"A single Chinese..." - Poll
edevils
http://www.proprofs.com/polls/poll/?title=would-you-say-a-chinese-for-a-chinese-person
Linguistic Poll: Would you say "A Chinese" for a Chinese person?
For instance, as in the sentence "I don't recall bumping into a single
Chinese, Russian or Spaniard." Does this usage sound OK to you as a
native English speaker, or does it strike you as odd? The idea for this
poll came from the thread "One Dutch, two French, a single Chinese",
Dec. 11, 2010. Please note: this poll is not publicly listed on the web
site.
Plac
> |http://www.proprofs.com/polls/poll/?title=would-you-say-a-chinese-for...
>
> Linguistic Poll: Would you say "A Chinese" for a Chinese person?
> For instance, as in the sentence "I don't recall bumping into a single
> Chinese, Russian or Spaniard." Does this usage sound OK to you as a
> native English speaker, or does it strike you as odd? The idea for this
> poll came from the thread "One Dutch, two French, a single Chinese",
> Dec. 11, 2010. Please note: this poll is not publicly listed on the web
> site.
"Chinaman" sounds old-fashioned, sexist & patronising.
"Chinese Person" is too twee and precise.
So there is only "Chinese" left, and yes, that is very good English -
in London at least.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
I've selected the option "Depends".
The reason is that I would happily use "A Chinese" for a Chinese person
in a list of nationality nouns but not on its own.
In "One Dutch, two French, a single Chinese" I would interpret "a single
Chinese" to mean "a single Chinese person". Because the phrase is in the
context of a list of people it is possible to omit "person".
I would not use "Chinese" as a noun outside a context in which it would
be normal to elided "person".
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
MC
<99df6e28-27e2-4c4a...@l8g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Plac <pl...@gmx.com> wrote:
> So there is only "Chinese" left, and yes, that is very good English -
> in London at least.
But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not talking
about a person.
--
"If you can, tell me something happy."
- Marybones
Mark Brader
No. My vocabulary has no noun meaning "a Chinese person" (except for
the obsolete "Chinaman").
> Please note: this poll is not publicly listed on the web site.
Just as well. I refuse to visit sites that demand my name before I start.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Pleasant dreams!"
m...@vex.net | "I'll dream of Canada." -- THE SUSPECT
edevils
>> Linguistic Poll: Would you say "A Chinese" for a Chinese person?
>
> No. My vocabulary has no noun meaning "a Chinese person" (except for
> the obsolete "Chinaman").
>
>> Please note: this poll is not publicly listed on the web site.
>
> Just as well. I refuse to visit sites that demand my name before I start.
Actually the poll doesn't demand your name or anything. Just tick your
answer and click the "Vote" button.
Django Cat
I have lots of Chinese students and I wouldn't dream of referring to
one of them as 'a Chinese' - to me it borders on offensiveness and it
certainly wouldn't go down well in a university context where
sensibilities tend towards the PC.
But thinking about this, I don't think I use nationality nouns much
anyway; maybe sometimes - rarely - 'she's a Russian, he's an
American', but never 'she's a Spaniard, he's a Frenchman'. I'd be far
more likely to say (and I think I share this with most BrE speakers)
'she's Russian, he's American, they're Spanish and he's French'.
DC
--
Christian Weisgerber
> But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not talking
> about a person.
Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for _a_ Chinese?
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Don Phillipson
news:ZwpOo.64142$QU2....@newsfe14.ams2...
> I have lots of Chinese students and I wouldn't dream of referring to
> one of them as 'a Chinese' - to me it borders on offensiveness and it
> certainly wouldn't go down well in a university context where
> sensibilities tend towards the PC.
>
> But thinking about this, I don't think I use nationality nouns much
> anyway; maybe sometimes - rarely - 'she's a Russian, he's an
> American', but never 'she's a Spaniard, he's a Frenchman'. I'd be far
> more likely to say (and I think I share this with most BrE speakers)
> 'she's Russian, he's American, they're Spanish and he's French'.
This neatly summarizes the problem (of trying to forecast other people's
PC sensitivities.) The traditional terms Frenchman and Dutchman are
still usually approved (by French and Dutch people as well as others;)
the equivalent term Chinaman became PI several decades ago (I'd
guess at the period of the "China Lobby" in Washington 1940-60.)
A few people nowadays abjure most words ending -man (chairman as
well as Dutchman) (but have not yet found a substitute for German.)
In Canada, Chinese and Japanese are nowadays used as nouns as
well as adjectives.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
the Omrud
> MC<cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>
>> But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not talking
>> about a person.
>
> Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for _a_ Chinese?
Entirely normal in BrE.
--
David
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
<postm...@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>In article <ieddh0$nde$1...@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>, na...@mips.inka.de
>says...
>>
>> MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>>
>> > But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not talking
>> > about a person.
>>
>> Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for _a_ Chinese?
>
>Yes. "Going for a Chinese" is a quite normal and frequently heard term
>in the UK. It may well be short for "Going for a Chinese meal".
For a different cuisine one "Goes for an Indian".
Skitt
>> Linguistic Poll: Would you say "A Chinese" for a Chinese person?
>
> No. My vocabulary has no noun meaning "a Chinese person" (except for
> the obsolete "Chinaman").
>
>> Please note: this poll is not publicly listed on the web site.
>
> Just as well. I refuse to visit sites that demand my name before I start.
Well, it doesn't have to be *your* name. I didn't use mine (not even
Skitt).
--
Skitt (SF Bay Area)
http://come.to/skitt
musika
news:copespaz-694B89...@reserved-multicast-range-not-delegated.example.com,
MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> typed:
> In article
> <99df6e28-27e2-4c4a...@l8g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> Plac <pl...@gmx.com> wrote:
>
>> So there is only "Chinese" left, and yes, that is very good English -
>> in London at least.
>
> But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not talking
> about a person.
Neither are they when they say "let's go out for an Indian".
