"chintzy" - racist slur?
Daan Sandee
In article <4tlktb$u...@kernighan.cs.umass.edu>, k...@giane.cs.umass.edu (John B. Kim) writes:
|> Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
|> is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
You might consider consulting a dictionary rather than bothering this
group. It's what they're for and this group is not.
Daan Sandee
Burlington, MA san...@think.com
Robert Lipton
: John B. Kim wrote:
: >
: > Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
: > is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
: > --
Ahem. Your Friend may be confusing "Chink" which was a term for
Chinese some time ago -- I'm sure Bret Harte used it liberally.
Interestingly, my father used to use it, but only to refer to Chinese
food. Whether this is derogatory or simple laziness is up to the speaker
and listener. As derogatory terms like "Chinese Fire Drill" --referring
to a chaotic and disorganized group activity a la The Three Stooges --
use the "Chinese" form, it might be suggested that "Chinese" is
derogatory and "Chink" is not. However, as it was the sub-standard form
of the word, it lost out some time around the turn of the century.
Chintz, according to Webster's Third is a light cotton cloth usually
decorated with flowers, originally from India. The name is related to a
Sanskrit word meaning "spotted"or "bright."
My surmise from reading late 19th century literature is that it was used
as a decorative cloth for drapes, ruffles and so forth: undoubtedly
inexpensive, it eventually becam declassed to the point where it became a
standard metaphor for cheapness in all forms.
There is no relationship between "Chintz" and "Chink"
COme to think of it, I believe Harte used the substandard "Chinee", as if
"Chinese" were plural. Well, it worked for "pea."
Bob
who does not welsh on obligations, gyp people out of their property or
call Burma "Myanmar."
Marina Waltz
John B. Kim wrote:
>
> Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
> is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
According to Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, "chintzy"
comes from "chintz", which in turn comes from a Hindi word. "Chintz"
is a printed calico (usually glazed cotton) from India. "Chintzy"
came to mean gaudy or cheap, and stingy.
Regards,
Marina
John B. Kim
Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
--
John Kim
k...@cs.umass.edu
(413) 545-3749
Gregory Resch
k...@giane.cs.umass.edu (John B. Kim) writes:
> Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
> is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
You still don't, I hope.
Look the word up in a (good) dictionary. If it isn't there, the evocative
word, "chintz", should be.
--
Truly Donovan
John B. Kim wrote:
>
> Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
> is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
You never knew it because it is not true. "Chintzy" (from "chintz,"
the name of lightweight fabric) comes to us from India. One must not
assume, however, that chintz is always chintzy; some of the pieces that
brought astronomical sums at the Jackie Onassis auction were upholstered
in chintz.
Truly Donovan
warrenh
John B. Kim wrote:
>
> Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
> is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
>
Hardly.
The Oxford Concise Electronic dictionary defines it as: "like
chintz.
gaudy, cheap.
characteristic of the décor associated with chintz soft
furnishings."
It defines chintz as:"n. & adj.
n. a printed multicoloured cotton fabric with a glazed finish.
adj. made from or upholstered with this fabric.
earlier chints (pl.) f. Hindi chint f. Skr. citra variegated."
Your friend's "racial slur" radar needs checking.
John B. Kim
Daan Sandee (san...@Think.COM) wrote:
> You might consider consulting a dictionary rather than bothering this
> group. It's what they're for and this group is not.
I did consult what I thought was a good dictionary, and it was
not helpful. Plus, it is always interesting to get different angles and
sources than just one. I browsed the FAQ and the current content of this
newsgroup before posting my question, and thought my question was
appropriate. You might consider posting a weekly FAQ on what is
appropriate for this group before venting your grumpiness on others.
That's what they're for and a public post is not.
Grumpily yours,
JK
Cissy . Thorpe
On 30 Jul 1996, John B. Kim wrote:
> Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
> is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
>
> --
> John Kim
> k...@cs.umass.edu
> (413) 545-3749
>
>
Chintzy I heard and used as "cheap". Chinky I have heard my Brit of a
husband use to mean cheaply made - as in "made in Japan" ---- and he says
it includes all oriental made things. But I have never heard him use
chinky for a person....just badly/poorly made products.
Cissy
solace
Though I am sure you never intended to do anything helpful, you provided
an excellent example of "chintzy" behavior, Resch.
Gregory Resch wrote:
>
> k...@freya.cs.umass.edu (John B. Kim) writes:
>
> > Daan Sandee (san...@Think.COM) wrote:
> > > You might consider consulting a dictionary rather than bothering this
> > > group. It's what they're for and this group is not.
> >
> > I did consult what I thought was a good dictionary, and it was
> > not helpful....
>
> Do you still "know" it's a good dictionary, if it was not helpul?
> Buy a second dictionary, if UMass has only the one.
>
> > I browsed the FAQ and the current content of this newsgroup before
> > posting my question, and thought my question was appropriate....
>
> You didn't browse the FAQ very well if you skipped the part at the
> very beginning, about what is and what isn't appropriate for posting,
> specifically the explicit statement about not asking questions that can be
> answered by looking in any good dictionary. ("Good" doesn't mean
> "handy.")
>
> > You might consider posting a weekly FAQ on what is
> > appropriate for this group before venting your grumpiness on others....
>
> Just who is "you"? The vast majority of net-news is administered
> completely by volunteers. But you knew that, didn't you:
>
> > That's what they're for and a public post is not.
>
> Yes, users here get grumpy, too--about off-topic postings (just as the
> readers in any newsgroup do), carelessly-worded inquiries ("English
> only"), and shallow questions (yours). They have a right to.
>
> > k...@cs.umass.edu
>
> A question for you: UMass is called a center of higher learning; what
> does "higher learning" mean?
>
> --
Benny H Quay
John B. Kim (k...@giane.cs.umass.edu) wrote:
: Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
: is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
BQ "Did you" sounded a lot like "Jew" to the character (played by Woody
Allen" in Annie Hall). Your friend probably heard "chinky" and
pronounces it chintzy. Of course, I am presuming your friend is
Chinese or hard of hearing.
Gregory Resch
David Read
k...@giane.cs.umass.edu (John B. Kim) wrote:
>Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
>is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
These days it's a type of shiny cloth, although I'm not sure what
gives it the shine. The Victorians were fond of chintz.
My pocket OED has it as "colour printed glazed cotton cloth
[Hind.]"
My Compact OED gives:
"Originally _chints_, plural of _chint_, adopted from the Hindi
_chint_; also formerly found as _chite_, French _chite_,
Portuguese _chita_, adopted from Mahrati _chit_ in same sense.
Both derived from the Sanskrit _chitra_, variegated. The plural
of this word, being more frequent in commercial use, came in
course of time to be mistaken for a singular, and this to be
written _chince_, _chinse_, and at length _chintz_ (apparently
after words like _Coblenz_, and _quartz_). This error was not
established before the third quarter of the 18th century,
although editors and press readers have intruded it into
re-editions of earlier works."
I hope this is of some interest.
David Read
Nathan Mitchum
>Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
>is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
Not a good friend, I hope, because he seems ignorant and dangerous
in equal parts. Open a dictionary: "chintzy" comes from the name
of a fabric, chintz, a sturdy cotton that is often polished and
brightly colored; used in upholstery and drapery. No, the word
"chintz" does not derive from anything remotely related to
"Chinese" either.
N.Mitchum <aj...@lafn.org> [Mail&Post]
Rob Pegoraro
In article <4tphmv$q...@soap.news.pipex.net>, j.nu...@dial.pipex.com wrote:
>Something may have been left out of my education, but chintzy comes
>across to me with no association with cheap and stingy, but simply as
>indicating either that kind of flowery fabric for upholstery and
>curtains, and the general style of decor, furniture, and so on that
>goes with it. Strong connotations of afternoon tea in an English
>country village, in fact.
Indeed. Chintz can, in fact, be extremely expensive; try hiring the
services of a decorator named Mario Buatta, one of the biggest "chintzy"
guys out there, and you'll find out. (Not that I have; my decor is usually
Ikea fake wood accessorized with CDs, magazines and papers I've forgotten
to put away. My expertise here comes solely through my mom, who's worked
as an interior decorator herself.)
ro...@cais.com ====================================================
Rob Pegoraro At work, I'm r...@twp.com, but
Washington, D.C., USA I'm only speaking for myself here
======================================== http://www.cais.com/robp/
John Nurick
Ode...@ptel.net (Mark Odegard) wrote:
>Chintzy is cheap and stingy but a chintzy living room is not
>necessarily so. We have a possible contronym here: Is is
>chintzy living room cheap and stingy?
Something may have been left out of my education, but chintzy comes
across to me with no association with cheap and stingy, but simply as
indicating either that kind of flowery fabric for upholstery and
curtains, and the general style of decor, furniture, and so on that
goes with it. Strong connotations of afternoon tea in an English
country village, in fact.
For some reason chintz can be (quite often is) old and shabby without
ceasing to be respectable.
--
John Nurick
j.nu...@dial.pipex.com
David Read
don...@shadow.net (Donnah Dunthorn) wrote:
>: Ode...@ptel.net (Mark Odegard) wrote:
>: >Chintzy is cheap and stingy but a chintzy living room is not
>: >necessarily so. We have a possible contronym here: Is is
>: >chintzy living room cheap and stingy?
> Even if someone had everything in his living room, dog included,
> covered in chintz, walking in and saying "What a chintzy living
> room!" would still be a very bad idea.
> I'd opt for "chintz-bedecked", "all done up in chintz", "chintz-
> covered", or even "Wow! Looks like you were jonesin' for chintz!"
> d.
>
>
The Victorians liked chintz. It's a nice smooth slick glossy
fabric that looks great until it's been used for a few months. It
doesn't wash well, and the gloss/glaze cracks. Precisely the
cloth that your average Victorian yuppy would kill for.
