"Jew" as a noun
Mirhanda Sarko
has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case) as a verb anymore
because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the price down). In response to
that, someone else posted the following:
"On a tangent, I choose not to use the word Jew as a noun either. There's
just something about it that I find sort of hard-edged. Instead, I always
say something like "There were several Jewish people who took today off
for Passover." But to say "Some Jews took off today for Passover" doesn't
sound right to my ears."
So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew offensive
to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not Jewish.
I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of other
religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have a
Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
Mirhanda
--
Decapitate my addy to email me
I know who you are!! You are the character who occasionally appears in the
comic strip "Sylvia", as "The Woman Who Does Everything More Beautifully
Than You Do".
Les, speaking of me, in alt.fan.cecil-adams
Boron Elgar
(Mirhanda Sarko) wrote:
>On one of my mailing lists, there was a discussion about a dictionary that
>has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case) as a verb anymore
>because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the price down). In response to
>that, someone else posted the following:
>
>"On a tangent, I choose not to use the word Jew as a noun either. There's
>just something about it that I find sort of hard-edged. Instead, I always
>say something like "There were several Jewish people who took today off
>for Passover." But to say "Some Jews took off today for Passover" doesn't
>sound right to my ears."
>
>So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew offensive
>to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not Jewish.
>I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of other
>religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have a
>Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
>
Doesn't bother me one whit.
Boron
Al Yellon
news:3aec29d6...@news.carroll.com...
> >So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew
offensive
> >to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not
Jewish.
> >I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of other
> >religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have a
> >Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
> >
>
> Doesn't bother me one whit.
Nor me.
--
**********************************
AY - Charter Member, DBFC
http://www.dbfc.org
**********************************
david
>On one of my mailing lists, there was a discussion about a dictionary that
>has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case) as a verb anymore
>because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the price down).
Isn't that kinda, well, stupid?
I mean, what does offensiveness have to do with including the word in
a dictionary? I can understand a style guide suggesting against it
(obviously), but a dictionary should only be concerned with how common
a word is.
Margaret Kane
"Al Yellon" <tvdir...@REMOVETHISdbfc.org> wrote in message
news:tduc2qp...@corp.supernews.com...
> "Boron Elgar" <Kalk...@bwu.edu> wrote in message
> news:3aec29d6...@news.carroll.com...
> > >So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew
> offensive
> > >to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not
> Jewish.
> > >I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of other
> > >religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have a
> > >Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
> > >
> >
> > Doesn't bother me one whit.
>
> Nor me.
Well how are you saying it? "Oh yes, Margaret is a Jew (and will not be
attending Easter services)"? or "Yes, Margaret's a *Jew* (that's why she's
so cheap)"?
But generally, not really a problem. (Although for some reason "Jewess" has
always irked me, I'm not sure whether that's because it sounds anti-semitic
or sexist.)
Jew as an adjective can be troublesome; I've generally only heard it used
that way as an epithet i.e. Jew lawyer.
Margaret
Margaret
ra...@westnet.poe.com
> "Boron Elgar" <Kalk...@bwu.edu> wrote in message
> news:3aec29d6...@news.carroll.com...
>> >So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew
> offensive
>> >to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not
> Jewish.
>> >I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of other
>> >religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have a
>> >Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
>> >
>>
>> Doesn't bother me one whit.
> Nor me.
It's the intent that matters.
John
--
Remove the dead poet to e-mail, tho CC'd posts are unwelcome.
Ask me about joining the NRA.
Anny Middon
news:9bndai$8lu$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk...
>
>
> Well how are you saying it? "Oh yes, Margaret is a Jew (and will not be
> attending Easter services)"? or "Yes, Margaret's a *Jew* (that's why she's
> so cheap)"?
I'm not Jewish, but it seems to me that saying "Yes, Margaret's a *Jewish*
person (that's why she's so cheap)" would be every bit as offensive.
Anny
UFO_Charlie
>So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew offensive
>to you?
I've always thought it had sort of a hard edge, but I attribute that to bad
genetic memories. I don't really take offense unless it's clear that it was
meant. (i.e. "Kill the fucking Jew!")
