niggardly
JBYORK14
I am sure everyone in the NG knows this word, despite its unseemly appearance.
After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher in New York City was
almost fired when a parent complained -vociferously- about the word.
Should this word be avoided?
Ross Klatte
>Date: 2002-09-15 15:21 Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20020915152138...@mb-mu.aol.com>
That depends both upon your audience and upon your intentions.
A high school boy in Indiana was suspended for wearing a University
of South Carolina jersey. The jersey bore the word "COCKS." "Cocks"
is short for "Gamecocks," which is the name of USC athletic teams.
The boy actually had no interest in South Carolina athletics, and
the school was justified in suspending him.
Ross
Roebuck, South Carolina
http://community.webshots.com/user/ross_klatte
Skitt
That made me snigger.
--
Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/
I speak English well -- I learn it from a book!
-- Manuel (Fawlty Towers)
sand
wrote:
>
>That depends both upon your audience and upon your intentions.
>
>A high school boy in Indiana was suspended for wearing a University
>of South Carolina jersey. The jersey bore the word "COCKS." "Cocks"
>is short for "Gamecocks," which is the name of USC athletic teams.
>The boy actually had no interest in South Carolina athletics, and
>the school was justified in suspending him.
More on your audience, I imagine, that it has a filthy mind. Cock is
perfectly legitimate for several definitions.
Jan Sand
R H Draney
news:20020915152138...@mb-mu.aol.com:
> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher in New
> York City was almost fired when a parent complained
> -vociferously- about the word.
>
> Should this word be avoided?
I don't approve of changing my vocabulary every time someone makes a
niggling complaint....
Seriously, I think the teacher should be commended for making an
effort (if indeed that's what it was) to show kids that words can have
superficial resemblances without necessarily having anything to do
with each other....r
Kurt Kurosawa
"JBYORK14" <jbyo...@aol.community> wrote in message
news:20020915152138...@mb-mu.aol.com...
>
> Should this word be avoided?
I avoid it. Accidentally learned another one to avoid the other day. I told
someone on the phone not to get his knickers in a knot, and caught a
co-worker's candid reaction of surprise out of the corner of my eye. That's
what they mean by 'trigger word,' I guess. His body was jolted. I know he
didn't take offense once it registered, the sounds just touched off
something. In daily speech, I try to avoid anything that might get in the
way of what I'm trying to say.
Bill Funke
Part of me says that we should not fall prey to the forces of
ignorance and avoid a word because someone might not understand it.
The rest of me says it makes a lot of sense to avoid trouble.
According to M-W, "niggard" is Old English, derived from a Norse word.
Like many other Old English words, it hasn't been in common use much
lately, and we have plenty of other words available.
Raymond S. Wise
"sand" <jan_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:s6s9ouokpe3dbl9ra...@4ax.com...
"Legitimacy" would appear to be insufficient, certainly to me. Most
Americans I know would never use the noun "cock." The one possible exception
would be the use of "cock" for the male of the domestic fowl when discussing
cockfighting, and most Americans have no occasion to discuss cockfighting,
since it is illegal almost everywhere. Count me among those who would have
very little occasion to use the "legitimate" meanings of "cock."
(Of course, from my way at looking at language, the vulgar meaning of "cock"
is just as legitimate as any other meaning. The only sort of illegitimate
use of the word would be one based upon ignorance, such as the infamous case
of the poet Robert Browning who mistook the word "twat" to mean some kind of
clothing. See http://www.f-word.org/essays/?x=walker.html .)
Such a situation puts "cock" in a similar situation to "gay" and "Polack"
and "niggardly."
It's interesting that sometimes the association leading to possible
misunderstanding does not, in fact, lead to a change in terminology. Some
linguists ( = "scientists in linguistics" ) proposed "linguistician" for the
name of their profession, to avoid the very real problem of confusion with
the "linguist" meaning "polyglot." But the change did not succeed. There are
other words which have hung in there despite the possibility of confusion,
including "Indian" for "American Indian."
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Mike Oliver
> "Legitimacy" would appear to be insufficient, certainly to me. Most
> Americans I know would never use the noun "cock." The one possible exception
> would be the use of "cock" for the male of the domestic fowl when discussing
> cockfighting, and most Americans have no occasion to discuss cockfighting,
> since it is illegal almost everywhere. Count me among those who would have
> very little occasion to use the "legitimate" meanings of "cock."
Not even in set phrases like "when the cock crows?"
Another possible nominal use: "You'll know him by the slant
of his jaw and the cock of his hat"
Raymond S. Wise
news:20020915152138...@mb-mu.aol.com...
>
>
The short answer is, "Yes, of course. That's the commonsense thing to do."
This subject came up earlier in the newsgroup alt.english.usage , and as a
result I spent part of this afternoon reading several Internet articles on
the "nigger/niggardly" controversy. One of the things that impressed me
about what I read is that each side believes its side to be on the side of
common sense. That includes me: I think it's blatantly foolish to continue
to use the word "niggardly." It is of course worthwhile to have the word in
one's recognition vocabulary, but when to introduce it to young children is
a question of judgment. I gave an example in the other group that there is
nothing inherently offensive in telling a child that "Polak" is the Polish
word for "Pole," but when to do so is a question of judgment, because the
word sounds too close to the English-language slur "Polack."
To put it bluntly, if you tell some children that "niggardly" is "perfectly
okay," as some people would apparently do, you are going to have children
figure out ways to tease black classmates. Just as with "Polak" aimed at
Polish-American classmates, the teasers will insist that they are doing
nothing wrong, because the word is (in some sense or other, because the
teacher said it was) "okay."
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minneapolis USA
CyberCypher
news:uoa81sf...@corp.supernews.com:
>
> "sand" <jan_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:s6s9ouokpe3dbl9ra...@4ax.com...
>> On 15 Sep 2002 19:45:54 GMT, klatt...@aol.commmm (Ross Klatte)
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >
>> >That depends both upon your audience and upon your intentions.
>> >
>> >A high school boy in Indiana was suspended for wearing a
>> >University of South Carolina jersey. The jersey bore the word
>> >"COCKS." "Cocks" is short for "Gamecocks," which is the name of
>> >USC athletic teams. The boy actually had no interest in South
>> >Carolina athletics, and the school was justified in suspending
>> >him.
>>
>> More on your audience, I imagine, that it has a filthy mind. Cock
>> is perfectly legitimate for several definitions.
>>
>> Jan Sand
>
>
> "Legitimacy" would appear to be insufficient, certainly to me.
> Most Americans I know would never use the noun "cock." The one
> possible exception would be the use of "cock" for the male of the
> domestic fowl when discussing cockfighting, and most Americans
> have no occasion to discuss cockfighting, since it is illegal
> almost everywhere. Count me among those who would have very little
> occasion to use the "legitimate" meanings of "cock."
There are lots of stock phrases in everyday American English that
include "cock", eg "to be cocksure of oneself", "cock of the walk",
"cock and bull story", and "cocky". I'm sure there are others.
[...]
>
> Such a situation puts "cock" in a similar situation to "gay" and
> "Polack" and "niggardly."
This is a strange trio, IMHO. Hardly anyone misunderstands "gay" these
days; "Polack" is, currently, inherently an insult, as demonstrated so
well by either Dear Abbey or Ann Landers after her infamous remark
about the Pope a couple of years back; and "niggardly" is simply a
problem of education and hypersensitivity.
--
Franke
Mike Oliver
> This subject came up earlier in the newsgroup alt.english.usage , and as a
> result I spent part of this afternoon reading several Internet articles on
> the "nigger/niggardly" controversy. One of the things that impressed me
> about what I read is that each side believes its side to be on the side of
> common sense. That includes me: I think it's blatantly foolish to continue
> to use the word "niggardly."
While I can sort of understand that point of view, I object to the
notion that a harmless word, harmlessly intended, can be put out
of bounds simply because some people baselessly choose to take
offense at it. I do not care for the idea of giving any person or
group a blank check written against my vocabulary, however real
that group's historical, or even present, grievances be.
> To put it bluntly, if you tell some children that "niggardly" is "perfectly
> okay," as some people would apparently do, you are going to have children
> figure out ways to tease black classmates.
A sensible, skilled teacher can tell when children are being deliberately
cruel (whether with racial animus or not) and keep control of his/her
classroom.
Paul Pfalzner
"Raymond S. Wise" <illinoi...@mninter.net> wrote in message
news:uoa81sf...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "sand" <jan_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:s6s9ouokpe3dbl9ra...@4ax.com...
> > On 15 Sep 2002 19:45:54 GMT, klatt...@aol.commmm (Ross Klatte)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >That depends both upon your audience and upon your intentions.
> > >
> > >A high school boy in Indiana was suspended for wearing a University
> > >of South Carolina jersey. The jersey bore the word "COCKS." "Cocks"
> > >is short for "Gamecocks," which is the name of USC athletic teams.
> > >The boy actually had no interest in South Carolina athletics, and
> > >the school was justified in suspending him.
> >
> > More on your audience, I imagine, that it has a filthy mind. Cock is
> > perfectly legitimate for several definitions.
> >
>
I always thought the word 'cocktail' sounds most suspicious. Worse than 'cock',
surely. But everyone is quite comfotable with saying it. How odd.
PaPf
Tony Cooper
> "Legitimacy" would appear to be insufficient, certainly to me. Most
> Americans I know would never use the noun "cock." The one possible
exception
> would be the use of "cock" for the male of the domestic fowl when
discussing
> cockfighting, and most Americans have no occasion to discuss
cockfighting,
> since it is illegal almost everywhere. Count me among those who would
have
> very little occasion to use the "legitimate" meanings of "cock."
Not a gun owner, eh? Not a person that says things without thinking
them through even half-way, eh?
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
Raymond S. Wise
Another example of a word whose current default meaning leads to a very
reduced use of an older or more general meaning is "mistress." A similar
change happened in the French language, making possible a joke in the French
movie "Les Visiteurs" in which a time-traveler from the Middle Ages used the
word in the old sense and was misunderstood by a modern person to have meant
it in the modern, sexual sense.
> It's interesting that sometimes the association leading to possible
> misunderstanding does not, in fact, lead to a change in terminology. Some
> linguists ( = "scientists in linguistics" ) proposed "linguistician" for
the
> name of their profession, to avoid the very real problem of confusion with
> the "linguist" meaning "polyglot." But the change did not succeed. There
are
> other words which have hung in there despite the possibility of confusion,
> including "Indian" for "American Indian."