--
Ray
UK
Django Cat
> MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>
> > But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not
> > talking about a person.
>
> Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for a Chinese?
Yes, all the time. Except when going for an Indian.
I might even go for a Chinese this evening... the local Chinese is only
two doors down.
DC
--
Django Cat
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 01:34:19 +0800, "rw.1965"
> <postm...@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>
> > In article <ieddh0$nde$1...@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>, na...@mips.inka.de
> > says...
> >>
> >> MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> > But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not
> talking >> > about a person.
> >>
> >> Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for a
> Chinese?
> >
> > Yes. "Going for a Chinese" is a quite normal and frequently heard
> > term in the UK. It may well be short for "Going for a Chinese meal".
>
> For a different cuisine one "Goes for an Indian".
Do you think you'd 'go for an Italian'? I'm not sure if I say that or
not...
I certainly wouldn't go for a thai (well, I would, I love thai food,
but I wouldn't say that...)
DC
--
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
Today in The Times (of London) there is an article by the Chef Heston
Blumenthal entitled _British curry has come of age_. It includes:
When friends such as the food writer Harold McGee or the chefs
Ferran Adrià and his brother, Albert, come to visit, I take them for
an Indian.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
>Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 01:34:19 +0800, "rw.1965"
>> <postm...@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <ieddh0$nde$1...@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>, na...@mips.inka.de
>> > says...
>> >>
>> >> MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not
>> talking >> > about a person.
>> >>
>> >> Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for a
>> Chinese?
>> >
>> > Yes. "Going for a Chinese" is a quite normal and frequently heard
>> > term in the UK. It may well be short for "Going for a Chinese meal".
>>
>> For a different cuisine one "Goes for an Indian".
>
>Do you think you'd 'go for an Italian'? I'm not sure if I say that or
>not...
>
I now eat out very rarely and it must be many years (possibly decades)
since I went to an Italian restaurant so I have no occasion to use the
phrase.
A Google search for "let's go for an italian" finds only one relevant
result. It is on the website of the The Dublin Spanish Language Meetup
Group.
http://www.meetup.com/dublines/calendar/13727727/
Let's go for an italian!
It's time we did another get together over some food!
This time we'll go for a taste of Italy!
>I certainly wouldn't go for a thai (well, I would, I love thai food,
>but I wouldn't say that...)
>
>DC
--
Mike Page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdo79znnHl8
--
MP
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
Yes. It's a painfully accurate mirror image of the behaviour of some
English people.
Robert Bannister
> |
> http://www.proprofs.com/polls/poll/?title=would-you-say-a-chinese-for-a-chinese-person
>
>
> Linguistic Poll: Would you say "A Chinese" for a Chinese person?
No.
> For instance, as in the sentence "I don't recall bumping into a single
> Chinese, Russian or Spaniard." Does this usage sound OK to you as a
> native English speaker, or does it strike you as odd?
Yes.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> On Dec 16, 9:57 am, edevils<use_replyto_addr...@devils.com> wrote:
>> |http://www.proprofs.com/polls/poll/?title=would-you-say-a-chinese-for...
>>
>> Linguistic Poll: Would you say "A Chinese" for a Chinese person?
>> For instance, as in the sentence "I don't recall bumping into a single
>> Chinese, Russian or Spaniard." Does this usage sound OK to you as a
>> native English speaker, or does it strike you as odd? The idea for this
>> poll came from the thread "One Dutch, two French, a single Chinese",
>> Dec. 11, 2010. Please note: this poll is not publicly listed on the web
>> site.
>
> "Chinese Person" is too twee and precise.
> So there is only "Chinese" left, and yes, that is very good English -
> in London at least.
for a meal or a restaurant.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> MC<cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>
>> But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not talking
>> about a person.
>
> Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for _a_ Chinese?
>
Normal: going for a Chinese, going for an Indian, going for a Thai... I
don't think it works with every nationality. Italian is possible, but I
don't think a Greek or German or Croatian are likely, so it's probably
only the most common ones - a thing that changes with fashion over the
years.
--
Rob Bannister
Peter Brooks
>
> certainly wouldn't go down well in a university context where
> sensibilities tend towards the PC.
>
Peter Brooks
> On 17/12/10 12:08 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>
>
> >> But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not talking
> >> about a person.
>
> > Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for _a_ Chinese?
>
> Normal: going for a Chinese, going for an Indian, going for a Thai... I
> don't think it works with every nationality. Italian is possible, but I
> don't think a Greek or German or Croatian are likely, so it's probably
> only the most common ones - a thing that changes with fashion over the
> years.
>
embarrassing ambiguous.
If it did exist, I'd expect 'going for a Croat', rather than 'going
for a Croation', to fit the general pattern. Also, if there are German
restaurants, most people I know would say 'going for a Kraut' if they
were in such extreme need of pork and sauerkraut.
There was a nice Belgian restaurant in Bristol, the visiting of which
would naturally fall out as 'going for a Belgian'.
Nick Spalding
on Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:07:55 -0800:
I have two middle names, the second of which is usable as a surname, and
I use those.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
Peter Brooks
> Skitt wrote, in <iedo2b$dm...@news.albasani.net>
as well. Today my wife suggested that I should have a fifth, central,
name 'difficult' - not quite as Victorian as Morse' 'Endeavour', but
that line of country, I think.
Leslie Danks
[...]
>
> I've been known to say, "I could really go for a chinese" but I don't
> capitalize it when talking about food. Yes, I know this is wrong. No, I
> don't care.
>
>
Don't care was made to care,
Don't care was hung,
Don't care was put in a pot
And boiled till he was done.
--
Les (BrE)
Evan Kirshenbaum
> |
> http://www.proprofs.com/polls/poll/?title=would-you-say-a-chinese-for-a-chinese-person
>
> Linguistic Poll: Would you say "A Chinese" for a Chinese person?