As you might guess, chintz dropped out of fashion, but like lots
of victoriana (both sides of the Pond), there's still an awful
lot of it about. I've always understood 'chintzy', used as a
perjorative, to mean old fashioned and quaint. The sort of
furniture you might find at your maiden aunt's house, or at a
seaside boarding house, or both if your maiden aunt was the
landlady of a seaside boarding house.
David Read
Matthew Rabuzzi
David Read <rea...@xs4all.nl> writes:
: solace <sol...@gte.net> wrote:
:
: >Though I am sure you never intended to do anything helpful, you provided
: >an excellent example of "chintzy" behavior, Resch.
: Greg: 1 v. To whinge aimlessly: "He's gregging about the weather
: again" etym. uncertain. obs. 2 n. The single leg of a pair of trousers
Can we please back off on the eristic displays? No, politeness isn't Gregory's
strong suit, and I can see why you want to tit-for-tat here
(note that he seems to style himself "Gregory", not "Greg", BTW).
But if you reread his post de novo, in a vacuum, you'll see that this one
happens to lack the usual sarcasm and rudeness; it expands upon some quite
reasonable explanations for his and Daan's feelings on the matter and upon
the charter of a.u.e and its FAQ.
The original poster, John B. Kim, claims to have browsed the FAQ but somehow
missed the clear statement that simple dictionary questions are tiresome,
a waste of bandwidth, likely to get one trodden on. He also claims to have
consulted "what I thought was a good dictionary...it was not helpful...
it is always interesting to get different angles and sources than just one".
consult a different dictionary. The dozen or so people who have responded
with etymology here don't seem to have had any problem locating the information.
The *same* information, may I add, with the exception of the somewhat fuller
historical usage you (David) posted from the Compact OED: not to disparage
any of those dozen's efforts and personal enjoyment in looking things up,
but do we really need a dozen posts all parroting pretty much the same thing?
I'm not concerned about the electronic so much as my neuronic bandwidth.
Yes, I could simply killfile this thread, but we are now talking about
larger issues of courtesy and adherence to charter, and the possibility
of future similar threads, are we not?
Like you two (David, Solace), I dislike incivility on the 'net. However,
I do not find anything objectionable in the sentiments or the phrasing
of Gregory's last post (the "Higher learning" one), nor even the preceding,
artfully neutrally phrased one ("Re: chintzy").
..................
Emily Brontesaurus
Matthew Rabuzzi
David Read
solace <sol...@gte.net> wrote:
>Though I am sure you never intended to do anything helpful, you provided
>an excellent example of "chintzy" behavior, Resch.
>Gregory Resch wrote a lot, but gave not one jot:
>> all cut <<
Greg: 1 v. To whinge aimlessly: "He's gregging about the weather
again" etym. uncertain. obs. 2 n. The single leg of a pair of
trousers (joc) "He has but one greg, and that be bootless and
unhorsed" - Merkin's He Stops to Mither.
Resch: see retch, wretch.
David Read
..........
Real men read Flan O'Brien
Keith C. Ivey
Matthew Rabuzzi <rab...@loc251.tandem.com> wrote:
>Can we please back off on the eristic displays? No, politeness
>isn't Gregory's strong suit, and I can see why you want to
>tit-for-tat here (note that he seems to style himself "Gregory",
>not "Greg", BTW).
I understand your sensitivity to the issue, Matthew-not-Matt,
but just a few threads up (on my system) is a posting in the
"thinko" thread in which Greg calls himself "Greg". Either he
has no strong preference, or he's developed one only very
recently.
Keith C. Ivey <kci...@cpcug.org> Washington, DC
Contributing Editor/Webmaster
The Editorial Eye <http://www.eei-alex.com/eye/>
Lee Lester
CT> eap". Chinky I have heard my Brit of a husband use to mean cheaply
CT> made - as in "made in Japan" ---- and he says it includes all
CT> oriental made things. But I have never heard him use chinky for a
CT> person....just badly/poorly made products.
In Britain, I have often heard use of the term -- some hold it to be
mildly derogatory -- as a synonym for a Chinese person, e.g. 'Chinks eat
chop suey.' I have never heard it used in any other sense or in
reference to anything not Chinese.
Lee Lester
The Shorter Oxford entry for Chink gives one word: Chinaman. It says it
is of US origin and dates from 1901.
Bill Fisher
In article <4tm0b3$5...@dorsai.dorsai.org>, lip...@dorsai.org (Robert Lipton) writes:
> : John B. Kim wrote:
> : >
> : > Does anyone know the etymology of "chintzy?" A friend just told me it
> : > is a derogatory abbreviation of "Chinese." I never knew that.
> : > --
> Ahem. Your Friend may be confusing "Chink" which was a term for
> Chinese some time ago -- I'm sure Bret Harte used it liberally.
> Interestingly, my father used to use it, but only to refer to Chinese
> food. Whether this is derogatory or simple laziness is up to the speaker
> and listener. As derogatory terms like "Chinese Fire Drill" --referring
> to a chaotic and disorganized group activity a la The Three Stooges --
> use the "Chinese" form, it might be suggested that "Chinese" is
> derogatory and "Chink" is not. However, as it was the sub-standard form
> of the word, it lost out some time around the turn of the century.
>
"Chink" used to be pretty mild on the derogatoryness scale; somewhere
just slightly south of "brave", and not as bad as "wop". As I
remember, the high school basketball team from Pekin, Illinois,
was called the "Pekin Chinks".
- billf
Markus Laker
lee.l...@guildnet.org (Lee Lester):
> In Britain, I have often heard use of the term -- some hold it to be
> mildly derogatory -- as a synonym for a Chinese person, e.g. 'Chinks eat
> chop suey.' I have never heard it used in any other sense or in
> reference to anything not Chinese.
A Chink is a Chinese person; the term is now perceived as offensive and
is rarely used in polite company. 'Chinky' is the related adjective
and, used as a noun, is also is a slang word for a Chinese meal (much as
one would speak of going for a Chinese) or a Chinese take-away shop. In
this last sense 'Chinky' seems to be less offensive than 'Chink',
although I still doubt that it would be used in front of an oriental.
--
Markus Laker.
Lee Lester
> A Chink is a Chinese person; the term is now perceived as offensive
> and is rarely used in polite company.
Ah, political correctness and changing usage.
On this side of the pond, 'negro' and 'colored' are regarded in the
same way. And yet thousands of black -- the now-correct term --
subscribe to the United Negro College Fund and the National Association
for the Advancement of Colored People. Go figure!
Noelle Crist
In article <96081203...@guildnet.org>,
'supposed' origins of a person. I say supposed, because nowadays many
people have more than one ethnic origin.
NC
J. Sean Connell
Noelle Crist (NCR...@restrum.uni-mannheim.de) wrote:
: 'Negro' is a word like 'Caucasian'or 'Hispanic': it explains the
: people have more than one ethnic origin.
What makes "Caucasian" funny is that by the standard definition of "Caucasian"
(when used to refer to color or "race") is that the *real* Caucasians...
aren't. :)
As far as the Subject: line goes, isn't "chintzy" of Yiddish extraction?
Since all my (decent) etymological dictionaries are (about two thousand times)
out of arm's reach, I can't verify this; it does, however, have a Yiddishys
'feel' to me :)
--
J. Sean Connell Systems Software Architect, ICONZ
an...@canuck.gen.nz "Oh life is a glorious cycle of song,
an...@iconz.co.nz a medley of extemporanea,
#include <stddisc.h> And love is a thing that can never go wrong...
And I'm Queen Marie of Romania."
I *hate* Sun Type 4 kbs! --Dorothy Parker
Gregory Resch
an...@canuck.gen.nz (J. Sean Connell) writes:
> What makes "Caucasian" funny is that by the standard definition of
> "Caucasian" (when used to refer to color or "race") is that the *real*
> Caucasians aren't.
Aren't what? Colored? Wouldn't that make them "white" then?
("Transparent"? "Invisible"? The Caucasian mind reels.)
--
The Chechens could use some of that invisiblity.
Truly Donovan
J. Sean Connell wrote:
>
> As far as the Subject: line goes, isn't "chintzy" of Yiddish extraction?
> Since all my (decent) etymological dictionaries are (about two thousand times)
> out of arm's reach, I can't verify this; it does, however, have a Yiddishys
> 'feel' to me :)
Nah. If it were Yiddish, it would be either "schintzy" or "hintzy."
Truly Donovan
David Vanecek
Truly Donovan (tr...@lunemere.com) wrote:
: Truly Donovan
'Chintzy' is from 'chintz', which is from Hindi. A kind of cloth.
DV
Truly Donovan
The only one who doesn't know that is Connell, who picked up an ancient thread long
after it had been answered correctly 700 times.
Truly Donovan
Murray Arnow
In article <321E11...@lunemere.com>, Truly Donovan <tr...@lunemere.com> wrote:
>J. Sean Connell wrote:
>>
>> As far as the Subject: line goes, isn't "chintzy" of Yiddish extraction?
>> Since all my (decent) etymological dictionaries are (about two thousand
> times)
>> out of arm's reach, I can't verify this; it does, however, have a Yiddishys
>> 'feel' to me :)
>
>Nah. If it were Yiddish, it would be either "schintzy" or "hintzy."
>
>Truly Donovan
_____________________________
Murray Arnow (mar...@wwa.com)
Holly Gallup
In article <4vml2a$m...@news.third-wave.com>,
David Vanecek <dvan...@third-wave.com> wrote:
>: J. Sean Connell wrote:
>: >
>: > As far as the Subject: line goes, isn't "chintzy" of Yiddish extraction?
>: > Since all my (decent) etymological dictionaries are (about two thousand times)
>: > out of arm's reach, I can't verify this; it does, however, have a Yiddishys
>: > 'feel' to me :)
>'Chintzy' is from 'chintz', which is from Hindi. A kind of cloth.
Specifically, chintz is a kind of cotton cloth with a glazed finish, which
gives it most of its body. When chintz has been washed or, in the case
of furniture upholstered in chintz, sat on long enough, it loses its
glaze and becomes rather tired-looking. I always thought that was the
origin of chintzy: something that looked good when it was new, but was
really not of high quality.