>
The default meanings in English of the words "America" and "American" have
in effect eliminated other meanings, when those are presented without being
accompanied by an adjective or being part of a compound word. Thus, "ancient
Americans," "South Americans" are acceptable, but "Americans" to mean "the
(current) inhabitants of the Americas" is not. And it's "the Americas," not
"America" for the combination of North and South America and the Caribbean
Islands--"America" is listed with this last meaning in dictionaries, but
it's either a historical or a specialized usage. (In Esperanto, on the other
hand, "Ameriko" means what in English we would call "the Americas," the word
for a citizen of the United States being "Usonano," from the Esperanto
version of "the United States of [North] America."
Raymond S. Wise
news:am3e27$28jef$1...@ID-113505.news.dfncis.de...
Note that I said in the beginning of my post "Most Americans I know would
never use the noun 'cock.'" That is what I was referring to when I said
above "Count me among those who would have very little occasion to use the
'legitimate' meanings of 'cock.'" Verbal uses and uses of the word in
compounds is a different matter. The noun meaning "4 a : the hammer in the
lock of a firearm b : the cocked position of the hammer," as the
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate puts it, was one unknown to me until I looked
it up this evening, and I expect most people are equally unaware of it,
unlike the verb "to cock a gun."
Raymond S. Wise
news:3D852779...@math.ucla.edu...
> "Raymond S. Wise" wrote:
>
> > This subject came up earlier in the newsgroup alt.english.usage , and as
a
> > result I spent part of this afternoon reading several Internet articles
on
> > the "nigger/niggardly" controversy. One of the things that impressed me
> > about what I read is that each side believes its side to be on the side
of
> > common sense. That includes me: I think it's blatantly foolish to
continue
> > to use the word "niggardly."
>
> While I can sort of understand that point of view, I object to the
> notion that a harmless word, harmlessly intended, can be put out
> of bounds simply because some people baselessly choose to take
> offense at it. I do not care for the idea of giving any person or
> group a blank check written against my vocabulary, however real
> that group's historical, or even present, grievances be.
>
The word has already been put out of bounds--it's a dead cause. I attempted
to find by way of a Google search a use of the word "niggardly" in which the
article or Web page was not a discussion of the word "niggardly" itself. It
took me a long time, and when I finally found a couple of examples one of
them was used by the Australian author Thomas Keneally in an interview in
2000 and one was used in a translation of the Qur'an into English by
Mohammad Habib Shakir, who died in 1939.
> > To put it bluntly, if you tell some children that "niggardly" is
"perfectly
> > okay," as some people would apparently do, you are going to have
children
> > figure out ways to tease black classmates.
>
> A sensible, skilled teacher can tell when children are being deliberately
> cruel (whether with racial animus or not) and keep control of his/her
> classroom.
Good grief! I wasn't expecting that the black kids would be teased *inside*
the classroom. The teasers would have to be pretty stupid to do that. I had
in mind teasing *outside* the classroom.
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
Raymond S. Wise
news:Xns928B56DA2...@130.133.1.4...
Hardly anyone misunderstands "gay" these days because the old meaning of the
word is long gone. The deal with "Polack" is that in its Polish form,
"Polak," it is entirely inoffensive: The same word used in a different
context, in this case, used in English, becomes the offensive "Pollack." You
say that the problem with "'niggardly' is simply a problem of education and
hypersensitivity." I disagree. First, there is in my opinion no
hypersensitivity involved, simply ordinary sensitivity. Second, you are
implying that as soon as a person learns the etymology of the word, he or
she will say "Oh, well all right then, no problem. Go ahead and use it, I
won't mind now." I would not expect such an outcome, and I think a person
who continues to use the word in this day and age is using extremely bad
judgment.
Mike Oliver
> "Mike Oliver" <oli...@math.ucla.edu> wrote in message
> news:3D852779...@math.ucla.edu...
>> notion that a harmless word, harmlessly intended, can be put out
>> of bounds simply because some people baselessly choose to take
>> offense at it. I do not care for the idea of giving any person or
>> group a blank check written against my vocabulary, however real
>> that group's historical, or even present, grievances be.
>
> The word has already been put out of bounds--it's a dead cause. I attempted
> to find by way of a Google search a use of the word "niggardly" in which the
> article or Web page was not a discussion of the word "niggardly" itself.
I concede that that's probably the only way I'd be likely to use
it. That's not really the point. I don't like the *precedent*
involved. I think a stand needs to be taken against the absurd
principle--openly espoused by some--that anything to which someone
takes offense is ipso facto offensive, at least if that someone
is part of a disadvantaged group.
That just *can't* be the rule. A person can take offense
at *anything*; it needs only the will to do so.
>> A sensible, skilled teacher can tell when children are being deliberately
>> cruel (whether with racial animus or not) and keep control of his/her
>> classroom.
>
> Good grief! I wasn't expecting that the black kids would be teased *inside*
> the classroom. The teasers would have to be pretty stupid to do that. I had
> in mind teasing *outside* the classroom.
If kids are going to make racist taunts they can do it with or
without "niggardly".
Apteryx
news:20020915152138...@mb-mu.aol.com...
>
>
Oddly, the same debate is raging on alt.fan.tolkien at the moment (in that
case, because the teacher's difficulties reignited an earlier debate started
by a troll suggesting that Tolkien's use of the word "niggard" in Lord of
the Rings showed that he was rascist, no doubt the same troll who earlier
called him homophobic because of his penchant for throwing faggots on the
fire).
While you might well think that suggestion absurd for a writer in the past,
I'd hazard a guess that when that scene is shown in the current film version
of Lord of the Rings (which won't be until the third film screens late next
year) the word "niggard" will not be heard.
--
Apteryx
"My advice to you is get married: if you find a good wife you'll be happy;
if not, you'll become a philosopher" Socrates
CyberCypher
That's true.
> The deal with "Polack" is that
> in its Polish form, "Polak," it is entirely inoffensive: The same
> word used in a different context, in this case, used in English,
> becomes the offensive "Pollack."
I don't speak Polish, and I suspect that most English speakers don't,
so this is a problem that will come up only for those aware of the
Polish word "Polak". Black Americans call each other "nigger" all the
time in person and on film. The same word in a different context
becomes offensive to black Americans. And the word is English in both
contexts. Maybe this means something more substantial than your "Polak"
example. I find Jackson Pollack offensive, yes. I think he was a
mediocre artist, but I've never seen "Polak" spelled "Pollack". That
double "l" in there seems to serve as a vowel changer in this word,
from the vowel in "Poe" to the vowel in "pop".
> You say that the problem with
> "'niggardly' is simply a problem of education and
> hypersensitivity." I disagree. First, there is in my opinion no
> hypersensitivity involved, simply ordinary sensitivity. Second,
> you are implying that as soon as a person learns the etymology of
> the word, he or she will say "Oh, well all right then, no problem.
> Go ahead and use it, I won't mind now." I would not expect such an
> outcome, and I think a person who continues to use the word in
> this day and age is using extremely bad judgment.
Tell me about it. What can you expect from people who want to ban
_Huckleberry Finn_ because a character is called "Nigger Jim" but throw
the word "nigger" around like Sean Penn's Ridgemont High character used
"dude"? If the word is so offensive, then I'd expect that the persons
offended would stop using it. I don't like double standards and I'll
have to change my word from "hypersensitivity" to "hypocrisy".
That said, it's not a word I would use around ignoramuses or
hypocrites.
--
Franke: Speaker and teacher of Standard International English (SIE)
sand
Frankly, I find your logic a bit cockeyed. There is a thread somewhere
in this group in which the word "gay" is used in reference to renaming
Newark Airport and the intention is to indicate it as being
lighthearted.
Jan Sand
PBusw13724
> I think a person
>who continues to use the word in this day and age is using extremely bad
>judgment.
>
I can't comment on the US viewpoint, but I would be interested in views from my
English compatriots: this word 'niggardly' is one which I would find utterly
innocuous in everyday spoken and written language in this country.
Paul B
Steve Hayes
>
>
>I am sure everyone in the NG knows this word, despite its unseemly appearance.
Why do you say its appearance is unseemly. It describes and unseemly attitude
to some, which is prized by others.
>After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher in New York City was
>almost fired when a parent complained -vociferously- about the word.
Why did the parent complain? Did the teacher imply that the parent was
niggardly?
>Should this word be avoided?
If the cap fits....
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/steve.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Steve Hayes
>According to M-W, "niggard" is Old English, derived from a Norse word.
>Like many other Old English words, it hasn't been in common use much
>lately, and we have plenty of other words available.
Well there's mean, but that tends to be misunderstood nowadays, as a lot of
people seem to use it for "bad-tempered".
Parsimonious will have to do, then.
Of course, if you look it up in the dictionary, it's defined as "niggardlu",
so people who don't know what it means and look it up might still take
offence.
Mike Oliver
> Well there's mean, but that tends to be misunderstood nowadays, as a lot of
> people seem to use it for "bad-tempered".
I don't think that's a very accurate rendering. It's
closer to "cruel", though perhaps slightly milder. The
idea is not just that the person is often in a bad humor,
but that he enjoys making others miserable.
Jacqui
> I find Jackson Pollack offensive, yes. I think he was a mediocre
> artist, but I've never seen "Polak" spelled "Pollack".
No doubt, but what about Jackson Pollock?
Jac
Yuno Hu
Xns928B90C1D...@130.133.1.4, posted this:
> Tell me about it. What can you expect from people who want to ban
> _Huckleberry Finn_ because a character is called "Nigger Jim" but throw
> the word "nigger" around like Sean Penn's Ridgemont High character used
> "dude"? If the word is so offensive, then I'd expect that the persons
> offended would stop using it. I don't like double standards and I'll
> have to change my word from "hypersensitivity" to "hypocrisy".
Do you really think that those who object to "Nigger Jim" or "niggardly"
would address each other as "nigger"? I seriously doubt it.
Raymond S. Wise
Is my observation about the actual usage of the word "cock" in American
English incorrect? That would be the only way in which my logic could be
faulty, if my conclusions were based upon false observations. I personally
have nothing against any of the uses of the word "cock," whether as a noun
or not, whether as part of a compound or not. I do, however, recognize that
certain uses of it in current American English are not acceptable, and I
conform my speech to those realities.
