02:22 PM
09/28/05 02:22 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
R'lyeh
zmjezhd Offline
Carpal Tunnel
zmjezhd  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
R'lyeh
undeflowered

Ah, I see.



Ceci n'est pas un seing.
Re: 'manned/unmanned' and gender neutralisation #148359
09/28/05 02:30 PM
09/28/05 02:30 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055
Berlin
B
belligerentyouth Offline OP
old hand
belligerentyouth  Offline OP
old hand
B
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055
Berlin
> considerations of gender do not obscure and, in fact, have merit

I certainly think there is merit in making communication more accessible to everyone and that GN language can facilitate that. My point was that it isn't all that black and white. Clearly there are *some cases where GN versions do obscure the direct meaning or complicate matters (see above). Oh, well. Touchy topic, no doubt. I don't see all the advocates of PC and GN language come to the rescue when people get into linguistic quagmires over certain wording, but they come runnning when they find a combination of letters with 'man' in it though. Maybe we should just ban all but 'it' as a 3rd person next;-)


Re: 'manned/unmanned' and gender neutralisation #148360
09/28/05 03:31 PM
09/28/05 03:31 PM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
New York City
I
inselpeter Offline
Pooh-Bah
inselpeter  Offline
Pooh-Bah
I
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
New York City
Belli,

Agreed, in general. A rule of thumb

Don't use the gn equivalent if there isn't one.

(The language is moving toward using "they," which don't bother me none atall.)


Re: wait for it #148361
09/28/05 04:10 PM
09/28/05 04:10 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
R'lyeh
zmjezhd Offline
Carpal Tunnel
zmjezhd  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
R'lyeh
(The language is moving toward using "they," which don't bother me none atall.)

Singular, gender-neutral they has been in use since around Chaucer's time. Give it a couple of more years and it should re-arrive.

http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxgender.html

Language Log has some choice postings on it, too.




Ceci n'est pas un seing.
Re: wait for it #148362
09/28/05 04:48 PM
09/28/05 04:48 PM
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
B
belMarduk Offline
Carpal Tunnel
belMarduk  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
In Québec, we have an expression that goes, “Il cherche toujours la bête noire” (he’s always looking for the black beast) to mean somebody who always looks for insults even when no insult is present, or intended.

Saying that a border post is unmanned in no way implies that only men are able to work at this post. There is no subtle, hidden meaning in the word that says men are better than women and that only men could possibly work at a border post, and no possible way it can be interpreted as demeaning to women.

As to nouns, it does make sense to have more accurate nomenclature. Mailman is a noun that describes a man that delivers mail. It doesn’t imply that only men can do this job, however it is an inaccurate noun for a woman doing this job. Having a female variation makes sense. In the case of mailman, the accepted term here is postage carrier, which is gender neutral, and accurate also.

I’ve read texts that alternate pronouns religiously, “he” in one sentence, “she” in the other, “one” (as in “one can use the wrench to…), “they” and so on – and I found it extremely cumbersome and hard to follow. There is no flow to a text created in this way. Women are not elevated or helped by this, and I say it is foolish to think it is an improvement.

There are real barriers affecting the elevation of women to the level that men have – in some places women are still considered chattel, in others, women are tortured and discarded like refuse. Women should get over being insulted about a booth being “unmanned” and move on to real issue.

I’m not saying women shouldn’t be vigilant in assuring that they not be subclassed, I’m saying that we should be smart enough to judge when something is really meant to insult or demean, and when something is not, and to put our energies into the real problems affecting women.


“Arrête de voir les bibittes où y’en a pas ! “ (Stop seeing bugs where there are none.)

And lastly, “Fait une femme de toi.” – (Make a woman of yourself.) Be mature and be intelligent. The booth is unmanned. Get over it dag nabbit.



Re: wait for it #148363
09/28/05 04:59 PM
09/28/05 04:59 PM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
New York City
I
inselpeter Offline
Pooh-Bah
inselpeter  Offline
Pooh-Bah
I
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
New York City
>>Singular, gender-neutral they has been in use since around Chaucer's time. Give it a couple of more years and it should re-arrive.<<

I was being conservative in the hope of *avoiding* a jibe -- that's I get when I don't attribute: I was paraphrasing Bryan Garner whose book I mentioned earlier.
;-)


Re: wait for it #148364
09/28/05 06:04 PM
09/28/05 06:04 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
R'lyeh
zmjezhd Offline
Carpal Tunnel
zmjezhd  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
R'lyeh
Well, then I wasn't jibing you, but tweaking Mr Garner's nose. He should know better. (I just looked at his entry on sexism, and saw the sentence is question.) Thanks.



Ceci n'est pas un seing.
Re: wait for it #148365
09/28/05 06:25 PM
09/28/05 06:25 PM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
New York City
I
inselpeter Offline
Pooh-Bah
inselpeter  Offline
Pooh-Bah
I
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
New York City
>>tweaking Mr. Garner's nose<<

I suppose he's just touching on the issue for the sake of legal writers who freeze at the idea of using "they."

And thank you, too.


Re: singular they #148366
09/28/05 07:28 PM
09/28/05 07:28 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,538
this too shall pass
tsuwm Offline
Carpal Tunnel
tsuwm  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,538
this too shall pass
expanding on an example from Fowler:

prescrip: Everyone was blowing his nose.
p.c.: Everyone was blowing his/her nose.
extreme p.c.: Everyone was blowing hir nose.
singular they: Everyone was blowing their nose.
or: Everyone was blowing their noses?
or: Everyone were blowing their noses??


Re: singular they #148367
09/28/05 08:01 PM
09/28/05 08:01 PM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
New York City
I
inselpeter Offline
Pooh-Bah
inselpeter  Offline
Pooh-Bah
I
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
New York City
What about the likes of ships in pcese? "My, she was yar!"


Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Jackie 

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,883
Posts224,834
Members9,056
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
Nikki1221, Veezkneez, LOC, Luna, wordie
9056 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 219 guests, and 3 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
LOC 1
Top Posters(All Time)
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,538
LukeJavan8 9,158
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2018 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1
(Release build 20180111)
Page Time: 0.033s Queries: 13 (0.004s) Memory: 3.1823 MB (Peak: 3.3610 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2018-06-21 20:15:34 UTC