--holly
Chris Malcolm
In article <resch.8...@cpcug.org> re...@cpcug.org (Gregory Resch) writes:
>an...@canuck.gen.nz (J. Sean Connell) writes:
>> What makes "Caucasian" funny is that by the standard definition of
>> "Caucasian" (when used to refer to color or "race") is that the *real*
>> Caucasians aren't.
>Aren't what? Colored? Wouldn't that make them "white" then?
Well, strictly speaking, black and white aren't coloured, i.e., the only
coloured people are neither white nor black. This is expressed rather
nicely in the PC euphemism for "coloured", "tinted".
jeanette
Well, for a very long time, all people that were non-Chinese in
origin, were referred to as "barbarians". In fact, someone explained
to me that the English forced China to stop referring to them as
barbarians in their treaties and contracts.
Whenever the Chinese refer to their own race, we say "yun", which
means "person". A non-Chinese is referred to as a "gwi", which means
"monster", or more correctly "fan-gwi", which means "foreign monster".
<bow>
I honestly don't know any other term to use for Caucasian.
Oh well. I'm "wall filler". (Chink) <grin>
Jeanette
(purple with pink polka dots)
tom collins
jean...@direct.ca (jeanette) wrote:
>Well, for a very long time, all people that were non-Chinese in
>origin, were referred to as "barbarians". In fact, someone explained
>to me that the English forced China to stop referring to them as
>barbarians in their treaties and contracts.
>
> Whenever the Chinese refer to their own race, we say "yun", which
>means "person". A non-Chinese is referred to as a "gwi", which means
>"monster", or more correctly "fan-gwi", which means "foreign monster".
><bow>
>
>I honestly don't know any other term to use for Caucasian.
>
In John Le Carre''s wonderful Smiley trilogy, his characters
end up in Hong Kong (in The Honourable Schoolboy), where a
different term, "kwailo" is used for foreigners by the natives
there. Perhaps this was a Hong Kong version of "foreign
monster"?
In the book the term seemed to be applied a lot to the rather
tall and gangly Jerry Westerby, the sometimes hero of the
story, so it may have had a specific reference to his height or
his ugliness. No doubt this is a less polite word than yours?
Tom Collins
Polar
On 2 Sep 1996 09:28:13 GMT, tom collins <tcol...@inforamp.net> wrote:
>jean...@direct.ca (jeanette) wrote:
>>Well, for a very long time, all people that were non-Chinese in
>>origin, were referred to as "barbarians". In fact, someone explained
>>to me that the English forced China to stop referring to them as
>>barbarians in their treaties and contracts.
>>
>> Whenever the Chinese refer to their own race, we say "yun", which
>>means "person". A non-Chinese is referred to as a "gwi", which means
>>"monster", or more correctly "fan-gwi", which means "foreign monster".
>><bow>
>>
>>I honestly don't know any other term to use for Caucasian.
Well, get one!
That kind of Sino-centric stigmatizing of all outsiders is pretty
offensive. ( Is it also used for the many non-Han peoples within the
PRC?)
Of course, many, many other tribal cultures refer to, or (in the case
of genocided --reluctant neologism) cultures, did refer to,
themselves as "the people" or " human beings", thus by implication
excluding others. Yet how many actively stigmatized all others as
"monsters"?
Maybe I should post this on a cultural anthropology group. But first I
would fain plumb the wisdom of this August Body.
Polar
H Andrew Chuang
In article <50e9bd$n...@news.inforamp.net>,
tom collins <tcol...@inforamp.net> wrote:
>jean...@direct.ca (jeanette) wrote:
>>Well, for a very long time, all people that were non-Chinese in
>>origin, were referred to as "barbarians". In fact, someone explained
>>to me that the English forced China to stop referring to them as
>>barbarians in their treaties and contracts.
>>
>> Whenever the Chinese refer to their own race, we say "yun", which
>>means "person". A non-Chinese is referred to as a "gwi", which means
>>"monster", or more correctly "fan-gwi", which means "foreign monster".
>><bow>
>>
>>I honestly don't know any other term to use for Caucasian.
>>
>
>
>end up in Hong Kong (in The Honourable Schoolboy), where a
>different term, "kwailo" is used for foreigners by the natives
>there. Perhaps this was a Hong Kong version of "foreign
>monster"?
Tom's "kwailo" and Jeanette's "fan-gwi" are exactly the same thing.
"Gwai" (that's in Cantonese, in Mandarin, it's Guei/Gui) means ghost
(monster is not a very good translation). The Chinese word "fan" means
foreign. We call tomatoes "fan-qie" (foreign egg plants), and yams
"fan-shu" (foreign potatos), etc. "Lo" ("lau" in Mandarin) is a
colloquial term for a male person. Thus, gwailo and fan-gwei basically
mean the same thing.
I would like to point out that the use of "qwailo" is disrespectful.
However, it's not really derogatory. It was out of fear (of their
size and pale-looking skins) that the Chinese called Westerners "gwai"
(ghost).
Rose Platt
On Mon, 2 Sep 1996, Polar wrote:
> Maybe I should post this on a cultural anthropology group. But first I
> would fain plumb the wisdom of this August Body.
You may have a problem there, seeing as how it's been September for
almost three days now.
--Silence
"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything."
--Mark Twain
TsuiDB
"Kwailo" is usually transliterated "gweilo" and literally means "foreign
devil. It is actually possible in Chinese to use other words for
foreigner, such as (back to Mandarin herem, from the above Cantonese):
- waiguo ren (lit. "foreign country person")( a Chinese friend once told
me as a child he thought there were just two countries in the world,
"China" (lit. "central country") and "foreign", a logical mistake when
you look at the construction of the words);
- lao wai (lit. "old foreign" -- a not very pejorative pejorative, often
heard in phrases such as "pianpian lao wai" = "rip off foreigners", said
of someone purveying kitschy souvenirs, for example)
-- "Caucasian" could be rather formally translated as "bai zhong ren"
(lit. "white race person") but you hardly ever hear this or any formal
descriptions of race in Chinese speech except the academic.
Interesting reference on the substance of these matters, rather than on
terminology: _The Discourse of Race in Modern China_, by Frank Dikotter
(there should be an umlaut over that 'o').
SJM in HK
Keith C. Ivey
s.m...@ix.netcom.com (Polar) wrote (on September 2):
>Maybe I should post this on a cultural anthropology group.
>But first I would fain plumb the wisdom of this August Body.
You need to flip the page on your calendar.
[posted and mailed]
H Andrew Chuang
In article <322D0C...@netvigator.com>, TsuiDB <s...@netvigator.com> wrote:
>"Kwailo" is usually transliterated "gweilo" and literally means "foreign
>devil. It is actually possible in Chinese to use other words for
>foreigner, such as (back to Mandarin herem, from the above Cantonese):
>
>- waiguo ren (lit. "foreign country person")( a Chinese friend once told
>me as a child he thought there were just two countries in the world,
>"China" (lit. "central country") and "foreign", a logical mistake when
>you look at the construction of the words);
Pardon me! What logical mistake are you referring to? People in Taiwan
call non-Taiwanese as wai-sheng ren (i.e., people from provinces [sheng]
outside Taiwan). Cantonese people call non-Cantonese people as
ngoi-gong lo (ngoi is the Cantonese pronunciation of "wai", and ngoi-gong
lo means people from outside of the East River [in Cantonese, gong is the
word for "river"]). Thus, what's wrong with waiguo ren?
>
>- lao wai (lit. "old foreign" -- a not very pejorative pejorative, often
>heard in phrases such as "pianpian lao wai" = "rip off foreigners", said
>of someone purveying kitschy souvenirs, for example)
Lao wai is not pejorative. Chinese often call their friends lao xiong
(old brother). Lao wai is very informal and very colloquial, but in
most instances, it's not derogatory!
>
>-- "Caucasian" could be rather formally translated as "bai zhong ren"
>(lit. "white race person") but you hardly ever hear this or any formal
>descriptions of race in Chinese speech except the academic.
"Bai ren" is probably more commonly used than "bai zhong ren." Anyway,
Caucasians are not necessarily white. Most of Asian Indians are
Caucasians and they have very dark brown skins.
tom collins
s.m...@ix.netcom.com (Polar) wrote:
>
>>jean...@direct.ca (jeanette) wrote:
>>>Well, for a very long time, all people that were non-Chinese in
>>>"monster", or more correctly "fan-gwi", which means "foreign monster".
>>>
>>>I honestly don't know any other term to use for Caucasian.
>
>Well, get one!
>
>That kind of Sino-centric stigmatizing of all outsiders is pretty
>offensive. how many )other cultures) actively stigmatized all others as
>"monsters"?
I find Polar's response understandable, but lacking in
perspective (much less successful persuasion skills!) .
For one, all ancient (and some not-so-ancient) cultures in
intermittent or constant contact with other, often aggressive
cultures, feared and thus labelled in strong terms, the enemy.
Thus, the Angles feared the Vikings, the British,the Normans,
the early Americans,Indian natives, the much later Americans,
Russia, and so on.. And American's feelings today towards
Iranianians are full of the same demonizing--with good reason
most people would add. Then there's the Serbs and the
Croats....In truth, language has often reflected fear and
hatred between groups..
And this is going on in other ways today, even in so-called
"advanced" nations. We usually label it racism, but it's the
same as the Chinese situation, with only the language
modernized.
So, the Chinese language may be antiquated, but the feeling
behind the term is not only very modern, but very prevalent
around the world.
Tom Collins
Polar
Your remarks about groups historically fearing/hating each other are
accurate, but I believe you may be missing the point of my original
post, as well as of some of the comments on this thread.
There is a difference between ethnic or cultural or national groups
hating/fearing each other -- and a group stigmatizing ALL others as
"monsters".