I was under the impression that the reference to the word "gay" and the
Newark Airport did *not* have anything to do with the older, lighthearted
usage, but instead had to do with the current, slang sense of "stupid"--a
usage I have actually seen used only on the television program "South Park."
Mike Lyle
[...]
> (In Esperanto, on the other
> hand, "Ameriko" means what in English we would call "the Americas," the word
> for a citizen of the United States being "Usonano," from the Esperanto
> version of "the United States of [North] America."
Is this connected with Frank Lloyd Wright's "Usonian"?
Mike.
Raymond S. Wise
The double "l" was an error on my part. You might be interested in the
discussion of it at
http://kpearson.faculty.tcnj.edu/Dictionary/polack.htm
which does, by the way, mention a "Pollack" spelling for the word. (I doubt
that it affected the pronunciation, however.) But it was my intention to
write "Polack."
It is my belief that a study of racial slurs should include the etymology of
the slurs. Therefore, the history of the word "Polack" would include its
original meaning in Polish. The question becomes, when should the child be
introduced to such questions? It's something that society ends up making
formal decisions about, in the form (here in the US) of local school board
decisions or even the decisions of local school administrators. On the
individual level, of course, just as in the case of the teaching of sex
education, some parents will teach their children the facts before the
school gets around to teaching them. I would expect Polish-American parents
to be more likely to introduce their children to the etymology of "Polack"
at an earlier age than do other parents with their children. What African
American parents teach their kids probably varies widely, given that for
some people the word "nigger" is an absolutely taboo word, and "Negro" is
not much better.
> > You say that the problem with
> > "'niggardly' is simply a problem of education and
> > hypersensitivity." I disagree. First, there is in my opinion no
> > hypersensitivity involved, simply ordinary sensitivity. Second,
> > you are implying that as soon as a person learns the etymology of
> > the word, he or she will say "Oh, well all right then, no problem.
> > Go ahead and use it, I won't mind now." I would not expect such an
> > outcome, and I think a person who continues to use the word in
> > this day and age is using extremely bad judgment.
>
> Tell me about it. What can you expect from people who want to ban
> _Huckleberry Finn_ because a character is called "Nigger Jim" but throw
> the word "nigger" around like Sean Penn's Ridgemont High character used
> "dude"? If the word is so offensive, then I'd expect that the persons
> offended would stop using it. I don't like double standards and I'll
> have to change my word from "hypersensitivity" to "hypocrisy".
>
> That said, it's not a word I would use around ignoramuses or
> hypocrites.
>
> --
> Franke: Speaker and teacher of Standard International English (SIE)
>
You haven't thought the matter out sufficiently. There is absolutely no
reason to see hypocrisy in the "neutral" use of "nigger" by some African
Americans. I put scare quotes around "neutral" there because the word does
not really have an absolutely neutral usage, but must always seen, in one
way or another, to be a loaded word.
Raymond S. Wise
> "Raymond S. Wise" wrote:
> > "Mike Oliver" <oli...@math.ucla.edu> wrote in message
> > news:3D852779...@math.ucla.edu...
> >> While I can sort of understand that point of view, I object to the
> >> notion that a harmless word, harmlessly intended, can be put out
> >> of bounds simply because some people baselessly choose to take
> >> offense at it. I do not care for the idea of giving any person or
> >> group a blank check written against my vocabulary, however real
> >> that group's historical, or even present, grievances be.
> >
> > The word has already been put out of bounds--it's a dead cause. I
attempted
> > to find by way of a Google search a use of the word "niggardly" in which
the
> > article or Web page was not a discussion of the word "niggardly" itself.
>
> I concede that that's probably the only way I'd be likely to use
> it. That's not really the point. I don't like the *precedent*
> involved. I think a stand needs to be taken against the absurd
> principle--openly espoused by some--that anything to which someone
> takes offense is ipso facto offensive, at least if that someone
> is part of a disadvantaged group.
>
> That just *can't* be the rule. A person can take offense
> at *anything*; it needs only the will to do so.
>
And society will put limits to it. I have little respect for "slippery
slope" arguments.
> >> A sensible, skilled teacher can tell when children are being
deliberately
> >> cruel (whether with racial animus or not) and keep control of his/her
> >> classroom.
> >
> > Good grief! I wasn't expecting that the black kids would be teased
*inside*
> > the classroom. The teasers would have to be pretty stupid to do that. I
had
> > in mind teasing *outside* the classroom.
>
> If kids are going to make racist taunts they can do it with or
> without "niggardly".
But using "niggardly" will let them get away with a racist taunt without
being technically incorrect. Child lawyers love that sort of crapola, and
it hurts no less than an actual racist taunt to the victim--it may, in fact,
hurt more.
Lars Eighner
and talented Raymond S. Wise broadcast on alt.usage.english:
> Child lawyers
There's an ugly mental picture.
--
Lars Eighner -finger for geek code- eig...@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/
J. E. S. U. S. -- it's how America spells fascism.
Ross Klatte
>Date: 2002-09-16 06:21 Eastern Daylight Time
"The United States of North America" doesn't work because
of the existence of "The United States of Mexico," a nation
that is also situated in North America. I prefer a less
ambiguous term such as "Merkin," or "Godzonian," or
"Gringo." "Usan," while clever, is hard to catch.
I would prefer that foreigners not use the offensive
term "Yankee."
As for "Ameriko," and the shorter "Meriko," this term
is an abusive slur in Japanese. To be consistent, therefore,
Esperanto should use "Jap" for the citizens of Japan .
Ross
Roebuck, South Carolina
http://community.webshots.com/user/ross_klatte
CyberCypher
Ray Hewitt
corrosive effect of political correctness on our language and thought. (Just
make sure you are prepared to explain its meaning clearly and calmly to
those with ruffled feathers).
"JBYORK14" <jbyo...@aol.community> wrote in message
news:20020915152138...@mb-mu.aol.com...
>
>
appearance.
>
City was
> almost fired when a parent complained -vociferously- about the word.
>
CyberCypher
news:B9AAF66E.24E02%n...@hotmail.com:
You ever been to Oakland or San Francisco? I know you don't hang with
no home boys, my man, or you would not doubt it for a minute.
On what do you base your dobts?
CyberCypher
> "CyberCypher" <fra...@seed.net.tw> wrote in message
> news:Xns928B90C1D...@130.133.1.4...
>> "Raymond S. Wise" <illinoi...@mninter.net> burbled
>> news:uoapfue...@corp.supernews.com:
[...]
>> >> This is a strange trio, IMHO. Hardly anyone misunderstands
>> >> "gay" these days; "Polack" is, currently, inherently an
>> >> insult, as demonstrated so well by either Dear Abbey or Ann
>> >> Landers after her infamous remark about the Pope a couple of
>> >> years back; and "niggardly" is simply a problem of education
>> >> and hypersensitivity.
>> > Hardly anyone misunderstands "gay" these days because the old
>> > meaning of the word is long gone.
>>
>> That's true.
>>
>> > The deal with "Polack" is that
>> > in its Polish form, "Polak," it is entirely inoffensive: The
>> > same word used in a different context, in this case, used in
>> > English, becomes the offensive "Pollack."
>>
>> I don't speak Polish, and I suspect that most English speakers
>> don't, so this is a problem that will come up only for those
>> aware of the Polish word "Polak". Black Americans call each other
>> "nigger" all the time in person and on film. The same word in a
>> different context becomes offensive to black Americans. And the
>> word is English in both contexts. Maybe this means something more
>> substantial than your "Polak" example. I find Jackson Pollack
>> offensive, yes. I think he was a mediocre artist, but I've never
>> seen "Polak" spelled "Pollack". That double "l" in there seems to
>> serve as a vowel changer in this word, from the vowel in "Poe" to
>> the vowel in "pop".
I have also been advised by another poster that the man's name was
"Pollock", like the fish, which is also spelled "pollack".
[...]
> It is my belief that a study of racial slurs should include the
> etymology of the slurs. Therefore, the history of the word
> "Polack" would include its original meaning in Polish. The
> question becomes, when should the child be introduced to such
> questions? It's something that society ends up making formal
> decisions about, in the form (here in the US) of local school
> board decisions or even the decisions of local school
> administrators. On the individual level, of course, just as in the
> case of the teaching of sex education, some parents will teach
> their children the facts before the school gets around to teaching
> them. I would expect Polish-American parents to be more likely to
> introduce their children to the etymology of "Polack" at an
> earlier age than do other parents with their children. What
> African American parents teach their kids probably varies widely,
> given that for some people the word "nigger" is an absolutely
> taboo word, and "Negro" is not much better.
So what do you think African American parents teach their kids?
Etymology? How many people know the etymology of that word? And how
many know the history of what black people in America have called
themselves and wanted to be and not be called? For more than 100 years
black Americans have been struggling with what they want the rest of us
to call them, and still so many black Americans call themselves and
each other "nigger" in private and in public.
The United Negro College Fund still exists and has not changed its
name. The NAACP still exists and has not changed its name. What kind of
bullshit taboos are you talking about?
I know that there is no single African American block that makes the
rules for all black Americans, but you'd expect people obviously have
some sort of respect for their own history (Why else would they not
change the names of those two organizations?) would not try to dictate
how American literary history is presented in its greatest books. If
African American culture is so precious, then every other hyphenated
American culture has to be given the same rights and values, it seems
to me.
>> > You say that the problem with
>> > "'niggardly' is simply a problem of education and
>> > hypersensitivity." I disagree. First, there is in my opinion no
>> > hypersensitivity involved, simply ordinary sensitivity. Second,
>> > you are implying that as soon as a person learns the etymology
>> > of the word, he or she will say "Oh, well all right then, no
>> > problem. Go ahead and use it, I won't mind now." I would not
>> > expect such an outcome, and I think a person who continues to
>> > use the word in this day and age is using extremely bad
>> > judgment.
>>
>> Tell me about it. What can you expect from people who want to ban
>> _Huckleberry Finn_ because a character is called "Nigger Jim" but
>> throw the word "nigger" around like Sean Penn's Ridgemont High
>> character used "dude"? If the word is so offensive, then I'd
>> expect that the persons offended would stop using it. I don't
>> like double standards and I'll have to change my word from
>> "hypersensitivity" to "hypocrisy".