> For instance, as in the sentence "I don't recall bumping into a single
> Chinese, Russian or Spaniard." Does this usage sound OK to you as a
> native English speaker, or does it strike you as odd? The idea for
> this poll came from the thread "One Dutch, two French, a single
> Chinese", Dec. 11, 2010. Please note: this poll is not publicly listed
> on the web site.
No. If the example sentence were to come out of my mouth, it would be
the result of my having started to say "... a single Chinese, Russian,
or Spanish person" and then switching to nouns halfway through to
produce "Spaniard". I can't conceive of myself saying it with the
nationalities permuted to put "Chinese" at the end.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |You cannot solve problems with the
SF Bay Area (1982-) |same type of thinking that created
Chicago (1964-1982) |them.
| Albert Einstein
evan.kir...@gmail.com
Mark Brader
> > Just as well. I refuse to visit sites that demand my name before I start.
> Well, it doesn't have to be *your* name.
I wouldn't want to be dishonest.
--
Mark Brader "We demand rigidly defined areas
Toronto of doubt and uncertainty!"
m...@vex.net -- Vroomfondel (Douglas Adams: HHGTTG)
Christian Weisgerber
> > Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for _a_ Chinese?
>
> Entirely normal in BrE.
Any comments from other continents?
Skitt
> Mark Brader:
>>> Just as well. I refuse to visit sites that demand my name before I start.
>
> "Skitt":
>> Well, it doesn't have to be *your* name.
>
> I wouldn't want to be dishonest.
What's a little dishonesty among friends?
Django Cat
> In article <slrnign2g5....@ibook-g4.local>,
> g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies says...
> > [...]
> > I've been known to say, "I could really go for a chinese" but I
> > don't capitalize it when talking about food. Yes, I know this is
> > wrong. No, I don't care.
>
> If said by a BrEng speaker in a certain way, "I could really go for a
> Chinese." might not always indicate a desire for food, but suggest a
> desire and preference at that time for a relationship with a Chinese
> person, though expressed in a rather base and perhaps vulgar way.
Just as long as it isn't mixed up with 'I could murder a curry'.
DC
--
Robin Bignall
>Mark Brader wrote:
>> Mark Brader:
>
>>>> Just as well. I refuse to visit sites that demand my name before I start.
>>
>> "Skitt":
>>> Well, it doesn't have to be *your* name.
>>
>> I wouldn't want to be dishonest.
>
>What's a little dishonesty among friends?
Dishonest.
--
Robin Bignall
(BrE)
Herts, England
Peter Moylan
> the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for _a_ Chinese?
>> Entirely normal in BrE.
>
> Any comments from other continents?
>
I'm having trouble thinking of examples where we use "Chinese" tout
court. Well, perhaps the following exchange.
"How about going to Raj's, then?"
"No, I feel like Chinese tonight."
But still no "a" in front.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Robert Bannister
> Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>> the Omrud<usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Going for Chinese (food) is fine of course, but going for _a_ Chinese?
>>> Entirely normal in BrE.
>>
>> Any comments from other continents?
>>
> The closest I can think of in AusE is "Let's get a Chinese takeaway".
> I'm having trouble thinking of examples where we use "Chinese" tout
> court. Well, perhaps the following exchange.
> "How about going to Raj's, then?"
> "No, I feel like Chinese tonight."
> But still no "a" in front.
>
Seems to be common enough in the West, but then we are alleged to be 90%
Poms anyway. Notably, "no wuckers" has never caught on here or, at
least, not yet.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> In message<3glkg658rueq6bm0q...@4ax.com>
> Peter Duncanson (BrE)<ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 01:34:19 +0800, "rw.1965"
>> <postm...@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> In article<ieddh0$nde$1...@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>, na...@mips.inka.de
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not talking
>>>>> about a person.
>>>>
>
>
>>> Yes. "Going for a Chinese" is a quite normal and frequently heard term
>>> in the UK. It may well be short for "Going for a Chinese meal".
>
>> For a different cuisine one "Goes for an Indian".
>
> capitalize it when talking about food. Yes, I know this is wrong. No, I
> don't care.
>
>
Can people really hear it when you capitalise?
--
Rob Bannister
Jonathan Morton
news:lj3o8h...@gmail.com...
>
> No. If the example sentence were to come out of my mouth, it would be
> the result of my having started to say "... a single Chinese, Russian,
> or Spanish person" and then switching to nouns halfway through to
> produce "Spaniard". I can't conceive of myself saying it with the
> nationalities permuted to put "Chinese" at the end.
Interestingly - not specific to Evan's comment - see the new thread "Do you
like Argentina?", where the OP writes:
Since I'm a Chinese, if I have said something improperly, please forgive me.
Regards
Jonathan
edevils
> Mark Brader:
>>> Just as well. I refuse to visit sites that demand my name before I start.
>
> "Skitt":
>> Well, it doesn't have to be *your* name.
>
> I wouldn't want to be dishonest.
Be honest, then, and give a *nick* name of yours, if you have to (you
don't have to, for polls).
abzorba
wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 19:46:28 GMT, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote:
>
> >> On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 01:34:19 +0800, "rw.1965"
>
> >> > In article <ieddh0$nd...@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>, na...@mips.inka.de
> >> > says...
>
> >> >> MC <copes...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> > But when someone says "let's go out for a Chinese" they're not
> >> talking >> > about a person.
>
> >> Chinese?
>
> >> > Yes. "Going for a Chinese" is a quite normal and frequently heard
> >> > term in the UK. It may well be short for "Going for a Chinese meal".
>
> >> For a different cuisine one "Goes for an Indian".
>
> >not...
>
> I now eat out very rarely and it must be many years (possibly decades)
> since I went to an Italian restaurant so I have no occasion to use the
> phrase.
>
> A Google search for "let's go for an italian" finds only one relevant
> result. It is on the website of the The Dublin Spanish Language Meetup
> Group.http://www.meetup.com/dublines/calendar/13727727/
>
> Let's go for an italian!