It is hardly news that the Chinese thought, and quite possibly still
think of themselves as the center of the world, with everybody else
being considered "barbarians" or -- as my original query wondered --
actually "monsters".
If someone has info about *another* national, ethnic, or cultural
group stigmatizing ALL outside their immediate circle by definition as
"monsters", I would be interested to receive it.
Polar
H Andrew Chuang
In article <322ef7e7...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
Polar <s.m...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
[snip]
>
>Your remarks about groups historically fearing/hating each other are
>accurate, but I believe you may be missing the point of my original
>post, as well as of some of the comments on this thread.
>
>There is a difference between ethnic or cultural or national groups
>hating/fearing each other -- and a group stigmatizing ALL others as
>"monsters".
>
> It is hardly news that the Chinese thought, and quite possibly still
>think of themselves as the center of the world, with everybody else
>being considered "barbarians" or -- as my original query wondered --
>actually "monsters".
>
>If someone has info about *another* national, ethnic, or cultural
>group stigmatizing ALL outside their immediate circle by definition as
>"monsters", I would be interested to receive it.
>
If you're referring to "gwailo," it's not a "monster person", it's a
"ghostly peson." I think it's human nature to make up names for people
who are different from you. Thus, I don't think Chinese is alone.
That's why you have "jap," "gook," "chink," "nigger," in your language.
Let my share my childhood experience of learning the Chinese
history. There were many foreign groups which had conflicts with
China. Some were easy for me to remember, for example, Xiong Nu
which supposedly had migrated to Hungary (in Chinese Hungary is Xiong
Yia Li), and Tu Jue which supposedly had migrated to Turkey (in Chinese
it's Tu Er Qi, I believe there are still some Turks living in the
Western part of China). There were many names which I had no idea what
they meant. Only one, Nan Man (Southern Barbarian) has a specific
reference of the word barbarian. After I came to the States, I had an
opportunity to talk to a person from Korea. He pointed out to me that
Chinese at one time called the Koreans as Eastern Barbarian which in
Chinese is Tong Yi. Before the conversation, I had no idea "Yi" meant
barbarian. It seemed to me that Chinese had "invented" a lot of
"elaborate" words for foreigners surrounding the "Middle Kingdom."
Of all the Chinese history that I have learned (sadly to say that I
don't remember much details), I could only recall one very negative term
to decribe the Japanese around 1700 A.D. The word is Wo Kou which means
short pirates (if I remember correctly). IMHO, only this one is
comparable to "nigger," "gook," or "chink."
There is also a big difference between the Chinese culture and the Western
culture. Throughout history, Chinese had been very successful in
assimilating foreign "invaders" and preserving the Chinese identity.
There are many Mogolians and Manchurians in China that you can't even
tell that they are not Han Chinese. Thus, no matter what the Chinese
had called those people, they were able to mingle. However, in the
US, it took some political movements before the White people started
accepting the Black as their equal. So did South Africa. In Germany,
there are still very strong sentiments against foreigners.
Hence, I find it a bit offending that people try to equate "qwailo" to
words like nigger and chink. No doubt, the usage of "qwailo" is
disrespectful, but it's not derogatory nor condescending!
tom collins
Polar wrote about my post:
>Your remarks about groups historically fearing/hating each other are
>accurate, but I believe you may be missing the point of my original
>post, as well as of some of the comments on this thread.
>
>There is a difference between ethnic or cultural or national groups
>hating/fearing each other -- and a group stigmatizing ALL others as
>"monsters".
>
Yes, you may be quite right, but I'm not sure.
I suspect, instead, that we have a language issue here. What I
was trying to suggest but didn't actually say is that language
has progressed in Western countries, but has not in China.
Thus. "monster" is quite possibly a term one might find in
Western thought a 1000 years ago, with its connotations of a
dreaded, supernatural-like foreign enemy. In China, neither
their culture nor their language, I believe, has developed, so
the word still exists.
I felt, altho I may be wrong, that you were reacting to this
term from a modern, Western perspective, and were thus
horrified by the term. But I don't read anything more into it
than a very old-fashioned language in a very old-fashioned
country.
If the Chinese are to modernize truly, then they will have to
change their language, which will be very painful for them.And,
if they don't succeed, quite possibly painful for the rest of
us.
What is interesting to me is that their attitude is one of
fear, for which there are no doubt historical reasons. This
contrasts with another group, the 18th to early 20th century
white race that saw all other groups as inferior and therefore
needing "saving". But, of course, there were historical reasons
for that attitude too.
However, I might still not "get it", so I'll be interested to
follow this thread further.
Tom Collins
H Andrew Chuang
In article <50obml$j...@news.inforamp.net>,
tom collins <tcol...@inforamp.net> wrote:
>Polar wrote about my post:
>
>>Your remarks about groups historically fearing/hating each other are
>>accurate, but I believe you may be missing the point of my original
>>post, as well as of some of the comments on this thread.
>>
>>There is a difference between ethnic or cultural or national groups
>>hating/fearing each other -- and a group stigmatizing ALL others as
>>"monsters".
>>
>Yes, you may be quite right, but I'm not sure.
>
>I suspect, instead, that we have a language issue here. What I
>was trying to suggest but didn't actually say is that language
>has progressed in Western countries, but has not in China.
>Thus. "monster" is quite possibly a term one might find in
>Western thought a 1000 years ago, with its connotations of a
>dreaded, supernatural-like foreign enemy. In China, neither
>their culture nor their language, I believe, has developed, so
>the word still exists.
I do agree that people in the East are not as politically correct as, say,
people in the US. (Do remember, most Far Eastern societies, such as Japan,
Korea, China, etc., are much more homogeneous than the US. Thus, PC is
not as important an issue as in a multi-racial society.) Nevertheless,
there are still many ignorant and insensitive people in the US using racial
slurs. Hence, it has nothing to do with whether the language has developed
or not.
>
>I felt, altho I may be wrong, that you were reacting to this
>term from a modern, Western perspective, and were thus
>horrified by the term. But I don't read anything more into it
>than a very old-fashioned language in a very old-fashioned
>country.
Agree. Remember how the term first came about. Nowadays, you see people
of all races. In the old days, it had to be a shocking experience for
the Chinese to see a pale, bearded, huge Caucasian that they had never
seen before in their life. You simply cannot use your 20th-Century,
Western perspective to conclude that the Chinese stigmatized ALL others
as "ghostly." (The conclusion suggested by Polar is false anyway. The
word "gwai/gui" only applies to Whites [and Blacks more recently]. It has
never been used to describe Asians.)
>
>If the Chinese are to modernize truly, then they will have to
>change their language, which will be very painful for them.And,
>if they don't succeed, quite possibly painful for the rest of
>us.
>
>What is interesting to me is that their attitude is one of
>fear, for which there are no doubt historical reasons. This
>contrasts with another group, the 18th to early 20th century
>white race that saw all other groups as inferior and therefore
>needing "saving". But, of course, there were historical reasons
>for that attitude too.
To me, that's the most important distinction. There is no sense of
superiority when those Chinese terms are used. However, many English
terms are used with a sense of superiority.
>
>However, I might still not "get it", so I'll be interested to
>follow this thread further.
>
I think you did. It's Polar who has not. Furthermore, Chinese is not
alone in disrespecting other races. All people do. For example, Malays
call Chinese as "jina gwei" (something like that, meaning Chinese ghosts),
and Malaysian Chinese call Malays "babi" (pigs).
Polar
Polar speaking:
Well, shucks, I might as well give up. This thread has become so
tangled that, due to editing problems, I am being credited (or
debited?) with utterances and attitudes of other posters, as well as
having my original, narrow inquiry misunderstood.
Here, for the 2nd or 3rd time, is my ORIGINAL post:
Begin:
I found the below post on another group, and am curious to learn
whether this is still the "normal" or "correct" Chinese term for
foreigners, or whether there has been consideration of creating a
more value-neutral term.
Thank you for any input.
Polar
Begin quote:
>Well, for a very long time, all people that were non-Chinese in
>>origin, were referred to as "barbarians". In fact, someone explained
>>to me that the English forced China to stop referring to them as
>>barbarians in their treaties and contracts.
>>
>> Whenever the Chinese refer to their own race, we say "yun", which
>>means "person". A non-Chinese is referred to as a "gwi", which means
>>"monster", or more correctly "fan-gwi", which means "foreign monster".
>><bow>
>>
>>I honestly don't know any other term to use for Caucasian.
To which I replied:
Well, get one!
That kind of Sino-centric stigmatizing of all outsiders is pretty
offensive. ( Is it also used for the many non-Han peoples within the
PRC?)
Of course, many, many other tribal cultures refer to, or (in the case
of genocided --reluctant neologism) cultures, did refer to,
themselves as "the people" or " human beings", thus by implication
excluding others. Yet how many actively stigmatized all others as
"monsters"?
Maybe I should post this on a cultural anthropology group. But first I
would fain plumb the wisdom of this August Body.
Polar
End
Resume current message:
I was, and am still, trying to focus *very narrowly* on whether the
apparent Sino-centric attitude toward *all* outsiders as "monsters"
(not knowing Chinese I couldn't speak to correctness of translation)
is unique to China. I asked whether any other such cultures were
known. Still waiting for input on that point.
As one who has had Chinese friends & lovers for [censored] years, I
suppose I should resent the implied accusation of racism in some
posts, but then some people react reflexively, as though a PC-
switch were being thrown in their minds, when a question such as mine
is raised.
Polar
H Andrew Chuang
In article <323060df...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
A netter (I believe it's SJM from Hong Kong) did tell you that there
are other terms used for Caucasian (and you chose to ignore it). In
fact there are plenty. Just to name a few (all translations are
word-for-word literal translations, so they may not be the proper
translations): bai-ren (white person), bai-zhong ren (white race
person), wai-guo ren (outside-country person), mei-guo ren (US person),
ying-guo ren (UK person), yang ren (ocean person, i.e., a person
[who reaches China] from the ocean, maybe we should call it a sky person
now ;-) ). Less formally, we say lao wai (old outsider), lao mei (old
American), etc. As I pointed out earlier to SJM, lao wai is not
derogatory, because we call ourselves lao zhong (old Chinese) and our
friends lao xiong (old brother). I had at least two or three postings
in this thread and firmly asserted that gwai/gui means "ghost" in
Chinese. Yet, you chose to believe the other poster and still used
"monster."