>>
>> That said, it's not a word I would use around ignoramuses or
>> hypocrites.
>
> You haven't thought the matter out sufficiently. There is
> absolutely no reason to see hypocrisy in the "neutral" use of
> "nigger" by some African Americans.
I don't see it as neutral at all. We Italian Americans (strictly for
the sake of argument here; I never call myself an Italian American for
real) do not go around saying "Yo, ginny (or ginzo or dago or wop)! You
got pasta for brains" the way black Americans go around saying "Yo,
niggah! What you be doin?" The only time I ever heard that word at home
was when my father got pissed at my mother and started calling her a
stupid ginny. "Paisan" I heard a lot.Well, my family was filled with
Calabrese peasants, so the word was not untrue. But it is used the way
"brother" or "sister" is, not the way "Polak" or "nigger" is.
If the word is offensive, then it is offensive. If it is offensive only
when used by a non-black American, then it is a double standard. If
that isn't hypocrisy, I don't know what is. You cannot condemn a book
written 150 years ago for saying what you say in movies, music, and
print as well as on the street every day and not be hypocritical.
It's like adults telling children that they are not allowed to use
swear words when adults use them all the time. "Do as I say, not as I
do". If that isn't hypocrisy, I don't know what is, especially when it
is said as self-righteously as the book banners and the people who take
offense at the N-word say it.
Reminds me of the 1920s WCTU meeting at which all the teetotalers (Why
isn't that "teatotalers"?) were drinking sherry because they "could
handle it" while the common drinker could not, they opined.
> I put scare quotes around "neutral" there because the word
> does not really have an absolutely neutral usage, but must
> always seen, in one way or another, to be a loaded word.
You seem to contradict yourself. First you say it's neutral and then
you preclude the possibility of neutrality. I wish you'd make your mind
up.
Edward
ago, with no visible flinch from any of my interlocutors. Admittedly,
they were all University educated, if that makes a difference.
Edward
pbusw...@aol.com (PBusw13724) wrote in message news:<20020916025923...@mb-fq.aol.com>...
iwasaki
"Ross Klatte" <klatt...@aol.commmm> wrote in message
news:20020916070849...@mb-cn.aol.com...
>
> As for "Ameriko," and the shorter "Meriko," this term
Really? I haven't heard those words. It sounds like a
word that someone just made up for a single occasion.
--
Nobuko Iwasaki
Per Erik Rønne
> his knickers in a knot
What does it mean?
--
Per Erik Rønne
Frederikssundsvej 308B, DK-2700 Brønshøj, DENMARK, EUROPEAN UNION
Tlf. + fax: +38 89 00 16, mobil +45 28 23 09 92.
Homepage http://www.diku.dk/students/xerxes
Per Erik Rønne
> According to M-W, "niggard" is Old English, derived from a Norse word.
But not according to the »Bible« of the English language, the 23 volumes
large Oxford English Dictionary [three supplemantal volumes included].
In OED the etymology says: Of obscure etymology; an earlier synonym is
NIGON, and the termination in both cases would normally indicate a
French origin. The rareness of the n. NIG makes it doubtful wheter it is
the base of both formations.
The earliest known user of the word is Geoffrey Chaucer:
c1474 CHAUCER Troylus III. 1379 So parfite joye may no negarde have.
And:
c1386 CHAUCER Wife's T. 407 Old and angry nygardes of despense, God send
hem some verray pestilence.
nimue
>> Americans I know would never use the noun "cock." The one possible
>> exception would be the use of "cock" for the male of the domestic
>> fowl when discussing cockfighting, and most Americans have no
>> occasion to discuss cockfighting, since it is illegal almost
>> everywhere. Count me among those who would have very little occasion
>> to use the "legitimate" meanings of "cock."
>
> them through even half-way, eh?
That's exactly what I thought. However, I have the benefit of being married
to a man for a Western state. Guns were always a big part of his life. I
am from NYC, and never encountered guns. Ever. If I hadn't been married to
him, I probably wouldn't have thought of guns, either.
--
nimue
nimue
I would be very careful where I used the word. That said -- I think people
should know it! I knew a teacher who thought that the word niggardly was
somehow connected to -- had somehow evolved from -- the word nigger. I
remember being so irritated with this woman. I yanked out my OED (well --
it's pretty heavy, so I didn't actually "yank" it) and told her that there
was no connection. She didn't believe me. It was so frustrating -- she had
her belief, and wouldn't listen to anything else. I think people should be
able to use the word niggardly with impunity. There is nothing wrong with
the word. It's not racist. It just unfortunately happens to sound like
nigger. But, good god, if people had better vocabularies, and weren't so
inappropriately sensitive, this wouldn't be an issue.
--
nimue
Jacqui
> Kurt Kurosawa wrote:
>
>> his knickers in a knot
>
> What does it mean?
(BrE) "Don't get your knickers in a twist" = don't fuss, don't get
upset about something very silly.
It often is said mildly condescendingly, but is not really an insult.
It's roughly akin to "keep your hair on". Whether this changes meaning
over the pond I don't know, but BrE knickers are panties, and I don't
know if that intention is retained in the AmE phrase... getting
knickerbockers in a twist or knot seems slightly harder to do. :-)
Jac
nimue
>> From: mike_l...@yahoo.co.uk (Mike Lyle)
>> Date: 2002-09-16 06:21 Eastern Daylight Time
>> "Raymond S. Wise" <illinoi...@mninter.net> wrote in message
>> news:<uoaf408...@corp.supernews.com>...
>> [...]
>>> (In Esperanto, on the other
>>> hand, "Ameriko" means what in English we would call
>>> "the Americas," the word
>>> for a citizen of the United States being "Usonano," from
>>> the Esperanto
>>> version of "the United States of [North] America."
>>
>> Is this connected with Frank Lloyd Wright's "Usonian"?
>
> "The United States of North America" doesn't work because
> of the existence of "The United States of Mexico," a nation
> that is also situated in North America. I prefer a less
> ambiguous term such as "Merkin,"
A merkin is a wig worn where your pubic hair is supposed to be. Merkin is
also used metaphorically the same way "beard" is. Rock Hudson's wife would
have been referred to as a "beard." I can't think of any "merkins" at this
moment. I think "merkin" has all it can take now, and shouldn't be used to
describe citizens of anywhere.
or "Godzonian," or
> "Gringo." "Usan," while clever, is hard to catch.
>
> I would prefer that foreigners not use the offensive
> term "Yankee."
>
> As for "Ameriko," and the shorter "Meriko," this term
> is an abusive slur in Japanese. To be consistent, therefore,
> Esperanto should use "Jap" for the citizens of Japan .
>
>
>
> Ross
> Roebuck, South Carolina
> http://community.webshots.com/user/ross_klatte
--
nimue
Gopi Sundaram
> A high school boy in Indiana was suspended for wearing a University of
> South Carolina jersey. The jersey bore the word "COCKS." "Cocks" is
> short for "Gamecocks," which is the name of USC athletic teams. The
> boy actually had no interest in South Carolina athletics, and the
> school was justified in suspending him.
Ahem. As a proud alumnus, I object. The University itself sells athletic
gear that bears the word "cocks" embazoned across. I drew the line at
buying a T-shirt for my mother which bore the words "Cock Mom", but it
*was* available.
They also sold a poster of a cheerleader bent over in her skirt till her
knickers were showing, and you could see written on the derrière of her
panties the words "Go Cocks". Her father must be proud (I certainly
was).
I suppose you are in the PETA camp which objects to "Gamecocks" being a
mascot as well. They helpfully suggested that the team be renamed
something similar-sounding: the Gym Socks.
--
Gopi Sundaram
gop...@cse.sc.edu
Per Erik Rønne
> I was under the impression that the reference to the word "gay" and the
> Newark Airport did *not* have anything to do with the older, lighthearted
> usage, but instead had to do with the current, slang sense of "stupid"
But doesn't it mean [male] homosexual? When not used in it's original
meaning?
William
news:Xns928B9BDF258...@62.253.162.106...
>
> (BrE) "Don't get your knickers in a twist" = don't fuss, don't get
> upset about something very silly.
>
> It often is said mildly condescendingly, but is not really an insult.
> It's roughly akin to "keep your hair on". Whether this changes meaning
> over the pond I don't know, but BrE knickers are panties,
AFIK, it's well understood left of the pond thanks to endless
"Britcoms" on PBS and cable. (Though I often hear the translated
version as well: "Don't get your panties/shorts in a
twist/knot/bunch".) -Wm
sand
wrote:
>
>I would prefer that foreigners not use the offensive
>term "Yankee."
>
Are you kidding? What about "yankee ingenuity" and the popular song
"The Yanks ar Coming" (no sexual implications). Of course there is he
unfortunate synonym "jerk" which has negative connotations, but that
is a minor glitch.
Jan Sand
sand
wrote:
>
>That's exactly what I thought. However, I have the benefit of being married
>to a man for a Western state. Guns were always a big part of his life. I
>am from NYC, and never encountered guns. Ever. If I hadn't been married to
>him, I probably wouldn't have thought of guns, either.
And, of course, to go off half cocked has nothing to do with Bobbit
mutilation.
Jan Sand
Michael J Hardy
> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher
> in New York City was almost fired when a parent complained
> -vociferously- about the word.
Why is it always this form, and never the root word "nigard",
that people talk about? -- Mike Hardy
Mike Lyle
[...]
> Why did the parent complain? Did the teacher imply that the parent was
> niggardly?
>
> >Should this word be avoided?
>
Just in case we're moving towards a vote, I greatly respect RLW's
desire to avoid giving gratuitous offence to members of groups holding
less power than his own does, but I do use "niggardly" from time to
time, and I have no more intention of stopping than I have of using it
without discrimination. (If it *were* derived from "nigger" I'd never
have used it at all: I was brought up that way.) The grounds given for
killing the word are too weak.
Mike.
Steve Hayes
>The word has already been put out of bounds--it's a dead cause. I attempted
>to find by way of a Google search a use of the word "niggardly" in which the
>took me a long time, and when I finally found a couple of examples one of
>them was used by the Australian author Thomas Keneally in an interview in
>2000 and one was used in a translation of the Qur'an into English by
>Mohammad Habib Shakir, who died in 1939.