>
> It's time we did another get together over some food!
> This time we'll go for a taste of Italy!
>
> >I certainly wouldn't go for a thai (well, I would, I love thai food,
> >but I wouldn't say that...)
>
> >DC
>
> --
> Peter Duncanson, UK
> (in alt.usage.english)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The only time I would worry is if I get invited to an expensive
restaurant by a very rich person and he says "Hey, let's go Dutch."
Myles (a restaurant which has a Dutch Oven) Paulsne
abzorba
>
> - Show quoted text -
We’re getting off track on what was a very pertinent question. In
“Going for (a) Chinese”, “Chinese” is an adjective, with “food” or
“meal” understood. No probs. In “Meeting a Chinese”, the “Chinese” is
a noun. And the OP is correct, it sounds weird, and it you used it,
people would notice. This is simply because the noun “Chinaman” came
to be regarded as racist and pejorative. When “Chinaman” became
verboten, Chineseman or Chineseperson, as formal terms, did not take
its place. So while we have Englishman or Englishperson, we do not
have Chinaperson or Chineseperson. The result is that you more or
less HAVE to say “Chinese person”.
Here’s a quick way of determining what acceptable usage is. Take a
well-known book which contains a nationality in its title: “The Quiet
American” will do nicely. Now substitute OTHER nationalities for
“American” and see how it sounds. “The Quiet Russian, German, Italian”
all sound OK, although Englishman, Welshman, Frenchman etc are semi-
barred for reasons of sexism. Nevertheless, they can still be used.
Otoh, “The Quiet Chinese” sounds odd. And, interestingly enough, it’s
NOT a solution to simply have “The Quiet Chinese Person”, because that
would be an equivalent to “The Quiet American Person” and that is NOT
the same thing. I don’t think there is another nationality which has
the same problem.
Myles (The Noisy Australian) Paulsen
Peter Brooks
'chinaman' become either racist or perjorative??
'The Quiet Chinaman' would work perfectly well, though, since the
Chinese are usually quiet and polite, it'd lack the obvious irony of
the original title.
R H Draney
>
>In article <OK-dnSVPBoGEPpHQ...@bt.com>,
>jonathan.mortonb...@btinternet.com says...
>>
>> Since I'm a Chinese, if I have said something improperly, please forgive me.
>
>Mandarin, if one uses non-toned pinyin:
>
>"China" is "Zhongguo" (literally "Middle-country").
>
>"Chinese person" (male or female) is "Zhongguo ren" (literally: Middle-
>country person")
>
>"Chinese food" (as in "eat (a/the) Chinese food") would be "Zhongguo de
>fan" (literally "Middle-country (possessive-particle) food")
>
>Given that the common word between them all is "Zhongguo" which we can
>translate as "China" if used on its own, but which can be translated as
>"Chinese" if other components are present, I think it might be likely to
>be a slip up.
I'm having trouble finding a good place to mention this in the thread, but this
seemed as likely as any....
As many of the regulars here know, I'm a fan of the current and recent popular
music in Taiwan...I've been corrected in the past when I try to call it
"Taiwanese pop music", which I'm told should only refer to the music of the
indigenous people of Taiwan or perhaps the Hakka....
I have a similar problem when I try to refer to a performer like Stefanie Sun,
of Han ancestry, a citizen by birth of Singapore and performing (i.e. working)
in Taiwan, does either "she's Chinese" or "she's a Chinese" imply something
misleading or inaccurate?...do the two statements in fact imply the same
thing?...and does the meaning of either change if it's said by someone in
Beijing, in Singapore, or in Taipei?...
If citizenship, ethnicity and language are described using different short
phrases such as the above, what of the singer Alan Dawa Dolma, a Tibetan who has
become popular singing in Japanese?...r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
Peter Brooks
> rw.1965 filted:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <OK-dnSVPBoGEPpHQnZ2dnUVZ7r2dn...@bt.com>,
> >jonathan.mortonbutignorethisp...@btinternet.com says...
>
> >> Since I'm a Chinese, if I have said something improperly, please forgive me.
>
> >That could be interpreted as a mere slip up by a non-native speaker. In
> >Mandarin, if one uses non-toned pinyin:
>
> >"China" is "Zhongguo" (literally "Middle-country").
>
> >"Chinese person" (male or female) is "Zhongguo ren" (literally: Middle-
> >country person")
>
> >"Chinese food" (as in "eat (a/the) Chinese food") would be "Zhongguo de
> >fan" (literally "Middle-country (possessive-particle) food")
>
> >Given that the common word between them all is "Zhongguo" which we can
> >translate as "China" if used on its own, but which can be translated as
> >"Chinese" if other components are present, I think it might be likely to
> >be a slip up.
>
> I'm having trouble finding a good place to mention this in the thread, but this
> seemed as likely as any....
>
> As many of the regulars here know, I'm a fan of the current and recent popular
> music in Taiwan...I've been corrected in the past when I try to call it
> "Taiwanese pop music", which I'm told should only refer to the music of the
> indigenous people of Taiwan or perhaps the Hakka....
>
thus putting off people who might be interested in the music itself.
'Taiwanese pop music' sounds perfectly accurate.
>
> I have a similar problem when I try to refer to a performer like Stefanie Sun,
> of Han ancestry, a citizen by birth of Singapore and performing (i.e. working)
> in Taiwan, does either "she's Chinese" or "she's a Chinese" imply something
> misleading or inaccurate?...do the two statements in fact imply the same
> thing?...and does the meaning of either change if it's said by someone in
> Beijing, in Singapore, or in Taipei?...
>
she's also Chinese...meaning that she is of Chinese ancestry.
This isn't uncommon. Many people in South Africa are South African,
but also English.