--
***UFO_Charlie***
Random Neural Firings - http://theRNF.tripod.com
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS/GG/GJ/GMU/GS d s+:+ a--- C++ W+++ N++
w+ PS+ PE- Y- t@ X+ R tv++ b++ DI+++++ G e- h* r z?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
[Discombobulate my email address to reply.]
Mirhanda Sarko
>
>Well how are you saying it? "Oh yes, Margaret is a Jew (and will not be
>attending Easter services)"? or "Yes, Margaret's a *Jew* (that's why
>she's so cheap)"?
Well, if you had read my original post which contained the statement from
the person on the mailing list, you would have seen:
"On a tangent, I choose not to use the word Jew as a noun either. There's
just something about it that I find sort of hard-edged. Instead, I always
say something like "There were several Jewish people who took today off
for Passover." But to say "Some Jews took off today for Passover" doesn't
sound right to my ears."
kitteridge
>a dictionary? I can understand a style guide suggesting against it
>(obviously), but a dictionary should only be concerned with how common
>a word is.
I believe it would depend on whether or not that dictionary contained vulgar
slang. I love the American Heritage dictionary, 'cause it seems to include most
everything. If the word is then listed as slang, vulgar, then fine, leave it in
there. As a word for regular usage (Jew as a verb), no, that's not acceptable.
Personally, I don't hear it much -- maybe just the part of the world I'm in --
but if I did, I would be offended.
Context is all, in my opinion, when you use the word "Jew" as a noun. "He's a
Jew" or "She's a Jew" may be better English than "He's Jewish" or "She's
Jewish" (both of which make it sound as though you're dancing around the point
because of the "ish"). I mean, nobody says you're Catholicish or Protestantish;
you're a Catholic or a Protestant. So there's no logical reasoning behind it; I
sense it's just a matter of those who tend to use Jew as a noun have, for a
long time, used it pejoratively. Additionally, common parlance seems to lean
towards "Jewish," which makes "Jew" stand out.
Now, on that note, are there any people of Welsh descent who object to the use
of "welshing" on a bet?
Best,
Kitt
RM Mentock
>
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:55:04 GMT, Mirhanda Sarko wrote:
> >On one of my mailing lists, there was a discussion about a dictionary that
> >has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case) as a verb anymore
> >because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the price down).
>
> Isn't that kinda, well, stupid?
Which dictionary?
--
RM Mentock
panta rhei -- Heraclitis
http://mentock.home.mindspring.com/
david
>>I mean, what does offensiveness have to do with including the word in
>>a dictionary? I can understand a style guide suggesting against it
>>(obviously), but a dictionary should only be concerned with how common
>>a word is.
>
>I believe it would depend on whether or not that dictionary contained vulgar
>slang.
Isn't it a bit weird for a dictionary to have suddenly discovered this
year that "jew" as a verb is offensive?
>I love the American Heritage dictionary, 'cause it seems to include most
>everything. If the word is then listed as slang, vulgar, then fine, leave it in
>there. As a word for regular usage (Jew as a verb), no, that's not acceptable.
>Personally, I don't hear it much -- maybe just the part of the world I'm in --
>but if I did, I would be offended.
Obviously it's offensive, I'm not disputing that at all. I don't
think anybody is.
>Context is all, in my opinion, when you use the word "Jew" as a noun. "He's a
>Jew" or "She's a Jew" may be better English than "He's Jewish" or "She's
>Jewish" (both of which make it sound as though you're dancing around the point
>because of the "ish").
I don't see that. I honestly can't imagine a context where the word
"Jew" would be offensive and "Jewish" would not. ("Jew" as a prefix
is another matter, of course).
Boron Elgar
<margar...@zdnet.com> wrote:
>
>"Al Yellon" <tvdir...@REMOVETHISdbfc.org> wrote in message
>news:tduc2qp...@corp.supernews.com...
>> "Boron Elgar" <Kalk...@bwu.edu> wrote in message
>> news:3aec29d6...@news.carroll.com...
>> > >So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew
>> offensive
>> > >to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not
>> Jewish.
>> > >I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of other
>> > >religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have a
>> > >Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
>> > >
>> >
>> > Doesn't bother me one whit.
>>
>> Nor me.