So that very fact shows that there should be no problem whatever in using it.
Just about everyone in the English-speaking world with acces to the internet
now knows that some stupid American made a huge fuss about nothing through
misunderstandingh a word.
Everyone should know its proper meaning, we can put it down to an ignorant
misunderstanding an move on.
Or do Americans really have this desperate desire to be the laughing stock of
the world?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/steve.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Kurt Kurosawa
"William" <wi...@us.itmasters.com> wrote in message
news:cinh9.67252$5r1.2...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> (Though I often hear the translated
> version as well: "Don't get your panties/shorts in a
> twist/knot/bunch".) -Wm
Yup, I hear that more frequently. These days, you could probably say "Don't
have a wedgie over it." But I like that kn/kn thing.
rzed
"Michael J Hardy" <mjh...@mit.edu> wrote in message
news:3d8608e0$0$3937$b45e...@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu...
You have to wonder how long it will be before "denigrated" is
denigrated.
--
rzed
Tony Cooper
> Just about everyone in the English-speaking world with acces to the
internet
> now knows that some stupid American made a huge fuss about nothing
through
> misunderstandingh a word.
>
> Everyone should know its proper meaning, we can put it down to an
ignorant
> misunderstanding an move on.
>
> Or do Americans really have this desperate desire to be the laughing
stock of
> the world?
Before you make that pronouncement, consider that South Africa may not
face the same problem with the word that we do. I don't know the
commonality of usage of "nigger" in SA, nor do I know if the blacks in
SA are as likely to object to word that just sounds like something that
might be bad. If these factors are not present, then you can't judge
the impact.
I've known the definition of "niggardly" since I was a teen-ager.
Probably, because I came across it in a book and looked it up. I know
it was never a word on the standard vocabulary lists taught at school.
Not because it was "bad", but because it was a relatively unimportant
word to know.
I can't recall ever using the word in conversation or writing. I would
avoid it. I don't understand why it's objectionable since it only
contains certain letters in common with the other word, but I still
avoid it. My rationale is that, being white, "nigger" has no emotional
impact on me so a close-sounding word certainly doesn't. However, I'll
allow for someone else's feelings and just take the high road. I don't
worry about their feeling being misdirected. If the feeling is there, I
see no need to stir it up.
I don't consider the British to be the laughingstock of the world over
the Paeditrician/Paedophile thing. No American would confuse
Pediatrician for Pedophile, but this isn't England and I can't judge the
similarity.
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
Per Erik Rønne
> I would prefer that foreigners not use the offensive
> term "Yankee."
Well, in Denmark a Yankie Bar is a bar of - chokolate :-).
And don't tell me what a Danish is in the States. I know ...
MM
>
> I would prefer that foreigners not use the offensive
> term "Yankee."
Unless perhaps they're referring to the New York Yankees?
MM
Skitt
> You say that the problem with "'niggardly' is
> simply a problem of education and hypersensitivity." I disagree.
> First, there is in my opinion no hypersensitivity involved, simply
> ordinary sensitivity. Second, you are implying that as soon as a
> person learns the etymology of the word, he or she will say "Oh, well
> all right then, no problem. Go ahead and use it, I won't mind now." I
> would not expect such an outcome, and I think a person who continues
> to use the word in this day and age is using extremely bad judgment.
Yup, we have to be very careful to speak in a way the the stupid can not
possibly mishear as being offensive. Simple words only. Short ones. Watch
out for anything with "nigg" anywhere in them. In fact, any long words
should be banned fronm use -- too much possibility of misinterpretation by
the "knowledge challenged" masses. Don't snigger at this!
--
Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/
I speak English well -- I learn it from a book!
-- Manuel (Fawlty Towers)
Skitt
> "Michael J Hardy" wrote:
>> JBYORK14 wrote:
>>> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher
>>> in New York City was almost fired when a parent complained
>>> -vociferously- about the word.
>>
>>
>> Why is it always this form, and never the root word "nigard",
>> that people talk about? -- Mike Hardy
>>
>
> You have to wonder how long it will be before "denigrated" is
> denigrated.
And Niger should certainly be renamed. That name is just too close for
comfort, no?
Sara Moffat Lorimer
Ross is posting from South Carolina. I understand they consider "yankee"
to be an insult down there.
--
SML, a Yankees fan who likes cheddar on her breakfast apple pie
http://www.pirate-women.com
Jerry Friedman
> On Sun, 15 Sep 2002 22:49:02 GMT, wf...@mindspring.com (Bill Funke) wrote:
>
> >According to M-W, "niggard" is Old English, derived from a Norse word.
> >lately, and we have plenty of other words available.
>
> Well there's mean, but that tends to be misunderstood nowadays, as a lot of
> people seem to use it for "bad-tempered".
>
> Parsimonious will have to do, then.
>
> Of course, if you look it up in the dictionary, it's defined as "niggardlu",
> so people who don't know what it means and look it up might still take
> offence.
The normal American word is "stingy", in case you're wondering. There
are also slang terms such as "tight". My age was in double digits
when I found out that "mean" could, um, signify the same thing (from
the _Guinness Book_ article on Hetty Green, history's worst miser).
One of those "terraced homes" things.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
> >From: jbyo...@aol.community (JBYORK14)
> >Date: 2002-09-15 15:21 Eastern Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <20020915152138...@mb-mu.aol.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >I am sure everyone in the NG knows this word, despite its unseemly
> >appearance.
> >
> >After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher in New York City
> >was
> >almost fired when a parent complained -vociferously- about the word.
> >
> >
>
> A high school boy in Indiana was suspended for wearing a University
> of South Carolina jersey. The jersey bore the word "COCKS." "Cocks"
> is short for "Gamecocks," which is the name of USC athletic teams.
> The boy actually had no interest in South Carolina athletics, and
> the school was justified in suspending him.
"Justified?" Beyond the debatable question of whether the jersey was
offensive, relying on intentions is dangerous. Some kid who's a good
liar will now be tempted to wear such a jersey and claim that he or
she *is* interested in S. C. sports, and then get away with wearing
the jersey around all day. Some other kid will move to this town from
South Carolina or some such. The first kid will see whether he can
get away with wearing a "Gamecocks" shirt. Et cetera.
Also, suspension and expulsion are obviously the least desirable
punishments from the administration's point of view because they
interfere with learning. I thought the normal reaction to violators
of the dress code was to tell them to put on something allowed and
come back. The worst case is that this turns into a one-day
suspension, but it can work out much better if, say, the student or a
friend keeps a sweatshirt in a locker, or the student is wearing an
acceptable undershirt beneath the jersey.
--
Jerry Friedman
Mike Oliver
> "Mike Oliver" <oli...@math.ucla.edu> wrote in message
> news:3D85675B...@math.ucla.edu...
>> I concede that that's probably the only way I'd be likely to use
>> it. That's not really the point. I don't like the *precedent*
>> involved. I think a stand needs to be taken against the absurd
>> principle--openly espoused by some--that anything to which someone
>> takes offense is ipso facto offensive, at least if that someone
>> is part of a disadvantaged group.
>>
>> That just *can't* be the rule. A person can take offense
>> at *anything*; it needs only the will to do so.
>
> And society will put limits to it. I have little respect for "slippery
> slope" arguments.
It's still wrong in principle, slippery slope or no. Taking
offense for no good reason, or for a misunderstanding, does
not make the thing offensive.
Raymond S. Wise
news:Xns928BCCDB9...@130.133.1.4...
> "Raymond S. Wise" <illinoi...@mninter.net> burbled
> news:uobc3r5...@corp.supernews.com:
>
> > "CyberCypher" <fra...@seed.net.tw> wrote in message
> > news:Xns928B90C1D...@130.133.1.4...
> >> "Raymond S. Wise" <illinoi...@mninter.net> burbled
> >> news:uoapfue...@corp.supernews.com:
>
> [...]
>
> >> >> This is a strange trio, IMHO. Hardly anyone misunderstands
> >> >> "gay" these days; "Polack" is, currently, inherently an
> >> >> insult, as demonstrated so well by either Dear Abbey or Ann
> >> >> Landers after her infamous remark about the Pope a couple of
> >> >> years back; and "niggardly" is simply a problem of education
> >> >> and hypersensitivity.
>
> >> > Hardly anyone misunderstands "gay" these days because the old
> >> > meaning of the word is long gone.
> >>
> >> That's true.
> >>
> >> > The deal with "Polack" is that
> >> > in its Polish form, "Polak," it is entirely inoffensive: The
> >> > same word used in a different context, in this case, used in
> >> > English, becomes the offensive "Pollack."
> >>
> >> I don't speak Polish, and I suspect that most English speakers
> >> don't, so this is a problem that will come up only for those
> >> aware of the Polish word "Polak". Black Americans call each other
> >> "nigger" all the time in person and on film. The same word in a
> >> different context becomes offensive to black Americans. And the
> >> word is English in both contexts. Maybe this means something more
> >> substantial than your "Polak" example. I find Jackson Pollack
> >> offensive, yes. I think he was a mediocre artist, but I've never
> >> seen "Polak" spelled "Pollack". That double "l" in there seems to
> >> serve as a vowel changer in this word, from the vowel in "Poe" to
> >> the vowel in "pop".
>
> I have also been advised by another poster that the man's name was
> "Pollock", like the fish, which is also spelled "pollack".
>
> [...]
>
> > It is my belief that a study of racial slurs should include the
> > etymology of the slurs. Therefore, the history of the word
> > "Polack" would include its original meaning in Polish. The
> > question becomes, when should the child be introduced to such
> > questions? It's something that society ends up making formal
> > decisions about, in the form (here in the US) of local school
> > board decisions or even the decisions of local school
> > administrators. On the individual level, of course, just as in the
> > case of the teaching of sex education, some parents will teach
> > their children the facts before the school gets around to teaching
> > them. I would expect Polish-American parents to be more likely to
> > introduce their children to the etymology of "Polack" at an
> > earlier age than do other parents with their children. What
> > African American parents teach their kids probably varies widely,
> > given that for some people the word "nigger" is an absolutely
> > taboo word, and "Negro" is not much better.
>
> So what do you think African American parents teach their kids?