>
>That kind of Sino-centric stigmatizing of all outsiders is pretty
>offensive. ( Is it also used for the many non-Han peoples within the
>PRC?)
>
And Euro-centric stigmatization is not offensive, is it? Had Chinese
sent out Crusaders many times to force others to believe what they
believed in and killed others because they had different beliefs? As I
pointed out in my last post that Chinese had great success in assimilating
other cultures. Not many cultures had successfully assimilated their
conquerors, but the Chinese had done it twice (Mongols and Manchus). If
the Chinese were as arrogant as you implied, would they have mingled
with those "barbarians?"
>Of course, many, many other tribal cultures refer to, or (in the case
>of genocided --reluctant neologism) cultures, did refer to,
>themselves as "the people" or " human beings", thus by implication
>excluding others. Yet how many actively stigmatized all others as
>"monsters"?
Just a few netters said that "gwai/gui" is used does not mean all
Chinese-speaking people use it. There are plently of people in
the US still use niggers does not mean the majority of Americans are
racists. So, don't jump to conclusion based on some unproven claims.
Furthermore, remember when this term was widely used in China it was
during the time when the British merchants were selling opium to the
Chinese people. Those "gwailos" pratically destroyed the country. Do
you expect the Chinese to address them respectfully? It's certainly
disrespectful, but there was not (and still there is not) any
condescending connotation in its usage.
FWIW, "gwailo" is a Cantonese term. In Mandarin Chinese, the equivalent
is "yang gui zi" (ocean ghost). In Mandarin Chinese, we also call kids
"xiao gui zi" (little ghost). Does that mean we discriminate our
childern? Hardly! "Xiao gui zi" is a very common and acceptable term
in Chinese with very little negative connotation (a naughty kid is often
called xiao gui zi). Sometimes, it's even complimentary (for being
witty). Thus, I would say "yang gui zi" is a very informal term and
slightly disrespectful. To me, your conclusion of Sino-centric
stigmatization is a lot more offensive than the term "yang gui zi."
Some people call others names because they are ignorant and insensitive.
However, I think your accusation of Chinese being egocentric is even
more ignorant.
>
>Resume current message:
>
>I was, and am still, trying to focus *very narrowly* on whether the
>apparent Sino-centric attitude toward *all* outsiders as "monsters"
>(not knowing Chinese I couldn't speak to correctness of translation)
>is unique to China. I asked whether any other such cultures were
>known. Still waiting for input on that point.
Your question is irrelevant because you made a bad assumption that
Chinese were being Sino-centric. It's human nature to group together
with people with whom they can identify; and appearance is the most
obvious thing for the identification. (You spend most of the time
with people who have similar backgrounds, don't you?) People need
to be educated to accept people who are different from them. At
least in my eyes, throughout history, the Europeans have been no less
Euro-centric than the Chinese have been Sino-centric.
>
>As one who has had Chinese friends & lovers for [censored] years, I
>suppose I should resent the implied accusation of racism in some
>posts, but then some people react reflexively, as though a PC-
>switch were being thrown in their minds, when a question such as mine
>is raised.
>
However, your reply
>>>I honestly don't know any other term to use for Caucasian.
>
>To which I replied:
>
>
>Well, get one!
does imply the Chinese are not being PC, doesn't it?
P.S. Just want to make one thing clear: I'm not from China. There
are many overseas ethnic Chinese around the world. Thus, I'm
defending the Chinese culture, I'm not defending China per se.
tom collins
s.m...@ix.netcom.com (Polar) wrote:
>
>Polar speaking:
>
>Well, shucks, I might as well give up. This thread has become so
>tangled that, due to editing problems, I am being credited (or
>debited?) with utterances and attitudes of other posters, as well as
>having my original, narrow inquiry misunderstood.
Collins speaking:
Reminds me of what Churchill(?) said about the Balkan Question.
Something like:
"There are only three people who have ever understood this
issue. And one is dead and the other two have forgotten."
Well, I think I've gone brain-dead on this one, so I won't be
of any help. But good luck with others.
Tom Collins
PS Or was it the Baltics? Sheesh, brain-dead and forgetful too!
ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw
H Andrew Chuang's post on the subject of Chinese attitudes toward non-
Chinese was right on the mark. I could quibble with a few details, but
I'd much rather let it stand. There's a lot in there that a lot of people
need to learn.
Take this as a given: all peoples are ethnocentric. You can therefore
find evidence of "racism" in all cultures. What the word _racism_ means
to late twentieth century North Americans, however, is not what exists in
China, because China is not late twentieth century North America. Does
prejudice exist? Yes. Is it the kind of prejudice we know? No. Is it
universal in Chinese society? To believe so is to be racist indeed.
It seems this thread started as a discussion of something in John Le
Carre's works. How much did he know about Chinese society? If he knew
much about it, who is to say he wasn't just capitalizing on Westerners'
misconceptions about China? He wrote fiction, after all; and, I believe,
at least one of his objectives was to sell books.
Like H Andrew Chuang, I am not from China. I am, however, fully literate
in modern written Chinese, I speak good Cantonese and near-perfect
Mandarin, and I have lived in Taiwan for eighteen years straight. I can
attest that attitudes toward non-Chinese have changed a _great_ deal
during the time I've been here. But they aren't, and never were, anything
that any Westerner can imagine without being immersed in the culture.
Dan Strychalski ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw
N.R. Mitchum
tom collins wrote:
--------
> Reminds me of what Churchill(?) said about the Balkan Question.
> Something like:
>
> "There are only three people who have ever understood this
> issue. And one is dead and the other two have forgotten."
Wasn't that Disraeli describing the Schleswig-Holstein succession?
Whoever started it, I've no doubt it has been revamped thousands
of times to fit every knotty political problem.
Nathan Mitchum [post&mail]
Mark Odegard
[posted to alt.usage.english & e-mailed]
Don't know if it was Disraeli, but it goes more closely, "One's dead,
one's mad, and I've quite forgotten".
And the Schleswig-Holstein Question is obscure. Even when you study
it, you find you don't understand what the hell it's all about. In
short, the people of S-H were promised back in the middle ages that
their conjoined duchy would not be divided without their consent; when
the Danish male succession failed, the issue came to the fore. The
trouble was, finding "consent" among the S-Hers was impossible and it
turned into a kind of Bosnia-Hercegovina question.
--
Mark Odegard ode...@ptel.net
The great orthographical contest has long subsisted between
etymology and pronunciation. It has been demanded, on one hand,
that men should write as they speak; but, as it has been shown
that this conformity never was attained in any language, and
that it is not more easy to persuade men to agree exactly in
speaking than in writing, it may be asked, with equal propriety,
why men do not rather speak as they write.
-- Samuel Johnson, "The Plan of an English Dictionary" (1747).
Shakib Otaqui
On Thursday, in article
<322ef7e7...@nntp.ix.netcom.com> s.m...@ix.netcom.com
"Polar" wrote:
P> If someone has info about *another* national, ethnic, or cultural
P> group stigmatizing ALL outside their immediate circle by definition as
P> "monsters", I would be interested to receive it.
Americans?
--
Gesticulation: Any movement made by a foreigner. (J B Morton)
_____________________________________________________________________
Shakib Otaqui Al-Quds Consult
tom collins
ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw wrote:
>
>It seems this thread started as a discussion of something in John Le
>Carre's works.
No, I introduced the word "kwailo" from Le Carre's <The
Honourable Schoolboy> to query an earlier poster who had a
different Chinese term for Caucasians meaning "monster." Most
of the ensuing discussion has been about their use of the
concept and whether such a concept exists elsewhere.
I like your comment:
I have lived in Taiwan for eighteen years straight. I can
>attest that attitudes toward non-Chinese have changed a _great_ deal
>during the time I've been here. But they aren't, and never were, anything
>that any Westerner can imagine without being immersed in the culture.
>
I think that we see different English "cultures" every day here
on a.u.e., often with great misunderstandings. So it's a real
stretch for those of us not conversant with the Cinese culture
to try and understand what "monster" really means in Chinese.
Tom Collins
tom collins
Shakib Otaqui <Sha...@alquds.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On Thursday, in article
> <322ef7e7...@nntp.ix.netcom.com> s.m...@ix.netcom.com
> "Polar" wrote:
>
>P> If someone has info about *another* national, ethnic, or cultural
>P> group stigmatizing ALL outside their immediate circle by definition as
>P> "monsters", I would be interested to receive it.
>
> Americans?
>
>
>--
>
>Shakib Otaqui Al-Quds Consult
Ah, I like your panache. Imagine. Taking on perhaps
three-quarters of a.u.e. with one single word! It will be
interesting, I hope!
Tom Collins
Polar
On 9 Sep 1996 06:50:44 GMT, tom collins <tcol...@inforamp.net> wrote:
>Shakib Otaqui <Sha...@alquds.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>On Thursday, in article
>> <322ef7e7...@nntp.ix.netcom.com> s.m...@ix.netcom.com
>> "Polar" wrote:
>>
>>P> If someone has info about *another* national, ethnic, or cultural
>>P> group stigmatizing ALL outside their immediate circle by definition as
>>P> "monsters", I would be interested to receive it.
>>
>> Americans?
The American/English word for foreigners is "foreigners".
Polar
H Andrew Chuang
In article <32346f87...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
Also "aliens." Unfortunately for me, the first time that I came across
this word was by watching the movie "Alien." Therefore, in my mind,
I associated the word "alien" with a very negative connotation (not
unlike "monster"). When I first came to the US, I didn't really like
the alien label. After having spent many years in the US, I understand
that there is no negative connotation with the word "alien."