>
> If citizenship, ethnicity and language are described using different short
> phrases such as the above, what of the singer Alan Dawa Dolma, a Tibetan who has
> become popular singing in Japanese?...r
>
He's clearly Tibetan - that he sings in Japanese doesn't change
anything. Françoise Hardy has sung quite a bit in English, but that
doesn't stop her being French.
There's nothing odd about having multiple designations, all accurate.
Rab Nesbitt, to choose a random example, is a Glaswegian, Scotch,
British and European chap who speaks English. Albeit such a distant
relative of RP as really to merit a different name - 'Glaswegian' or,
maybe, Rab would suggest 'Scum' as a name for the language...
R H Draney
>
>On Dec 20, 8:15=A0am, R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>
>> If citizenship, ethnicity and language are described using different shor=
>t
>> phrases such as the above, what of the singer Alan Dawa Dolma, a Tibetan =
>who has
>> become popular singing in Japanese?...r
>>
>He's clearly Tibetan - that he sings in Japanese doesn't change
>doesn't stop her being French.
In the perhaps unlikely event the subject comes up again, Alan is a woman....r
Peter Brooks
'Alan' is a more peculiar name for a woman, though, even than 'Jose'.
I'd met a woman called 'Jose' before, and another woman called
'Peter', but never a woman called 'Alan' - though I've an Uncle called
Alan.
I've also got an Uncle called Bob, but I tend not to mention it as
people are unlikely to believe me.
James Hogg
Wikipedia:
The name "Alan", which is in fact her official surname, is a
self-created shortened form of a combination of the sinified Tibetan
names of her parents.
--
James
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
In BrE she might be described as an ethnic Chinese Singaporean.
A Google search suggests that that description is not limited to BrE.
Who are Indonesia's Ethnic Chinese?
http://www.indonesialogue.com/destinations/who-are-indonesias-ethnic-chinese.html
SEMINAR ON
ETHNIC CHINESE IN INDONESIA IN AN ERA OF GLOBALIZATION
http://www.chineseheritagecentre.org/ISEAS%20Seminar/19july07.pdf
ObAUE: The programme included:
9.00 am – 9.15 am Welcome Remarks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Singaporean
Chinese Singaporeans...
Ethnic Chinese in Singapore...
....Chinese in Singapore...
...Singaporean Chinese...
>If citizenship, ethnicity and language are described using different short
>phrases such as the above, what of the singer Alan Dawa Dolma, a Tibetan who has
>become popular singing in Japanese?...r
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Peter Brooks
to have a husband clever enough to invent hex keys.
CDB
>>
[dongxi]
>>
> I'm having trouble finding a good place to mention this in the
> thread, but this seemed as likely as any....
>
> As many of the regulars here know, I'm a fan of the current and
> recent popular music in Taiwan...I've been corrected in the past
> when I try to call it "Taiwanese pop music", which I'm told should
> only refer to the music of the indigenous people of Taiwan or
> perhaps the Hakka....
>
> I have a similar problem when I try to refer to a performer like
> Stefanie Sun, of Han ancestry, a citizen by birth of Singapore and
> performing (i.e. working) in Taiwan, does either "she's Chinese" or
> "she's a Chinese" imply something misleading or inaccurate?...do
> the two statements in fact imply the same thing?...and does the
> meaning of either change if it's said by someone in Beijing, in
> Singapore, or in Taipei?...
>>
adjective.
>>
http://books.google.ca/books?id=XbIMb84mc7UC&pg=PA129&lpg=
PA129&dq=cordwainer+chinesian&source=bl&ots=xCW92CBYtG&
sig=npTmtaDl_Ni0il8zvCslbfsSok&hl=en&ei=YlsPTZmoHozFnAfA
5pHODg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBU
Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Chinesian&f=false
>>
http://tinyurl.com/2crxerl
>>
> If citizenship, ethnicity and language are described using
> different short phrases such as the above, what of the singer Alan
> Dawa Dolma, a Tibetan who has become popular singing in
> Japanese?...r
>>
tony cooper
<postm...@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>The one thing a reasonable number might find somewhat amusing, and some
>find even insulting, is the way the entire UK gets known as "England"
>and its inhabitants, "English" by some. I'm pointing no fingers
>(especially not in the direction of Peorialand, across the Atlantic, as
>some of the Rhode Islanders might get twitchy because I don't know how
>many states [57, so Prof. Heinz tells me] make up Oregonia.)
Some Americans may mistakenly think Scotland is part of England, but
others are just not familiar with the cities and their locations. If
you tell an American you are from Sterling, he may think you are
English only because he's not aware that the Sterling you are from is
in Scotland.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Nick Spalding
on Mon, 20 Dec 2010 09:00:01 -0500:
And spelt Stirling.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
tony cooper
wrote:
See? I just substantiated the impression Europeans have that
Americans don't know world geography.
tony cooper
<postm...@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>In article <75oug6dnu63h2f1c2...@4ax.com>, tony_cooper213
>@earthlink.net says...
>That may be true in some cases, but I am thinking more of the other
>cases where US citizens want to refer to the entire country (UK). In
>these cases it is quite frequent that they use the term "England". Some
>are grateful and happy to be corrected if it is polite and possible to
>do so, but others become a bit agitated.
I don't think that this observation can be limited to either Americans
or the subject of geography. People don't like to be corrected. They
don't like to be corrected about geography, grammar, pronunciation, or
anything else. Some take corrections gracefully, and some don't.
If a Englishman, a Dane, or German tells me that he watched an
American professional football on TV where Notre Dame played Michigan
State, and I point out that he watched a college game - not a
professional game - he's likely to shrug off the correction with
annoyance because "You know what I meant". The distinction is
unimportant to him.
The same can be said about the American who is corrected when he says
he vacationed in England and spent time in London, York, and Cardiff.
the Omrud
You'd probably have to educate them about how to pronounce "Notre Dame"
as well.
> The same can be said about the American who is corrected when he says
> he vacationed in England and spent time in London, York, and Cardiff.
Quite. We don't "vacation" in England.