> Etymology? How many people know the etymology of that word? And how
> many know the history of what black people in America have called
> themselves and wanted to be and not be called? For more than 100 years
> black Americans have been struggling with what they want the rest of us
> to call them, and still so many black Americans call themselves and
> each other "nigger" in private and in public.
>
> The United Negro College Fund still exists and has not changed its
> name. The NAACP still exists and has not changed its name. What kind of
> bullshit taboos are you talking about?
>
I'm talking about the taboos that are in actual existence, the reality of
the situation. The organizations you mentioned I also mentioned in a post to
the thread "Retarded?" because a similar phenomenon has occurred in the case
of the organization "the Association for Retarded Citizens."
> I know that there is no single African American block that makes the
> rules for all black Americans, but you'd expect people obviously have
> some sort of respect for their own history (Why else would they not
> change the names of those two organizations?) would not try to dictate
> how American literary history is presented in its greatest books. If
> African American culture is so precious, then every other hyphenated
> American culture has to be given the same rights and values, it seems
> to me.
>
> >> > You say that the problem with
> >> > "'niggardly' is simply a problem of education and
> >> > hypersensitivity." I disagree. First, there is in my opinion no
> >> > hypersensitivity involved, simply ordinary sensitivity. Second,
> >> > you are implying that as soon as a person learns the etymology
> >> > of the word, he or she will say "Oh, well all right then, no
> >> > problem. Go ahead and use it, I won't mind now." I would not
> >> > expect such an outcome, and I think a person who continues to
> >> > use the word in this day and age is using extremely bad
> >> > judgment.
> >>
> >> Tell me about it. What can you expect from people who want to ban
> >> _Huckleberry Finn_ because a character is called "Nigger Jim" but
> >> throw the word "nigger" around like Sean Penn's Ridgemont High
> >> character used "dude"? If the word is so offensive, then I'd
> >> expect that the persons offended would stop using it. I don't
> >> like double standards and I'll have to change my word from
> >> "hypersensitivity" to "hypocrisy".
> >>
> >> That said, it's not a word I would use around ignoramuses or
> >> hypocrites.
> >
> > You haven't thought the matter out sufficiently. There is
> > absolutely no reason to see hypocrisy in the "neutral" use of
> > "nigger" by some African Americans.
>
> I don't see it as neutral at all. We Italian Americans (strictly for
> the sake of argument here; I never call myself an Italian American for
> real) do not go around saying "Yo, ginny (or ginzo or dago or wop)! You
> got pasta for brains" the way black Americans go around saying "Yo,
> niggah! What you be doin?" The only time I ever heard that word at home
> was when my father got pissed at my mother and started calling her a
> stupid ginny. "Paisan" I heard a lot.Well, my family was filled with
> Calabrese peasants, so the word was not untrue. But it is used the way
> "brother" or "sister" is, not the way "Polak" or "nigger" is.
>
> If the word is offensive, then it is offensive. If it is offensive only
> when used by a non-black American, then it is a double standard. If
> that isn't hypocrisy, I don't know what is. You cannot condemn a book
> written 150 years ago for saying what you say in movies, music, and
> print as well as on the street every day and not be hypocritical.
>
> It's like adults telling children that they are not allowed to use
> swear words when adults use them all the time. "Do as I say, not as I
> do". If that isn't hypocrisy, I don't know what is, especially when it
> is said as self-righteously as the book banners and the people who take
> offense at the N-word say it.
>
> Reminds me of the 1920s WCTU meeting at which all the teetotalers (Why
> isn't that "teatotalers"?) were drinking sherry because they "could
> handle it" while the common drinker could not, they opined.
>
They may have been incorrect in their opinion, but they were certainly not
hypocrites if they believed what you say that they did.
> > I put scare quotes around "neutral" there because the word
> > does not really have an absolutely neutral usage, but must
> > always seen, in one way or another, to be a loaded word.
>
> You seem to contradict yourself. First you say it's neutral and then
> you preclude the possibility of neutrality. I wish you'd make your mind
> up.
>
> --
> Franke: Speaker and teacher of Standard International English (SIE)
>
>
Is it not obvious that "nigger" can be said by blacks who would object to it
being said by whites in their presence because this gives members of an
oppressed group a sort of power over their oppressors? The poorest black man
is permitted to do something that the richest white man cannot! This makes
the use of "nigger" attractive, particularly to those blacks who feel the
least powerful.
There must be other examples of this phenomenon. For example, I would not be
surprised if "Polack" was similarly use by some Polish-Americans back when
Polish immigrants were looked down upon.
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Ross Klatte
>Date: 2002-09-16 15:45 Eastern Daylight Time
> "Justified?" Beyond the debatable question of whether the
> jersey was offensive, relying on intentions is dangerous.
Dangerous though it may be, our entire legal system
is based on determining people's intentions. I cannot
think of any judicial body except the IRS Tax Court that
does not look closely at a defendant's intentions.
> Some kid who's a good liar will now be tempted to wear such
> a jersey and claim that he or she *is* interested in S. C. sports,
> and then get away with wearing the jersey around all day.
As I remember, the kid made no effort to claim he was a fan.
He said he just wore it because he thought it was funny.
Fuck him.
Raymond S. Wise
> Yuno Hu <n...@hotmail.com> burbled
> news:B9AAF66E.24E02%n...@hotmail.com:
>
> > CyberCypher at fra...@seed.net.tw on 9/15/02 11:13 PM in
> > Xns928B90C1D...@130.133.1.4, posted this:
> >
> >> Tell me about it. What can you expect from people who want to ban
> >> _Huckleberry Finn_ because a character is called "Nigger Jim" but
> >> throw the word "nigger" around like Sean Penn's Ridgemont High
> >> character used "dude"? If the word is so offensive, then I'd
> >> expect that the persons offended would stop using it. I don't
> >> like double standards and I'll have to change my word from
> >> "hypersensitivity" to "hypocrisy".
> >
> > "niggardly" would address each other as "nigger"? I seriously
> > doubt it.
>
> You ever been to Oakland or San Francisco? I know you don't hang with
> no home boys, my man, or you would not doubt it for a minute.
>
> On what do you base your dobts?
>
> --
> Franke: Speaker and teacher of Standard International English (SIE)
>
I agree with Franke here. The word "nigger" is used in public also here in
Minneapolis and in St. Paul--particularly in black street slang--by blacks
who I fully expect would object to the use of "nigger" in Huckleberry Finn
and to the use of the term "niggardly."
Orne Batmagoo
<jbyo...@aol.community> wrote:
> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher in New York City was
> almost fired when a parent complained -vociferously- about the word.
You mean the same thing happened to a teacher in New York City that happened
to David Howard, a staff member of Washington, D.C., mayor Anthony Williams?
See <http://www.adversity.net/special/niggardly.htm> .
> Should this word be avoided?
Gosh! I should say so, if the same thing happened to some teacher in New York!
You don't happen to have an actual cite, do you?
By the way, does the "14" in your handle stand for your age?
--
Orne Batmagoo
Raymond S. Wise
news:am59m5$2kl27$1...@ID-61580.news.dfncis.de...
> rzed wrote:
> > "Michael J Hardy" wrote:
> >> JBYORK14 wrote:
>
> >>> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher
> >>> in New York City was almost fired when a parent complained
> >>> -vociferously- about the word.
> >>
> >>
> >> Why is it always this form, and never the root word "nigard",
> >> that people talk about? -- Mike Hardy
> >>
> >
> > You have to wonder how long it will be before "denigrated" is
> > denigrated.
>
> And Niger should certainly be renamed. That name is just too close for
> comfort, no?
No. If it were spelled "Nigger" and pronounced accordingly, perhaps, but it
is spelled "Niger," which spelling makes it obvious that the first syllable
is pronounced /aI/, that is, with a long "i."
Skitt
> "Skitt" wrote:
>> rzed wrote:
>>> "Michael J Hardy" wrote:
>>>> JBYORK14 wrote:
>>>>> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher
>>>>> in New York City was almost fired when a parent complained
>>>>> -vociferously- about the word.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why is it always this form, and never the root word "nigard",
>>>> that people talk about? -- Mike Hardy
>>>>
>>>
>>> You have to wonder how long it will be before "denigrated" is
>>> denigrated.
>>
>> And Niger should certainly be renamed. That name is just too close
>> for comfort, no?
>
>
> No. If it were spelled "Nigger" and pronounced accordingly, perhaps,
> but it is spelled "Niger," which spelling makes it obvious that the
> first syllable is pronounced /aI/, that is, with a long "i."
True, but "niggardly" is not spelled "niggerly", is it?
sand
wrote:
>As I remember, the kid made no effort to claim he was a fan.
>He said he just wore it because he thought it was funny.
>Fuck him.
And what in hell does it matter if he did want to wear a dirty word.
If that cheap idiocy gives him a thrill, why should anybody make an
issue over it? If everybody ignored it the display would very soon
lose the interest of everybody and nobody would have to go without an
education.
Jan Sand
Donna Richoux
> I am sure everyone in the NG knows this word, despite its unseemly appearance.
>
> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher in New York
> City was almost fired when a parent complained -vociferously- about the
> word.
>
> Should this word be avoided?
I see your question generated a great many responses, but in the first
dozen or two I checked, no one questioned your facts. Are you absolutely
certain it was a NYC teacher and this word? Because three years ago, a
very similar thing happened and made international news, but it happened
to David Howard, a city employee (mayor's aide) in Washington, DC.
Did you hear this by word of mouth, or is something that you could point
to in the New York newspapers? Maybe someone remembered the salient
points (niggardly, trouble) and made up the rest to fit?
Here's one of the stories from 1999:
CNN News at http://europe.cnn.com/US/9902/04/dc.word.flap/
D.C. aide in 'niggardly' flap will return to City Hall
Mayor now says he acted 'too hastily'
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A white aide to Washington Mayor
Anthony Williams who resigned after using the word
"niggardly" in a conversation will be returning to
city government, ending a flap over what critics
derided as political correctness run amok.
On Thursday, saying he acted "too hastily" in
accepting David Howard's resignation, Williams
offered Howard his job back as director of the
Office of the Public Advocate. Howard agreed to come
back to city government, but he has asked the mayor
to find him a different job.
I just like to keep the facts straight about this. If yours is
definitely a separate case, I would love some names, dates, locations.