<sarcastic mode on>
Nevertheless, I may choose to be obnoxious and insist that even the word
"foreigner" is somewhat offensive. The reason is the suffix
"-er/-or" does not necessary imply a "being" (for example, a collector
can be either a person or an object). Thus, a "foreign person" should be
the preferred term. (I know I'm stretching it a bit.)
<sarcastic mode off>
I made the above comment because I just recalled something that my
elementary school teacher told me. It's an insult to say someone looks
like a dog (or any other animals or even monsters), but it's not the
worst kind of insult. The worst kind is to say someone looks like a
human being (which implies the person is not a human being).
P.S. since Polar never did reply to my ranting of his ill-conceived
perception of "sino-stigmatization," I would like to remind him
again that there is no single Chinese term that describes
foreigners as "monsters." The term "kwailo/gwailo" means a ghostly
man. (Note, at least it's a human being. ;-) )
tom collins
s.m...@ix.netcom.com (Polar) wrote:
>>>
>>>P> If someone has info about *another* national, ethnic, or cultural
>>>P> group stigmatizing ALL outside their immediate circle by definition as
>>>P> "monsters", I would be interested to receive it.
Shakib Otaqui's daring reply:
>>> Americans?
Ever obdurate, Polar corrects:
>
>The American/English word for foreigners is "foreigners".
>
Collins intrudes again with:
No, the most typical epithet that Americans use for those who
cross them is :
"You devil."
Must be the Puritan heritage.
Tom Collins
Polar
On 9 Sep 1996 21:49:16 GMT, Chu...@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) wrote:
>In article <32346f87...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
>Polar <s.m...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>The American/English word for foreigners is "foreigners".
>>
>
>Also "aliens."
"Aliens" may be bureaucratic immigration-ese for a non-American
citizen, but I have *never* heard or seen it used in ordinary
conversation or writing. The word used is *always* foreigner.
(True, the noun is sometimes modified by impolite adjectives,
depending on the narrow-mindedness of the speaker/writer.)
Unfortunately for me, the first time that I came across
>this word was by watching the movie "Alien." Therefore, in my mind,
>I associated the word "alien" with a very negative connotation (not
>unlike "monster"). When I first came to the US, I didn't really like
>the alien label. After having spent many years in the US, I understand
>that there is no negative connotation with the word "alien."
>
><sarcastic mode on>
>
>Nevertheless, I may choose to be obnoxious and insist that even the word
>"foreigner" is somewhat offensive. The reason is the suffix
>"-er/-or" does not necessary imply a "being" (for example, a collector
>can be either a person or an object). Thus, a "foreign person" should be
>the preferred term. (I know I'm stretching it a bit.)
>
><sarcastic mode off>
>
>I made the above comment because I just recalled something that my
>elementary school teacher told me. It's an insult to say someone looks
>like a dog (or any other animals or even monsters), but it's not the
>worst kind of insult. The worst kind is to say someone looks like a
>human being (which implies the person is not a human being).
>
>P.S. since Polar never did reply to my ranting of his ill-conceived
> perception of "sino-stigmatization," I would like to remind him
> again that there is no single Chinese term that describes
> foreigners as "monsters." The term "kwailo/gwailo" means a ghostly
> man. (Note, at least it's a human being. ;-) )
Polar was not interested in continuing a sterile dialog.
Email from several a.u.e.-ers criticizing Andrew's ethnic
over-sensitivity and failure to address the real, narrow, language
usage issue reinforced that decision.
Polar
Gareth Williams
Thus spake s.m...@ix.netcom.com (Polar) :
+
+The American/English word for foreigners is "foreigners".
+
+Polar
Foreigner deriving from 'out of doors' - I mean, how parochial can you
get? Any one from outside your house is a foreigner/alien/stranger!
regards
Gareth Williams <g...@fmode.demon.co.uk>
Polar
>Thus spake s.m...@ix.netcom.com (Polar) :
>
>
>+
>+The American/English word for foreigners is "foreigners".
>+
>+Polar
>
>Foreigner deriving from 'out of doors' - I mean, how parochial can you
>get? Any one from outside your house is a foreigner/alien/stranger!
The question is not whether usage is "parochial"; name me a culture
that is NOT! Many cultures call themselves "human beings", by
implication suggesting that everyone else is something else.
But, to reiterate original point: let's say a given culture -- call
it "x" -- denotes everyone else as "monster", "[white] ghost", "big
nose", "round eyes", etc.etc.
I'm still trying pathetically hard to ask whether any culture other
than China -- for indeed, "x" = China -- uses this type of
terminology for foreigners.
Sigh! Maybe I'll have to visit every <soc.culture.x> group on the
'Net and ask *their* term for "foreigner". I just thought with the
wide range of scholarship on a.u.e., somebody might know.
Polar
>
>
>
>regards
>Gareth Williams <g...@fmode.demon.co.uk>
H Andrew Chuang
In article <3235c507...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
Polar <s.m...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>But, to reiterate original point: let's say a given culture -- call
>it "x" -- denotes everyone else as "monster", "[white] ghost", "big
>nose", "round eyes", etc.etc.
>
>I'm still trying pathetically hard to ask whether any culture other
>than China -- for indeed, "x" = China -- uses this type of
>terminology for foreigners.
>
You're hopelessly pathetic. Although I only know two languages and
several dialects of my language, I can confidently say that most, if not
all, cultures have disrespectful terms for foreigners and proper
terms for foreigners. Once again, the two most-widely-used proper Chinese
term for foreigners is Wai (outside) Guo (country) Ren (human being/person)
and Yang (Ocean) Ren. (As I explained before, yang-ren refers to a person
arriving from the ocean. We call Japanese Tong [East] yang-ren and Whites
Xi [West] yang-ren.) Thus, I sincerely request that if you want to ask
the question, please at least leave China out.
It's very unfortunate that people judge foreign language usage based
on their own mother tongue. In English, it's very uncommon to use
"ghost" to describe anything, but it's not the same in Chinese, especially
in Cantonese. For example, a woman may call her mate as "suei gwai"
(bad ghost) which can be quite intimate in Cantonese. "Gwai" is also
used in an adverbrial way. For example, one can say "hou gwai lian"
instead of "hou lian" (very pretty) to further emphasize the prettiness.
(BTW, this form of speech is very "girlish.") In Western civilization,
ghosts are almost always associated with devils, Satan. In Chinese,
ghosts are not always bad. I'm not trying to justify the use of
"gwailo" in Cantonese. Whoever uses "gwailo" is insensitive, if not
disrespectful. However, the most important point is the Chinese is no
different from Americans, Europeans, or any other people on earth in their
usage of disrespectful terms for people who look different from them. Yes,
some of us do call some White people "big nose." However, we are called
"flat nose" by some, too. No cultures are exempted from this problem. I
just don't understand why you keep on asking this question and insist
using China as your only example, especailly after I have told you so many
times that the Chinese do not refer to foreigners with non-human terms
only.
Steve MacGregor
H Andrew Chuang <Chu...@cris.com> wrote in article
<5123cs$l...@herald.concentric.net>...
<<
Thus, a "foreign person" should be
the preferred term. (I know I'm stretching it a bit.)
>>
Or, alternatively, we could go back to using the former term,
"outlandishman".
--
-- __Q Stefano MAC:GREGOR Mi dankas al miaj bonsxancigaj
-- -`\<, (s-ro) \ma-GREG-ar\ steloj, ke mi ne estas
-- (*)/ (*) Fenikso, Arizono, Usono supersticxulo.
------------ <http://www.indirect.com/www/stevemac/ttt-hejm.htm> ---
TsuiDB
For some reason my mail reader has lost some of this thread -- I am sure
H Andrew gave an example of "feminine" usage of "gwai" in Cantonese,
could you please re-mail that to me?
Thanks, SJM
ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw
"Polar" (s.m...@ix.netcom.com) wrote --
> The American/English word for foreigners is "foreigners".
I've heard some others for particular groups of foreigners -- and for
groups with a much longer history in North America than, say, my own
family. Pejorative terms for those considered outsiders were bandied about
in everyday discourse by Caucasian North Americans not so very long ago.
> But, to reiterate original point: let's say a given culture -- call
> it "x" -- denotes everyone else as "monster", "[white] ghost", "big
> nose", "round eyes", etc.etc.
1. "Monster" was offered as a translation of a Chinese term that actually
means something AKIN to ghost, specter, spook, demon, or devil (with a
small "d," as in "you little devil, you"). It was offered by a lady of
Chinese extraction living in Canada who obviously reads no Chinese and
almost certainly never lived in a Chinese-speaking country. It is a BAD
translation and should be struck from your list.
2. "Round-eyes" is used by Caucasians living in the Far East to refer to
themselves. I have never heard, in Cantonese or Mandarin, a Chinese term
for non-Chinese that remotely resembles this expression. Strike it.
> I'm still trying pathetically hard to ask whether any culture other
> than China -- for indeed, "x" = China -- uses this type of
> terminology for foreigners.
The lady who offered "monster" does not represent the culture of China. If
"gwi" or "fan gwi" is the only Chinese term she knows for non-Chinese, her
experience is extremely limited. I would guess that it is limited to a
small enclave of immigrants whose speech is locked in time -- frozen in the
state it was in when they left a poor rural area of Guangdong Province,
probably Taishan (a.k.a. Toisan) County.
How would you like it if people judged North American culture on the basis
of the speech habits of Kentucky hillbillies transplanted to a country they
disliked and misunderstood? (Not that I want to knock country folk;
apologies to General Chuck Yeager, Dr. Sun Yat-sen, and others.)
I wouldn't want to be judged on the basis of the speech habits of many
well-educated, well-traveled North Americans now living in Taiwan. They've
got some choice terms, too.