>
>Well how are you saying it? "Oh yes, Margaret is a Jew (and will not be
>attending Easter services)"? or "Yes, Margaret's a *Jew* (that's why she's
>so cheap)"?
You have to admit, Margaret, that if the latter inflection & intent
had been implied, no matter what the noun, an insult would have been
evident.
>But generally, not really a problem. (Although for some reason "Jewess" has
>always irked me, I'm not sure whether that's because it sounds anti-semitic
>or sexist.)
Me too...it was always used in bizarre ways.
>
>Jew as an adjective can be troublesome; I've generally only heard it used
>that way as an epithet i.e. Jew lawyer.
You forgot my personal favorite...Jew bastard! And, my goodness, don't
forget Dirty Jew. I actually got called that once when I was 16 and
working at my first job. I think it was the first time in my young
life that I talked back to an adult that way... even greater
invective.
Boron (nee Goldman)
mplsray
"kitteridge" <kitte...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20010419161154...@ng-fc1.aol.com...
> >I mean, what does offensiveness have to do with including the word in
> >a dictionary? I can understand a style guide suggesting against it
> >(obviously), but a dictionary should only be concerned with how common
> >a word is.
>
> I believe it would depend on whether or not that dictionary contained
vulgar
> slang. I love the American Heritage dictionary, 'cause it seems to include
most
> everything. If the word is then listed as slang, vulgar, then fine, leave
it in
> there. As a word for regular usage (Jew as a verb), no, that's not
acceptable.
> Personally, I don't hear it much -- maybe just the part of the world I'm
in --
> but if I did, I would be offended.
Of course, not everything that is offensive is slang. The AHD4 labels the
verb _jew_ as "Offensive," but not as slang.
>
> Context is all, in my opinion, when you use the word "Jew" as a noun.
"He's a
> Jew" or "She's a Jew" may be better English than "He's Jewish" or "She's
> Jewish" (both of which make it sound as though you're dancing around the
point
> because of the "ish"). I mean, nobody says you're Catholicish or
Protestantish;
> you're a Catholic or a Protestant. So there's no logical reasoning behind
it; I
> sense it's just a matter of those who tend to use Jew as a noun have, for
a
> long time, used it pejoratively. Additionally, common parlance seems to
lean
> towards "Jewish," which makes "Jew" stand out.
>
The usage note for _Jew_ in the AHD4 is worth taking a look at:
From http://www.bartleby.com/61/75/J0037500.html
[quote]
USAGE NOTES: It is widely recognized that the attributive use of the noun
_Jew,_ in phrases such as _Jew lawyer_ or _Jew ethics,_ is both vulgar and
highly offensive. In such contexts _Jewish_ is the only acceptable
possibility. Some people, however, have become so wary of this construction
that they have extended the stigma to any use of _Jew_ as a noun, a practice
that carries risks of its own. In a sentence such as "There are now several
Jews on the council," which is unobjectionable, the substitution of a
circumlocution like "Jewish people" or "persons of Jewish background" may in
itself cause offense for seeming to imply that _Jew_ has a negative
connotation when used as a noun.
[end quote]
> Now, on that note, are there any people of Welsh descent who object to the
use
> of "welshing" on a bet?
>
> Best,
> Kitt
>
I once knew a young (non-Jewish) woman from New York who used the word
_Hebrew_ instead of _Jewish._ I'm not Jewish, but I that particular usage
struck me as annoying.
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
mplsray
"Margaret Kane" <margar...@zdnet.com> wrote in message
news:9bndai$8lu$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk...
>
> news:tduc2qp...@corp.supernews.com...
> > "Boron Elgar" <Kalk...@bwu.edu> wrote in message
> > news:3aec29d6...@news.carroll.com...
> > > >So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew
> > offensive
> > > >to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not
> > Jewish.
> > > >I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of
other
> > > >religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have
a
> > > >Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
> > > >
> > >
> > > Doesn't bother me one whit.
> >
> > Nor me.
>
> Well how are you saying it? "Oh yes, Margaret is a Jew (and will not be
> attending Easter services)"? or "Yes, Margaret's a *Jew* (that's why she's
> so cheap)"?