I can also tell you the name and dates for the paediatrician in Wales
who had "Paedo" graffiti scrawled on her front walk in 2000 (but was
*not* pursued by any howling mob). In the UK, "paedo" is short for
pedophile.
Then there's the Kleberg, Texas, county commissioners, who passed a
resolution urging everyone to say "heaven-o" instead of "hell-o." Jan.
17, 1997. Never seen a follow-up report.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
Raymond S. Wise
> On Sun, 15 Sep 2002 22:49:02 GMT, wf...@mindspring.com (Bill Funke) wrote:
>
> >According to M-W, "niggard" is Old English, derived from a Norse word.
> >Like many other Old English words, it hasn't been in common use much
> >lately, and we have plenty of other words available.
>
> Well there's mean, but that tends to be misunderstood nowadays, as a lot
of
> people seem to use it for "bad-tempered".
>
> Parsimonious will have to do, then.
>
> Of course, if you look it up in the dictionary, it's defined as
"niggardlu",
> so people who don't know what it means and look it up might still take
> offence.
>
"Niggardly" does not appear in the definition of "parsimonious" in
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate, the AHD4, the dictionary at www.infoplease.com
, nor the Encarta World English Dictionary, North American Edition. It *is*
in The Century Dictionary of 1895 and the 1913 Webster's Unabridged. I take
this as evidence that "niggardly" has seriously fallen out of favor in the
intervening years, at least in American English.
Mike Oliver
> Then there's the Kleberg, Texas, county commissioners, who passed a
> resolution urging everyone to say "heaven-o" instead of "hell-o." Jan.
> 17, 1997. Never seen a follow-up report.
But surely they were joking?
Donna Richoux
> JBYORK14 <jbyo...@aol.community> wrote:
>
> > I am sure everyone in the NG knows this word, despite its unseemly
> > appearance.
> >
> > After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher in New York
> > City was almost fired when a parent complained -vociferously- about
> > the word.
> >
> > Should this word be avoided?
>
> I see your question generated a great many responses, but in the first
> dozen or two I checked, no one questioned your facts. Are you absolutely
> certain it was a NYC teacher and this word? Because three years ago, a
> very similar thing happened and made international news, but it happened
> to David Howard, a city employee (mayor's aide) in Washington, DC.
>
> Did you hear this by word of mouth, or is something that you could point
> to in the New York newspapers? Maybe someone remembered the salient
> points (niggardly, trouble) and made up the rest to fit?
I meant to check the Google News of the Week (go to their Advanced
Search) before I posted that. Now that I have, I see that there is
indeed a new "niggardly" story coming out of Wilmington, North Carolina,
this week, with all the details needed to satisfy me. See, for example,
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/local/4071105.htm
A teacher who used the word "niggardly" in her class
and was reprimanded for it is satisfied with how her
situation has been handled, New Hanover County
Schools Superintendent John Morris said Friday.
[snip lengthy story and details]
The significant error in how you learned the story is that it happened
in North Carolina, not New York City. Whether she was "almost fired"
would depend on who was telling the story.
Donna Richoux
Yes and no. They were mostly humoring a local persistent crackpot,
Leonso Canales, is the way I read it. I have three news stories but
didn't save the URLs. I see that searching for <kleberg county leonso
canales> turns up some -- see what you think.
R H Draney
>
>rzed wrote:
>>
>> You have to wonder how long it will be before "denigrated" is
>> denigrated.
>
>And Niger should certainly be renamed. That name is just too close for
>comfort, no?
I've been hesitant to use "denigrate" for some time now, realizing that unlike
"niggard", "niggling" and "snigger", it *is* derived from the same root as
"nigger" (literally, it's nothing more or less than a fancy word for
"blacken")...I can't find out whether "Niger" and "Nigeria" are ultimately from
the Latin for "black" as well...Niger seems to be named for the river, which
comes from the name of a local plant, but I can't tell whether that's a local
name or one imposed by Europeans....
You've got to love the candor of a straightforward botanical name like "piper
nigrum", though....r
mickwick
[...]
>...Niger seems to be named for the river, which comes from the name of
>a local plant, but I can't tell whether that's a local name or one
>imposed by Europeans....
>
>You've got to love the candor of a straightforward botanical name like "piper
>nigrum", though....r
Sure. But ain't it sad, sad, sad that we have to resort to botanical
Latin before we can admit to any sort of pleasure in the (undoubted)
etymology of Niger? PC is pure poison.
--
Mickwick
Who once pushed a coal-truck from Algeria to Niger (about 3 miles)
Tony Cooper
news:mpph9.6414$yT4.60...@news-text.cableinet.net...
That *is* the offensive usage.
Sincerely,
The Yawkey Family
Mike Barnes
>rzed wrote:
>> "Michael J Hardy" wrote:
>>> JBYORK14 wrote:
>
>>>> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher
>>>> in New York City was almost fired when a parent complained
>>>> -vociferously- about the word.
>>>
>>>
>>> Why is it always this form, and never the root word "nigard",
>>> that people talk about? -- Mike Hardy
>>>
>>
>> You have to wonder how long it will be before "denigrated" is
>> denigrated.
>
>And Niger should certainly be renamed. That name is just too close for
>comfort, no?
And what should one call people from Nigg (Scotland)?
--
Mike Barnes
CyberCypher
news:am4mev$2jpku$1...@ID-136331.news.dfncis.de:
>
> "Ross Klatte" <klatt...@aol.commmm> wrote in message
> news:20020916070849...@mb-cn.aol.com...
>>
>> As for "Ameriko," and the shorter "Meriko," this term
>> is an abusive slur in Japanese. [...]
>
> Really? I haven't heard those words. It sounds like a
> word that someone just made up for a single occasion.
I never heard it during my 10 years in Tokyo either.
CyberCypher
news:1filz35.8ymhj4hx6emN%radi...@nyc.rr.com:
> jan_...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> On 16 Sep 2002 11:08:49 GMT, klatt...@aol.commmm (Ross Klatte)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I would prefer that foreigners not use the offensive
>> >term "Yankee."
>> >
>> Are you kidding? What about "yankee ingenuity" and the popular
>> song "The Yanks ar Coming" (no sexual implications). Of course
>> there is he unfortunate synonym "jerk" which has negative
>> connotations, but that is a minor glitch.
>
> Ross is posting from South Carolina. I understand they consider
> "yankee" to be an insult down there.
>
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that "Yankee, go home!" originated
down there during Reconstruction.
CyberCypher
news:3d8608e0$0$3937$b45e...@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu:
> JBYORK14 (jbyo...@aol.community) wrote:
>
>> After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher
>> in New York City was almost fired when a parent complained
>> -vociferously- about the word.
>
>
> Why is it always this form, and never the root word "nigard",
> that people talk about? -- Mike Hardy
>
Because most users of the word "niggardly" do not use the noun form.
CyberCypher
news:am567j$79v$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com:
>
> "Michael J Hardy" <mjh...@mit.edu> wrote in message
> news:3d8608e0$0$3937$b45e...@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu...
>> JBYORK14 (jbyo...@aol.community) wrote:
>>
>> > After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher
>> > in New York City was almost fired when a parent complained
>> > -vociferously- about the word.
>>
>>
>> Why is it always this form, and never the root word "nigard",
>> that people talk about? -- Mike Hardy
>>
>
> You have to wonder how long it will be before "denigrated" is
> denigrated.
>
I posted something about that in a response to B Briggs some weeks ago.
The word means "to blacken" and is closely related to the source of
"nigger".
CyberCypher
news:ICJdcuA6...@senrab.com:
[...]
> And what should one call people from Nigg (Scotland)?
>
Nigg-persons.
CyberCypher
news:3d85b3cb...@news.saix.net:
>
>>The word has already been put out of bounds--it's a dead cause. I
>>attempted to find by way of a Google search a use of the word
>>"niggardly" in which the article or Web page was not a discussion
>>of the word "niggardly" itself. It took me a long time, and when I
>>finally found a couple of examples one of them was used by the
>>Australian author Thomas Keneally in an interview in 2000 and one
>>was used in a translation of the Qur'an into English by Mohammad
>>Habib Shakir, who died in 1939.
>
> So that very fact shows that there should be no problem whatever
> in using it.
>
> Just about everyone in the English-speaking world with acces to
> the internet now knows that some stupid American made a huge fuss
> about nothing through misunderstandingh a word.
>
> Everyone should know its proper meaning, we can put it down to an
> ignorant misunderstanding an move on.
>
> Or do Americans really have this desperate desire to be the
> laughing stock of the world?
When it comes to politics and political correctness, most Americans [1]
seem to have no shame. They (I exclude myself on the ground of ex-pat-
ism) do not mind being laughed at any more than any other group of
self-righteous people do.
[1] That "most" excludes all thinking Americans, a group the size of
which is not doubt no larger and no smaller than similar groups in all
other countries of the world.
MM
Fair enough! On reflection, I'd prefer that people didn't utter the
words "Manchester United". That applies to fellow Brits as well as
foreigners.
MM
CyberCypher
news:am575s$2r7tq$1...@ID-113505.news.dfncis.de:
> "Steve Hayes" <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>> Just about everyone in the English-speaking world with acces to
>> the
> internet
>> now knows that some stupid American made a huge fuss about
>> nothing
> through
>> misunderstandingh a word.
>>
>> Everyone should know its proper meaning, we can put it down to an
> ignorant
>> misunderstanding an move on.
>>
>> Or do Americans really have this desperate desire to be the
>> laughing
> stock of
>> the world?
>
> Before you make that pronouncement, consider that South Africa may
> not face the same problem with the word that we do. I don't know
> the commonality of usage of "nigger" in SA, nor do I know if the
> blacks in SA are as likely to object to word that just sounds like
> something that might be bad. If these factors are not present,
> then you can't judge the impact.
>
> I've known the definition of "niggardly" since I was a teen-ager.
> Probably, because I came across it in a book and looked it up. I
> know it was never a word on the standard vocabulary lists taught
> at school. Not because it was "bad", but because it was a
> relatively unimportant word to know.
>
> I can't recall ever using the word in conversation or writing. I
> would avoid it. I don't understand why it's objectionable since
> it only contains certain letters in common with the other word,
> but I still avoid it. My rationale is that, being white, "nigger"
> has no emotional impact on me so a close-sounding word certainly
> doesn't. However, I'll allow for someone else's feelings and just
> take the high road. I don't worry about their feeling being
> misdirected. If the feeling is there, I see no need to stir it
> up.
