My sweet shanks, you said:
can we justify the superiority of attitude inherent in the practice of describing a word as ''rude'' or bad mannered? Surely such judgements always redound upon the judge - as one who may not have expanded the compass of his or her tolerance sufficiently to accept differential speech practices of other groups?
This could, from being a purely linguistic analysis, expand to become one concerning the entire issue of liberalism, tolerance, political correctness and the like, but for this Board, perhaps thus far and no further should suffice.My dear sir, I don't believe that I said that that I don't
accept the "differential speech practices of other groups".
I meant only to indicate that I do not like them, a very different thing indeed. There are many things in my life that I accept while not liking them. If possible, I remove myself from the environs of such.
Perhaps I failed to make my main point adequately. I believe that the primary consideration for what is "crude" or not should be based on consideration for others' sensibilities. If I take offense at the floweriest of speeches, it then becomes crude. And if having consideration for others makes me "superior" to those who don't, why then, I must say that I think the adjective is justified.
A large helping of Dixie raspberries to you, sir!