--
David
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
<smile>
If Americans respell "centre" as "center" and "metre" as "meter" why
don't they spell that name as "Noter Dame"?
>> The same can be said about the American who is corrected when he says
>> he vacationed in England and spent time in London, York, and Cardiff.
>
>Quite. We don't "vacation" in England.
--
tony cooper
wrote:
>On 20/12/2010 14:54, tony cooper wrote:
I am annoyed and agitated by your correction. You knew what I meant.
the Omrud
It's too cold here to be annoyed or agitated, even if my English is
unwarrantedly corrected. It hasn't been any warmer than -8 C in
Cheshire today, even with blue skies and sunshine. That's about 17 F.
--
David
James Hogg
To say nothing of "timbre".
--
James
franzi
>
>It's too cold here to be annoyed or agitated, even if my English is
>unwarrantedly corrected. It hasn't been any warmer than -8 C in
>Cheshire today, even with blue skies and sunshine. That's about 17 F.
>
fog and pitch dark all through dinnertime 'ere, if ever we 'ad
dinnertime.
Pissing icicles we've been, all day long. Thank God for the Gulf Stream.
--
franzi
Peter Moylan
>
> That may be true in some cases, but I am thinking more of the other
> cases where US citizens want to refer to the entire country (UK).
> The only other sovereign state that seems to have constituent parts
> that are called countries seem to be The Netherlands,
Which is, as we know, often referred to using the name of one - sorry,
two - of its constituent parts.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Peter Moylan
Don't tell the Americans that, or you won't get any more vacationers.
Robert Bannister
> I've heard 'murder a curry' but never in relation to any non-curry
> comestibles.
What a quiet life you lead. Normally, I would say I could murder a beer,
but right now, at half past nine in the morning, I could murder a hot
cup of coffee.
--
Rob Bannister
abzorba
>
> - Show quoted text -
Why not? There must be millions of 'em. I've got a friend whose very
cheerful. His name is Larry.
Myles (myles to go...) Paulsen
abzorba
> On 20/12/2010 15:10, tony cooper wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >> On 20/12/2010 14:54, tony cooper wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 22:21:01 +0800, "rw.1965"
>
> >>>> In article<75oug6dnu63h2f1c2eh2ihsnb1bb799...@4ax.com>, tony_cooper213
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hello, darling, well if you imagine me, I'm sitting here with not much
on at all, my legs and feet are bare naked, and I've got a cold beer
next to me. The birds are singing, the sky is blue, I'm going to put
on my T-shirt and go to the beach, or maybe a barbeque, and then we'll
all just dance and dance and sing and dance and eat and dance until
the sun sets at about 9 pm...
Myles (Wish you were here...) Paulsen
abzorba
wrote:
> the Omrud <usenet.om...@gmail.com> wrote
Myles (Luxury) Paulsen
abzorba
> On Dec 20, 5:05 am, abzorba <myles...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> > > The only time I would worry is if I get invited to an expensive
> > > restaurant by a very rich person and he says "Hey, let's go Dutch."
>
> > > Myles (a restaurant which has a Dutch Oven) Paulsne- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > We’re getting off track on what was a very pertinent question. In
> > “Going for (a) Chinese”, “Chinese” is an adjective, with “food” or
> > “meal” understood. No probs. In “Meeting a Chinese”, the “Chinese” is
> > a noun. And the OP is correct, it sounds weird, and it you used it,
> > people would notice. This is simply because the noun “Chinaman” came
> > to be regarded as racist and pejorative. When “Chinaman” became
> > verboten, Chineseman or Chineseperson, as formal terms, did not take
> > its place. So while we have Englishman or Englishperson, we do not
> > have Chinaperson or Chineseperson. The result is that you more or
> > less HAVE to say “Chinese person”.
>
> > Here’s a quick way of determining what acceptable usage is. Take a
> > well-known book which contains a nationality in its title: “The Quiet
> > American” will do nicely. Now substitute OTHER nationalities for
> > “American” and see how it sounds. “The Quiet Russian, German, Italian”
> > all sound OK, although Englishman, Welshman, Frenchman etc are semi-
> > barred for reasons of sexism. Nevertheless, they can still be used.
>
> > Otoh, “The Quiet Chinese” sounds odd. And, interestingly enough, it’s
> > NOT a solution to simply have “The Quiet Chinese Person”, because that
> > would be an equivalent to “The Quiet American Person” and that is NOT
> > the same thing. I don’t think there is another nationality which has
> > the same problem.
>
> This is puzzling, when and why and for what groups of people did
> 'chinaman' become either racist or perjorative??
>
> 'The Quiet Chinaman' would work perfectly well, though, since the
> Chinese are usually quiet and polite, it'd lack the obvious irony of
> the original title.- Hide quoted text -
Well, what is it about spic, coolie, bung or nigger that is
INTRINSICALLY nasty. It is the attitude BEHIND the words that made
them taboo. It is the same for Chinaman. In Australia, for example,
it
was used of immigrant Chinese in the 19th Century, who were disliked
because they were a source of cheap labour, and because some thought
they would overrun the country. If you think "The Quiet Chinaman"
would work perfectly well, what do you think of "The Quiet Nigger"?
(Although Joseph Conrad wrote the short sea story Nigger of the
Narcissus, and it's a gem.)
Myles (Is the "Quiet American" an oxymoron?) Paulsen
Peter Brooks
question.
It seems, though, that you're saying that what is objectionable,
making it taboo, is the condition itself, not the name for it. So, to
people living under forced occupation, I'd expect the name of the
occupiers to be dirt, in the same way - 'Roman' must have been a dirty
word for some, as 'Yank' or 'Brit', or the equivalent, must be for
many living in Afghanistan or Iraq, as 'Russki' must have been when
chaps from Russkiland were the invaders d'jour.