Face it: the terms you cite are not used as you claim they are, they don't
have the meanings you ascribe to them, and the situation in China today is
not very different from that anywhere else. Your premise is WRONG. Does
that give you a clue as to why your query elicits only criticism instead of
the kind of answer you want?
Dan Strychalski ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw
Polar
On 11 Sep 1996 08:46:04 GMT, ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw wrote:
>"Polar" (s.m...@ix.netcom.com) wrote --
>
>> The American/English word for foreigners is "foreigners".
>
>I've heard some others for particular groups of foreigners -- and for
>groups with a much longer history in North America than, say, my own
>family. Pejorative terms for those considered outsiders were bandied about
>in everyday discourse by Caucasian North Americans not so very long ago.
No disagreement there! People have always found disparaging terms for
any outsider, or anyway dissimilar to themselves.
But you still seem to be missing my original point -- which I now
despair of clarifying: There *does* exist the neutral word
"foreigner" in English, and probably analogs in other languages.
I was trying to find out whether there existed a similar neutral word
in Chinese, since "monster" and "ghost" -- and now add "big-nose" and
"round-eyes" are not exactly neutral.
See above: My original inquiry was, precisely, asking whether there
existed a neutral term for "foreigner" in Chinese. That was ALL.
And don't be too sure I'm receiving "only criticism". Can you read
my private email?
Polar
Lee Rudolph
s.m...@ix.netcom.com (Polar) writes:
> But you still seem to be missing my original point -- which I now
>despair of clarifying: There *does* exist the neutral word
>"foreigner" in English
Lasciate ogni speranza at the door, Ma'am. There are some now who
don't take "foreigner", or "foreign", to be neutral. For instance,
the university that employs me has for several years discouraged
use of the phrase "foreign student", "international student"
being the preferred alternative. I have learned to use the
new phrase without a second thought, but am sometimes heard
muttering "international countries, international countries"
as I prowl the campus thinking of the many happy hours I've
spent over the years as a foreigner myself, here (well, no,
not actually here) and there.
Lee Rudolph
P.S. This just in from another window: the telnet program on
our old VAX still signs off "Connection closed by Foreign Host".
I wonder if I should blow the whistle?
Polar
Ma che! Non si puo dire "forestiere"? PC strikes again!
Anyway, I have bailed out of this bankrupt thread; it was going
nowhere because the original inquiry got clouded by knee-jerk PC
reactions. When my chief interlocutor electroned "You are pathetic",
it was a definite wrap. I don't engage in dialog with those who hurl
*ad hominem* stink bombs.
Pace!
Polar
ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw
Well, Polar has promised to let this one go. I tried to send the
following (actually, an even more poorly edited version) to the newsgroup
just before that, but the server here was not in service. May this truly
be an end to the thread!
Dan Strychalski ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> See above: My original inquiry was, precisely, asking whether there
> existed a neutral term for "foreigner" in Chinese. That was ALL.
I do you a favor by not quoting what you actually wrote. In any event,
there is such a term, and several people have posted it in a.u.e.:
_wai4-gwo2-ren2_ (I am using Yale Romanization, not the awful Pinyin used
in the PRC).
wai4 (pronounced much like the name of the letter Y, with a fourth --
i.e., falling -- tone): "outside"
gwo2 (kind of like "gw-aw," rhyming with "Aw" as in "Aw, shucks," with
a second -- i.e., rapidly rising -- tone): "country, nation"
ren2 (pronounced much as written, except that we don't have the
exact vowel; second tone): "person" (same character as the _yun_
somebody else mentioned)
This is the term for foreigners that is used most often in informal
spoken Mandarin on Taiwan. It is not used often in formal speech and
writing; there, such terms as _wai4-ji2 ren2-shr4_ ("persons of foreign
nationality") are more common (and note that _ren2-shr4_ fairly screams
"_respectable_ person"). _Gwo2-ji4 you3-ren2_ ("international friends")
is also common in formal contexts (hmm... reminds me of a post I just saw
regarding excessive political correctness).
> And don't be too sure I'm receiving "only criticism". Can you read
> my private email?
Point taken. But you're getting what you asked for in a.u.e.
_Wai4-gwo2-ren2_ is entirely neutral in derivation. If someone says
something akin to "long-nose" in a dialect other than Mandarin, and they
then realize that I understand that dialect, they will immediately
apologize and use _wai4-gwo2-ren2_. And let me stress: _wai4-gwo2-ren2_
is the most common term for foreigner in spoken Mandarin on Taiwan today.
_Wai4-gwo2-ren2_ is not 100% neutral; few words in any language are. The
point is, it's close enough, and Chinese has commonly-used words that are
as neutral, or as respectful, as you'd want to get.
Dan
Laura LeFave
tom collins <tcol...@inforamp.net> wrote:
>No, the most typical epithet that Americans use for those who
>cross them is :
> "You devil."
>Must be the Puritan heritage.
Is it? I don't think I've ever heard anyone actually use this term
except in movies and books. Of course you said "most typical"
not "most common", but why is this expression most typical.
I would say that "you s.o.b.", with or without the words spelled out,
is the most typical expression.
Tom Jacob (ja...@cs.unt.edu)
Department of Computer Sciences
University of North Texas
(posting from his wife's account)
Shakib Otaqui
On 11 Sep, in article <515u8c$5...@voyager.iii.org.tw>
ds...@cameonet.cameo.com.tw wrote:
d@c> How would you like it if people judged North American culture on the basis
d@c> of the speech habits of Kentucky hillbillies transplanted to a country they
d@c> disliked and misunderstood? (Not that I want to knock country folk;
d@c> apologies to General Chuck Yeager, Dr. Sun Yat-sen, and others.)
Precisely. One can also mention the NBC commentary during the
Olympics opening ceremony, which managed to insult people from
almost every racial and ethnic group, not least the Chinese.
It's not necessary to have a single word for "foreigner" to
display ethnocentrism and xenophobia.
--
Our true nationality is mankind.
tom collins
lle...@airmail.net (Laura LeFave) wrote:
Yes I agree. My post was part in jest, part in support of
something I had alluded to in a post on the preponderance of
religious issues and terminology in American politics (as
opposed to my own Canadian political scene), and part a dig at
what I saw as the original poster's (Polar) cultural blindness
(something he and many Americans, IMHO, seem to be oblivious
to.)(Earlier, our Arab(?) poster from England nailed him on
that one, I thought, but it seemed to go over everyone else's
head.
Pity. Could have made for a real good thread.
And that aspersion makes me, I suspect, an S.O.B.
Tom Collins
Toronto, Canada
Christopher Monsour
In article <514pir$r...@herald.concentric.net>,
H Andrew Chuang <Chu...@cris.com> wrote:
>In Western civilization, ghosts are almost always associated with
>devils, Satan. In Chinese, ghosts are not always bad.
It isn't true that ghosts are almost always associated with devils in
Western civilization.
--Christopher J. Monsour
Christopher Monsour
In article <32359f64...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
Polar <s.m...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>On 9 Sep 1996 21:49:16 GMT, Chu...@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) wrote:
>
>>In article <32346f87...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
>>Polar <s.m...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>"Aliens" may be bureaucratic immigration-ese for a non-American
>citizen, but I have *never* heard or seen it used in ordinary
>conversation or writing. The word used is *always* foreigner.
>(True, the noun is sometimes modified by impolite adjectives,
>depending on the narrow-mindedness of the speaker/writer.)
"Alien" is often used when "foreign" could be taken merely to mean "from
another state". For example, an insurance company domiciled in Illinois
is a foreign (but not alien) insurance company in Pennsylvania, whilst an
insurance company domiciled in Bermuda is an alien (and foreign) insurer
in Pennsylvania.
"Alien" is clearly from the Latin for "other", which is about as neutral a
derivation as one can find. Did it have such strongly pejorative
connotations before the first grade B science fiction films? (N.B. I'm
not necessarily talking about films with the word in the title.) Do all
terms for foreigners eventually develop pejorative connotations? If yes,
does that mean that new words must be developed regularly?
--Christopher J. Monsour
Kai Henningsen
Chu...@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) wrote on 05.09.96 in <50nklj$6...@herald.concentric.net>:
> accepting the Black as their equal. So did South Africa. In Germany,
> there are still very strong sentiments against foreigners.
Actually, a lot of the people with these strong feelings were themselves
foreigners very few generations ago. I often wonder how many of those
loving the popular TV criminal superintendent, "Schimanski", realised that
someone with that name probably originally came from Poland, for example.
Germany seems to be at least as mixed up as the US. (Personally, I have
relations distributed over half of Europe.)
Of course, talking to people, listening to people, you realize that really
strong feelings about foreigners are confined to a small, but very vocal
minority. I still remember literally half a bus load of people (including
myself, of course) protesting about one passenger (probably drunk) ranting
about foreigners. Didn't make the news, of course - people doing bad
things always makes for better sales.
Kai
--
Internet: k...@khms.westfalen.de
Bang: major_backbone!khms.westfalen.de!kai
http://www.westfalen.de/private/khms/
samantha...@gmail.com
Horace LaBadie
Peter Moylan
http://www.etymonline.com
It has a reputation for giving correct answers rather than someone's
wild guess.
Is the Indian fabric unknown at the University of BC?
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Athel Cornish-Bowden
anything someone said? Anyway despite my lack of a BA in English
Literature from the University of British Columbia I'm pretty confident
that chintz is not related to Chinaware dishes.
--
athel
Ross
> Chintzware means dishes, also known as CHINAware.I am Chinese-Canadian and have a BA in English Literature from the University of British Columbia. That's why I know the etymology.
you an expert in etymology.
According to Wikipedia, "Chintzware" is a particular type of chinaware
covered in a pattern similar to that of chintz fabrics. There may be
some people who use "chintzware" to mean chinaware in general, though
I've never heard it. Even if such a usage exists, it does not follow
that "chintz" is derived from "china".
Steve Hayes
wrote:
but about "chintzy", which refers to interior decor.