>
> I don't consider the British to be the laughingstock of the world
> over the Paeditrician/Paedophile thing. No American would confuse
> Pediatrician for Pedophile, but this isn't England and I can't
> judge the similarity.
The Brits also use the /ae/ digraph for haematology, anaesthesiology,
orthopaedics, aesthetic, and a host of other words derived from Greek,
presumably to maintain the Greek root and not to distinguish paedophile
from paediatrician, which is no more distinguishable than the American
pediatrician/pedophile.
CyberCypher
news:1ficouk6sll61tjtq...@4ax.com:
Your suggestion is too sensible.
CyberCypher
[...]
> Is it not obvious that "nigger" can be said by blacks who would
> object to it being said by whites in their presence because this
> gives members of an oppressed group a sort of power over their
> oppressors? The poorest black man is permitted to do something
> that the richest white man cannot! This makes the use of "nigger"
> attractive, particularly to those blacks who feel the least
> powerful.
Yes, it is obvious, just as obvious as it is that female sports
reporters are allowed into male locker rooms but male sports reporters
are *not* allowed into female locker rooms. PC bullshit has substituted
one double standard for another.
>
> There must be other examples of this phenomenon. For example, I
> would not be surprised if "Polack" was similarly use by some
> Polish-Americans back when Polish immigrants were looked down
> upon.
There probably are, but how would you know if a Polish AMerican was
calling another Polish American a "Polack" in Polish or in English?
This is a rather silly example.
Evan Kirshenbaum
> "Niggardly" does not appear in the definition of "parsimonious" in
> Merriam-Webster's Collegiate, the AHD4, the dictionary at
> www.infoplease.com , nor the Encarta World English Dictionary, North
> American Edition. It *is* in The Century Dictionary of 1895 and the
> 1913 Webster's Unabridged. I take this as evidence that "niggardly"
> has seriously fallen out of favor in the intervening years, at least
> in American English.
I don't think that it's necessarily from any bad associations,
though. I think that "stingy" and "cheap" just took its place.
MW has a usage note on the distinctions they see:
STINGY, CLOSE, NIGGARDLY, PARSIMONIOUS, PENURIOUS, MISERLY mean
being unwilling or showing unwillingness to share with
others. STINGY implies a marked lack of generosity <a stingy
child, not given to sharing>. CLOSE suggests keeping a tight grip
on one's money and possessions <folks who are very close when
charity calls>. NIGGARDLY implies giving or spending the very
smallest amount possible <the niggardly amount budgeted for the
town library>. PARSIMONIOUS suggests a frugality so extreme as to
lead to stinginess <a parsimonious life-style notably lacking in
luxuries>. PENURIOUS implies niggardliness that gives an
appearance of actual poverty <the penurious eccentric bequeathed a
fortune>. MISERLY suggests a sordid avariciousness and a morbid
pleasure in hoarding <a miserly couple devoid of social
conscience>.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Never attempt to teach a pig to
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |sing; it wastes your time and
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |annoys the pig.
| Robert Heinlein
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Tony Cooper
news:1fimkbs.15y0de812ohcxhN%tr...@euronet.nl...
> JBYORK14 <jbyo...@aol.community> wrote:
>
> > I am sure everyone in the NG knows this word, despite its unseemly
appearance.
> >
> > After making this word a weekly vocabulary word, a teacher in New
York
> > City was almost fired when a parent complained -vociferously-
about the
> > word.
> >
> > Should this word be avoided?
>
> I see your question generated a great many responses, but in the first
> dozen or two I checked, no one questioned your facts. Are you
absolutely
> certain it was a NYC teacher and this word? Because three years ago, a
> very similar thing happened and made international news, but it
happened
> to David Howard, a city employee (mayor's aide) in Washington, DC.
>
> Did you hear this by word of mouth, or is something that you could
point
> to in the New York newspapers? Maybe someone remembered the salient
> points (niggardly, trouble) and made up the rest to fit?
>
Perhaps it was in aeu, but someone posted on this subject earlier. She
did cite the newspaper reference. In trying to find this, I entered
"walker niggardly" in Google. (Many accounts of the Wilmington NC
incident under this search.)
I lost interest in this research, though when I spotted the following
New Zealand usage:
"They have, in Matthew Walker and Paul Hitchcock, two of the most
niggardly and effective bowlers at the death that the competition has
seen this season. Hitchcock, a largely unheralded player of enormous
potential, is at the top of the Shield bowling averages this season with
21 wickets at an average of 13.8. "
Niggardly is alive and well in southern hemisphere cricketing.
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
Tony Cooper
> > And what in hell does it matter if he did want to wear a dirty word.
> > If that cheap idiocy gives him a thrill, why should anybody make an
> > issue over it? If everybody ignored it the display would very soon
> > lose the interest of everybody and nobody would have to go without
an
> > education.
Here's Jan, who laments the decline and fall of practically everything,
that when presented with evidence of the decline and fall of something
says "Hey! No big deal. Let it go.".
CyberCypher
news:3D8643CD...@spamfodder.uwsa.edu:
[...]
> By the way, does the "14" in your handle stand for your age?
I think he drives a car, so maybe it's his EQ (emotional quotient).
CyberCypher
news:1fimo8k.1b490n91o9wav4N%tr...@euronet.nl:
From one of those stories:
However, 'heaven-o!' turns out not to be so new after all. The
following is from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 13 April 1902, pg. 4,
col. 5:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
WANTED, A NEW WORD.
"Hello" is not good enough for the particular residents of Evanston,
Ill., and in consequence a movement is on foot to abolish the word from
the vocabulary. The proposed reform is being directed by the Women's
Club, the members of which have tabooed the term on the ground that it
is not refined, and that a much better expression can be found.
Accordingly Evanstonian society is attempting to break itself of the
habit of saying "hello" through the telephone, and has pushed the
reform to the point where the girls at central have been instructed not
to use the word. When the advocates of the reform are called to the
telephone they say, "Good morning," or "How do you do?" or "Good
evening."
The progress of the movement started by the women of Evanston will be
watched with interest. Time was when "hello" belonged to the street and
had nothing to recommend it. But with the growth of the telephone, its
use has become universal; because it seems to fit exactly the
requirements of the instrument, and like some other phrases of lowly
origin, it is no longer a discourteous expression. As a special term,
it has entered the vocabulary along with the word telephone, and as
such has attained respectability and become firmly intrenched as a part
of the language.
To displace "hello" will not be easy. It is a good and useful word, and
will not drop out of sight because somebody prefers to say "Good
morning," or "How do you do?" The substitutes are too cumbersome. Until
the good women of Evanston can find a word as easy to say and as
convenient as "hello," the word they would cast out as unworthy will
persist in forcing itself upon their attention. "Hello" has become an
indispensable. It will not be downed by the mere dictum of a woman's
club.
http://www.uta.fi/FAST/US8/PC/heaveno.html
CyberCypher
But it does turn up in my Crowell _Roget's International Thesaurus, 3rd
Edition_ (850).
OED2 CD-ROM:
niggardly (________), a. Also 6 nigardly, 6 (9 dial.) niggerly.
[f. niggard n. + -ly1.]
1. Having a niggard’s nature; meanly parsimonious, close-fisted,
stingy; sparing.
parsimonious (_____________), a. Also 7 perci-, 7 parci-.
[f. L. parsimonia parsimony + -ous. Cf. It. parsimonioso (Florio 1598),
F. parcimonieux (1788 in Hatz.-Darm.).]
Characterized by parsimony; careful in the use or disposal of money or
resources; sparing, saving; ‘close’. Said of persons, their
expenditure, etc.
Robert Bannister
> This subject came up earlier in the newsgroup alt.english.usage , and as a
> result I spent part of this afternoon reading several Internet articles on
> the "nigger/niggardly" controversy. One of the things that impressed me
> about what I read is that each side believes its side to be on the side of
> common sense. That includes me: I think it's blatantly foolish to continue
> to use the word "niggardly."
I agree that words like "cock" should be avoided in America and Australia,
though not in England, but "niggardly" has no connotations of "nigger", either
in Australia or Britain. "Niggard", however, is rather more unusual and
perhaps more dangerous.
> It is of course worthwhile to have the word in
> one's recognition vocabulary, but when to introduce it to young children is
> a question of judgment. I gave an example in the other group that there is
> nothing inherently offensive in telling a child that "Polak" is the Polish
> word for "Pole," but when to do so is a question of judgment, because the
> word sounds too close to the English-language slur "Polack."
"Polack" is, as far as I know, not used outside America, so there's no
problem.
> To put it bluntly, if you tell some children that "niggardly" is "perfectly
> okay," as some people would apparently do, you are going to have children
> figure out ways to tease black classmates. Just as with "Polak" aimed at
> Polish-American classmates, the teasers will insist that they are doing
> nothing wrong, because the word is (in some sense or other, because the
> teacher said it was) "okay."
Children will, of course, find ways to tease other kids, whatever you do.
--
Rob Bannister
CyberCypher
news:3D867F04...@it.net.au:
[...]
> I agree that words like "cock" should be avoided in America and
> Australia, though not in England, but "niggardly" has no
> connotations of "nigger", either in Australia or Britain.
> "Niggard", however, is rather more unusual and perhaps more
> dangerous.
Well, actually, please see my post with the OED2 definition of the
term. It says "(dial.) niggerly". This is the first time I've seen
that, and I'm sure that most people are unaware of this spelling and
pronunciation variant. There just might be some real merit in the
claims made against the word if the dialect version was what was really
being objected to.
nimue
> Raymond S. Wise <illinoi...@mninter.net> wrote:
>
>> I was under the impression that the reference to the word "gay" and
>> the Newark Airport did *not* have anything to do with the older,
>> lighthearted usage, but instead had to do with the current, slang
>> sense of "stupid"
>
> But doesn't it mean [male] homosexual? When not used in it's original
> meaning?
It means homosexual. Some people, particularly teenagers at the high
school where I teach, ust the word "'gay" to mean stupid, or pathetic, but
always, ALWAYS, it is connected to the idea that being gay (homosexual) is
somehow wrong and bad. BTW, when those teenagers at my school use the word
gay, they wind up very, very sorry.
--
nimue