So, once the specific object has gone (if it can go), then the word
would be redeemed. 'Roman' isn't a dirty word with many people today,
so, since it's ages since there has been any massive use of Chinese
labour (the Tanzam railway in the '60s is the last one I can think
of), surely 'Chinaman' would be long past its taboo stage.
abzorba
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, the objective conditions that made the word offensive in the
first place might have gone, but the connotations behind the word
linger on for a long time to come. Because a words like 'nigger' or
'poofter' were COINED with derogatory intentions, those meanings
cannot just be erased as soon as the subjects to which they refer
become socially rehabilitated. It is interesting that both the groups
saddled with these eptithets, Afro-Americans and homosexuals, came to
use the words themselves of themselves, as a way of diluting their
power. The same goes for "wog" in Australia, which was once
unambiguously derogatory, but can now be used playfully and harmlessly
(on MOST occasions, not all).
Peter Brooks
designed to be offensive.
'Nigger', though, simply comes from the Latin for 'black'. As you'll
know, in 'The Dam Busters' and, later, in Pink Floyd's 'The Wall', the
dog, since it is black, is called 'Nigger', there is no offence
intended to anybody.
In the US, things are, I know, different, which is not that much of a
surprise considering the massive abuse of black people even after the
abolition of slavery.
Similarly, in South Africa, where 'nigger' has no particular status as
a word, 'kaffir' takes its place becasuse of its use as a derogatory
word during the days of apartheid. Outside South Africa, the word
usually rendered 'kafir', is the standard Arabic word for an infidel,
so all atheists, no matter what their skin colour, are 'kafirs' or
indeed, 'kaffirs'.
So the location is relevant to whether a word is found offensive. I,
for example, find 'gender', misused as 'sex', highly offensive and
thank visitors to my house not to distress me by so misusing it -
unless in a purely jocular manner.
Robin Bignall
Yeah. I, too, would like a private jet to take me to somewhere
warmer.
--
Robin Bignall
(BrE)
Herts, England
Robin Bignall
<inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>the Omrud wrote:
>> On 20/12/2010 15:10, tony cooper wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 14:59:13 +0000, the Omrud<usenet...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 20/12/2010 14:54, tony cooper wrote:
>
>>>>> The same can be said about the American who is corrected when he says
>>>>> he vacationed in England and spent time in London, York, and Cardiff.
>>>>
>>>> Quite. We don't "vacation" in England.
>>>
>>> I am annoyed and agitated by your correction. You knew what I meant.
>>
>> It's too cold here to be annoyed or agitated, even if my English is
>> unwarrantedly corrected. It hasn't been any warmer than -8 C in
>> Cheshire today, even with blue skies and sunshine. That's about 17 F.
>
>Don't tell the Americans that, or you won't get any more vacationers.
Considering that five inches of snow at Heathrow can shut down flying
throughout Europe, I wonder that we have any.
franzi
Robert Bannister
> On Dec 21, 6:50 am, abzorba<myles...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>> On Dec 20, 4:25 pm, Peter Brooks<peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 20, 5:05 am, abzorba<myles...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> The only time I would worry is if I get invited to an expensive
>>>>> restaurant by a very rich person and he says "Hey, let's go Dutch."
>>
>>>>> Myles (a restaurant which has a Dutch Oven) Paulsne- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>>> �Going for (a) Chinese�, �Chinese� is an adjective, with �food� or
>>>> �meal� understood. No probs. In �Meeting a Chinese�, the �Chinese� is
>>>> a noun. And the OP is correct, it sounds weird, and it you used it,
>>>> to be regarded as racist and pejorative. When �Chinaman� became
>>>> verboten, Chineseman or Chineseperson, as formal terms, did not take
>>>> its place. So while we have Englishman or Englishperson, we do not
>>>> have Chinaperson or Chineseperson. The result is that you more or
>>
>>>> Here�s a quick way of determining what acceptable usage is. Take a
>>>> well-known book which contains a nationality in its title: �The Quiet
>>>> American� will do nicely. Now substitute OTHER nationalities for
>>>> �American� and see how it sounds. �The Quiet Russian, German, Italian�
>>>> all sound OK, although Englishman, Welshman, Frenchman etc are semi-
>>>> barred for reasons of sexism. Nevertheless, they can still be used.
>>
>>>> NOT a solution to simply have �The Quiet Chinese Person�, because that
>>>> would be an equivalent to �The Quiet American Person� and that is NOT
>>>> the same thing. I don�t think there is another nationality which has
By your reasoning, "Jap" would now be fine, but I don't think it is.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
You can all have the 38° C we're promised for the whole of Christmas
weekend.
--
Rob Bannister
abzorba
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, I was wereiiihui...wrrooroor...wruuuuwuuu..wuuuwuue..WRONG! There
I said it.
Nigger does mean black, and it was once used without animosity (as
for example in the above-mentioned "Nigger of the Narcissus". The
odium attached to the words can linger on indefinitely. I can't think
off-hand of a word which was a pejorative but was became COMPLETELY
rehabilitated.
Your point re: sex and gender is well-made. I THINK the use for
"gender" outside of its traditional grammatical use, came about in the
1970s, and was a result of Wimmins Lib. I believe they thought that
the word "sex" had so entrenched a connotation of the "legs over" act,
that "gender" would do nicely. Now there's a word that even Aunt
Myrtle would not purse her lips over.
Myles (Has actually read Germaine Greer) Paulsen
abzorba
>
> - Show quoted text -
To get back OT, I said earlier that I thought that Chinese was the
only term for a nationality which can't be used a singular noun to
denote a member of that nationality. But then I thought of Britain and
British. Britisher does not exist, nor does Britishman or
Britishperson. So, in my test with the book, it would have to be "The
Quiet British Man". Odd, that one?
I also notice from my MsWord Spellchecker that while Englishperson is
acceptable, Welshperson and Irishperson are NOT. (There is no need for
Scotsperson, of course, as they DO have a term: Scot, so you could
have "The Quiet Scot".)