It sounds like one of those weird etymologies that is racist in the
same way that people concocted an etymology for "rule of thumb" that
they claimed was "sexist".
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Janet
samantha...@gmail.com says...
> Chintzware means dishes, also known as CHINAware.I am Chinese-Canadian and have a BA in English Literature from the University of British Columbia. That's why I know the etymology.
(meaning Chinese)
Janet
![Peter Duncanson [BrE]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjU1GGYFBCZgBCNB-pRgkosMu-ej0qpnECw3jc8uGYOTiF8a=s40-c)
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 01:45:35 -0700 (PDT), Ross <benl...@ihug.co.nz>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wednesday, April 15, 2015 at 5:31:05 PM UTC+12, samantha...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Chintzware means dishes, also known as CHINAware.I am Chinese-Canadian and have a BA in English Literature from the University of British Columbia. That's why I know the etymology.
>>
>>A degree in English Literature from any university is very unlikely to make
>>you an expert in etymology.
>>
>>According to Wikipedia, "Chintzware" is a particular type of chinaware
>>covered in a pattern similar to that of chintz fabrics. There may be
>>some people who use "chintzware" to mean chinaware in general, though
>>I've never heard it. Even if such a usage exists, it does not follow
>>that "chintz" is derived from "china".
>
>The question wsas not about "chintzware", which I'd never heard of,
>but about "chintzy", which refers to interior decor.
>
>It sounds like one of those weird etymologies that is racist in the
>same way that people concocted an etymology for "rule of thumb" that
>they claimed was "sexist".
Decorated or covered with chintz; suggestive of a pattern in chintz.
Also in extended use: suburban, unfashionable, petit-bourgeois,
cheap; mean, stingy.
1851 ‘G. Eliot’ Let. 18 Sept. (1954) I. 362 The effect is
chintzy and would be unbecoming.
1902 Academy 12 Apr. 379/1 Hunt's rhapsodical interpretation of
Tickell's chintzy mythological poem on Kensington Gardens.
1923 U. L. Silberrad Lett. Jean Armiter vi. 135 The drawing-room
was chintzy then—white walls and old china and bowls of roses and
pink shaded lights.
1941 J. H. N. Collier Presenting Moonshine 5 A chintzy woman,
possibly of literary tastes, swam forward.
1951 G. Greene End of Affair iii. vii. 145 He got up from his
chintzy chair and came and sat with me on the chintzy sofa.
1958 B. Hamilton Too Much of Water ii. 30 A pleasant
white-and-gold chintzy drawing-room.
1964 L. Deighton Funeral in Berlin xxx. 154 I'll have to revise
my attitude to the chintzy old bastard.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Richard Tobin
Bertel Lund Hansen
> It sounds like one of those weird etymologies that is racist in
> the same way that people concocted an etymology for "rule of
> thumb" that they claimed was "sexist".
--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark
bert
> Steve Hayes skrev:
>
> > It sounds like one of those weird etymologies that is racist in
> > the same way that people concocted an etymology for "rule of
> > thumb" that they claimed was "sexist".
>
> How did they construct that one?
was allowed to beat his wife with a stick, or a cane, provided
that the stick or cane was "no thicker than a thumb".
--
JoeyDee
You are also misinformed.
--
Remember: It is To Laugh
Peter Moylan
> Steve Hayes skrev:
>
>> It sounds like one of those weird etymologies that is racist in
>> the same way that people concocted an etymology for "rule of
>> thumb" that they claimed was "sexist".
>
> How did they construct that one?
of thumb" refers to the thickness of a stick that a man may use to beat
his wife. I don't know where the story came from, but apparently quite a
few people believe it.
Don Phillipson
news:8479de96-f909-4a48...@googlegroups.com...
people like George Woodcock, its degrees required familiarity with
19th and early 20th century English novels, covering the range from
the first arrival of chintz fabrics in Europe to the word's later
appropriation
as social criticism (of upholstered bourgeois comfort.) Nowadays I suppose
those degrees certify adepts in Theory and other sub-disciplines of right
thinking.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
Mike L
wrote:
>On 15/04/15 21:22, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>> Steve Hayes skrev:
>>
>>> It sounds like one of those weird etymologies that is racist in
>>> the same way that people concocted an etymology for "rule of
>>> thumb" that they claimed was "sexist".
>>
>> How did they construct that one?
>
>There have been stories floating around for years that claim that "rule
>of thumb" refers to the thickness of a stick that a man may use to beat
>his wife. I don't know where the story came from, but apparently quite a
>few people believe it.
believe bollocks when there's a perfectly straightforward and
well-attested alternative.
--
Mike.
Steve Hayes
lot myself. Fireirons and horse brasses.
Steve Hayes
bollocks about bunnies and Eostre/Ostara.
J. J. Lodder
The transation of 'rule of the thumb'
is 'vuistregel' (lit, rule of the fist)
Or perhaps they allow for bigger errors.
AFAIK no claim of a rule that a husband
would be allowed to rule his household by fist
has ever been derived from it,
Jan
Whiskers
wrote:
> and have a BA in English Literature from the University of British
> Columbia. That's why I know the etymology.
Inspired by the colourful, floral-patterned cottons first imported
from India in the late 17th century, Chintzware ceramics became
particularly popular from the late 1920s to the early 1960s. In a
period dominated by modernism and minimalist styles, these floral
ceramics have, somewhat surprisingly, become increasingly popular with
collectors. This phenomenon is no more evident than in the tremendous
increase in demand for antique Chintzware china. It was first produced
in the 18th century, and its decoration initially took the form of
painstakingly hand-painted replications of the floral patterns found
on imported Indian fabrics known as “Chintes” (the Hindu word meaning
‘to sprinkle with’).
[...]
<http://www.millersantiquesguide.com/articles/chintzware/>
And
Decorated or covered with chintz; suggestive of a pattern in chintz.
Also in extended use: suburban, unfashionable, petit-bourgeois,
cheap; mean, stingy.
<http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/31813> (accessed April 16, 2015).
So any derogatory sense is directed at the aesthetic preferences of
certain people, not at anyone's ethnicity or ancestry.
"China" became the word for the best ceramics because that's where they
came from in the 17th century; it's a complement, not remotely
derogatory.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Bertel Lund Hansen
> Apparently Dutch husbands are more robust.
> The transation of 'rule of the thumb'
> is 'vuistregel' (lit, rule of the fist)
The English article in Wikipedia has an error about Danish.
"Tommelfingerregel" has two very different meanings. One is "rule
of thumb" as a rude, practical thing to remember. The other has
to do with electrical current and H.C. Ørsted who discovered
electro-magnetism. When finding the poles or the direction of the
current we use a rule that is called both "tommelfingerregel" and
"højrehåndsreglen" ("right hand rule"). But a rule of thumb is
never called anything like "a rule of fist/right hand". Wikipedia
says that it is.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark
Katy Jennison
> On 2015-04-15, samantha...@gmail.com <samantha...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Chintzware means dishes, also known as CHINAware.I am Chinese-Canadian
>> and have a BA in English Literature from the University of British
>> Columbia. That's why I know the etymology.
>
> Too bad you're wrong, then.
>
> Also in extended use: suburban, unfashionable, petit-bourgeois,
> cheap; mean, stingy.
>
> "chintzy, adj.". OED Online. March 2015. Oxford University Press.
> <http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/31813> (accessed April 16, 2015).
>
> So any derogatory sense is directed at the aesthetic preferences of
> certain people, not at anyone's ethnicity or ancestry.
And "Tea!" she said in a tiny voice
"Wake up! It's nearly five"
Oh! Chintzy, chintzy cheeriness,
Half dead and half alive.
--
Katy Jennison
Mike L
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 23:21:56 +0100, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>believe bollocks when there's a perfectly straightforward and
>>well-attested alternative.
>
>Especially at this time of year, when the 'net is flooded with
>bollocks about bunnies and Eostre/Ostara.
great quantitiies of eastrogen.
--
Mike.
Robert Bannister
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 23:21:56 +0100, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 22:19:52 +1000, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/04/15 21:22, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>> Steve Hayes skrev:
>>>>
>>>>> It sounds like one of those weird etymologies that is racist in
>>>>> the same way that people concocted an etymology for "rule of
>>>>> thumb" that they claimed was "sexist".
>>>>
>>>> How did they construct that one?
>>>
>>> There have been stories floating around for years that claim that "rule
>>> of thumb" refers to the thickness of a stick that a man may use to beat
>>> his wife. I don't know where the story came from, but apparently quite a
>>> few people believe it.
>>
>> I'm still disturbed by the number of people who actually _prefer_ to
>> believe bollocks when there's a perfectly straightforward and
>> well-attested alternative.
>
> Especially at this time of year, when the 'net is flooded with
> bollocks about bunnies and Eostre/Ostara.
>
>
--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia
Steve Hayes
Lodder) wrote:
>bert <bert.hu...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 15 April 2015 12:22:46 UTC+1, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>> > Steve Hayes skrev:
>> >
>> > > It sounds like one of those weird etymologies that is racist in
>> > > the same way that people concocted an etymology for "rule of
>> > > thumb" that they claimed was "sexist".
>> >
>> > How did they construct that one?
>>
>> It was asserted that it derived from an old law that a husband
>> was allowed to beat his wife with a stick, or a cane, provided
>> that the stick or cane was "no thicker than a thumb".
>
>Apparently Dutch husbands are more robust.
>The transation of 'rule of the thumb'
>is 'vuistregel' (lit, rule of the fist)
>Or perhaps they allow for bigger errors.
the description of my height as five feet and eleven thumbs.
I asked him what the Dutch word for an inch was, and he said "ayn
senti-may-ter".
But, from the Afrikaans "duim" for "inch" I always took "rule of
thumb" to mean a rough and ready measurement, and was highly sceptical
of the feminist interpretation, which I only encountered many years
later, and made me conclude that much feminist rhetoric was bullshite.