It's seems odd that the English are entitled to a non-sexist term for
their nationality, but the Welsh and Irish are not.
Myles (The noisy Australian) Paulsen
Peter Brooks
tabulae rasae and so the idea that there is such a thing as
instinctive inclination is anathema. Boys would, in the theory, play
with dolls if they weren't forced by 'paternalism' into 'role
stereotypes' requiring them to play with bows and arrows.
Thus the notion was born in their heads that any brain identification
with a sex was not determined by the sex itself, but by a teaching of
societal norms. This meant that two quite separate things could be
identified; 'having a willie' and 'being a man'. The first they were
happy to keep the word 'sex' and 'male' for, the second they wanted to
call 'gender'.
So their meaning for 'gender' was actually: 'everything related to the
male or female sex that is not directly connected to primary and
secondary sexual characteristics'.
It is, of course, clearly bullshit. Yes, the environment, 'nurture',
does play a very important role in the development of identity, but so
do sex hormones and other parts of 'nature'. To try, as they did, to
divorce one from the other was foolish.
Left-wing fascists have long thought that it's enough to change
language to change reality - there's no need, for example, to cure
people of their lameness, simply call them 'disabled' or 'differently
abled', and, suddenly, all is resolved. The feminists of that time,
being stereotypical left-wing fascists (vide 'The Female Eunuch' for
example), decided it would be a grand thing to co-opt the grammatical
term in their fight to change reality by changing language.
It's just a pity that the vestige of this foolishness lies in people
now, ignorant of all of the above (mercifully), thinking that the term
simply is an alternative word for 'sex'.
Peter Brooks
>
>
> I also notice from my MsWord Spellchecker that while Englishperson is
> acceptable, Welshperson and Irishperson are NOT. (There is no need for
> Scotsperson, of course, as they DO have a term: Scot, so you could
> have "The Quiet Scot".)
>
1411. 629 Scotchmen‥have the same caution‥courage, and ‘dourness’ [as
Yorkshiremen]".
So you could have 'The dour Scotchman', though, if you wanted to
preserve the irony of the original, it'd have to be 'The gay
Scotchman' - albeit already been taken by the Gay Gordons.
Peter Brooks
> their nationality, but the Welsh and Irish are not.
>
though.
Since 'man' means both 'a male human' and 'the human species,
mankind', it is men who are discriminated against since, unlike women,
they don't have a single term that means only 'man', the term 'man'
means, unless the context is very clear, 'man and women'.
Similarly, 'he', means 'he or she'. If you specifically mean a woman,
you can use the pronoun 'she', but you don't have that option with
men, you have to use a qualifier of some sort to show you specifically
exclude women.
So much of the blather about sexist language has not only been
blather, but ill-considered blather. Though, of course, nearly all
firemen are men, you can have female firemen, just as you can have
female policemen. You can't, though, have male seamstresses - so it's
men who are disadvantaged by normal, undistorted language.
Peter Moylan
>
> To get back OT, I said earlier that I thought that Chinese was the
> only term for a nationality which can't be used a singular noun to
> denote a member of that nationality. But then I thought of Britain and
> British. Britisher does not exist, nor does Britishman or
> Britishperson. So, in my test with the book, it would have to be "The
> Quiet British Man". Odd, that one?
It doesn't seem to have bothered the Britons.
James Hogg
> abzorba wrote:
>> To get back OT, I said earlier that I thought that Chinese was the
>> only term for a nationality which can't be used a singular noun to
>> denote a member of that nationality. But then I thought of Britain and
>> British. Britisher does not exist, nor does Britishman or
>> Britishperson. So, in my test with the book, it would have to be "The
>> Quiet British Man". Odd, that one?
>
> It doesn't seem to have bothered the Britons.
Who are the Britons?
--
James
edevils
[...]
> The
> odium attached to the words can linger on indefinitely. I can't think
> off-hand of a word which was a pejorative but was became COMPLETELY
> rehabilitated.
impressionist
as a style of painting aiming to represent overall impressions rather
than exact details, first attested in English 1876, coined in French
1874 by French critic Louis Leroy ("ï¿œcole impressionniste") in a
disparaging reference to Monet's sunset painting "Impression, Soleil
Levant." Later extended to other arts.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=impressionist
Peter Moylan
one, of course, but "an inhabitant of Great Britain" is also listed.
Sara Lorimer
> Though, of course, nearly all
> firemen are men, you can have female firemen, just as you can have
> female policemen.
Or you can have firefighters and police officers.
--
SML
Seattle-ish
Peter Brooks
imagine those chaps (for they are mainly chaps) putting out massive
forest fires with helicopters, wet beaters and so forth - not the
chaps who, inter alia, rescue cats from trees (why they don't leave
them up there is a bit of a puzzle to me).
'Police Officer' sounds so peculiarly stilted and formal - the sort of
thing a plod says while talking about how he 'proceeded along King
Street'. 'Policeman' is a nice, honest, friendly word - I'm not
against 'Policewoman' where it's appropriate either, it's also better
than 'Officer'.
Cheryl
It depends on what you're used to. 'Firefighter' or 'fire fighter' seems
to me to be the default expression for the men in the red trucks who
rescue cats - and, as I discovered a while ago, are often the first to
turn up at a medical emergency - when they're not putting out house or
industrial fires. If I want to further specify that you mean only the
firefighters who are insanely brave enough to parachute into a forest
fire, I can do so.
It's the same thing with 'police officer'. It would be the first term to
come to my mind if I wanted to say something about the uniformed man or
woman in the police car.
It's not that 'fireman' or 'policeman' sound archaic or even merely
old-fashioned to me; it's just that they're no longer my automatic first
choice. The times they are a changin'.
'Fishers' took a bit more getting used to as a newfangled word for an
old occupation. I always think of 'fishers of men' rather than
'fishermen and fisherwomen'.
--
Cheryl