>
> But generally, not really a problem. (Although for some reason "Jewess"
has
> always irked me, I'm not sure whether that's because it sounds
anti-semitic
> or sexist.)
>
It's a matter of what linguists call _marking._ Many words in English are
marked when they refer to a female, but are unmarked when they refer to a
male. Sometimes marking habits are changed when it begins to be seen as
inappropriate. No one is annoyed when reference is made to a _princess,_ but
many people would be offended to find an Episcopal priest who happens to be
a woman called a "priestess," nor is "editress" acceptable any longer.
Recently, for another newsgroup ( alt.usage.english ) I made up a list of
words ending in -ess which have in my opinion fallen out of favor. _Jewess_
would be a suitable addition to the list:
ambassadress
ancestress
authoress
benefactress
citizeness
conductress
doctress
editress
governess (in the sense of "a woman who governs")
huntress
instructress
manageress
mayoress
mistress (in the sense of "owner of an animal": I personally know a woman
who describes herself as her cat's _master._ I would be surprised if many
other Americans did not follow this usage.)
murderess
poetess
postmistress
sculptress
traitress, also traitoress
tutoress
> Jew as an adjective can be troublesome; I've generally only heard it used
> that way as an epithet i.e. Jew lawyer.
>
david
>
>
>It's a matter of what linguists call _marking._ Many words in English are
>marked when they refer to a female, but are unmarked when they refer to a
>male. Sometimes marking habits are changed when it begins to be seen as
>inappropriate. No one is annoyed when reference is made to a _princess,_ but
>many people would be offended to find an Episcopal priest who happens to be
>a woman called a "priestess," nor is "editress" acceptable any longer.
ObCecil: Is "squaw" an obscene insult?
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/000317.html
Next2TheMoon
>On one of my mailing lists, there was a discussion about a dictionary that
>has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case) as a verb anymore
>because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the price down). In response to
>that, someone else posted the following:
>
>"On a tangent, I choose not to use the word Jew as a noun either. There's
>just something about it that I find sort of hard-edged. Instead, I always
>say something like "There were several Jewish people who took today off
>for Passover." But to say "Some Jews took off today for Passover" doesn't
>sound right to my ears."
This reminds me of some American white folks who think "Mexican" is somehow a
bad word and will purposefully avoid the adjective for fear of offending
anyone.
Dana Carpender
Next2TheMoon wrote:
>
> Mirhanda Sarko posted:
> >On one of my mailing lists, there was a discussion about a dictionary that
> >has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case) as a verb anymore
> >because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the price down). In response to
> >that, someone else posted the following:
> >
> >"On a tangent, I choose not to use the word Jew as a noun either. There's
> >just something about it that I find sort of hard-edged. Instead, I always
> >say something like "There were several Jewish people who took today off
> >for Passover." But to say "Some Jews took off today for Passover" doesn't
> >sound right to my ears."
>
> This reminds me of some American white folks who think "Mexican" is somehow a
> bad word and will purposefully avoid the adjective for fear of offending
> anyone.
Huh. I would have figured that Mexican was simply a designation of
nationality, like American, or English, or French. I do get flummoxed
about "Hispanic" versus "Latino", which, of course, are over-broad. But
I can't generally tell by accent or whatever if a person is from
Guatamala versus El Salvador versus Columbia, or where ever.
--
Dana W. Carpender
Author, How I Gave Up My Low Fat Diet -- And Lost Forty Pounds!
http://www.holdthetoast.com
Check out our FREE Low Carb Ezine!
Bob Ward
>mistress (in the sense of "owner of an animal": I personally know a woman
>who describes herself as her cat's _master._ I would be surprised if many
>other Americans did not follow this usage.)
I find it hard to believe that ANYONE who lives with a cat or cats
would describe themselves as the cat's master.
Lalbert1
<margar...@zdnet.com> writes:
>Well how are you saying it? "Oh yes, Margaret is a Jew (and will not be
>attending Easter services)"? or "Yes, Margaret's a *Jew* (that's why she's
>so cheap)"?
That's strange - she doesn't look Jewish to me.
Les
ctc...@hotmail.com
>
> Context is all, in my opinion, when you use the word "Jew" as a noun.
> "He's a Jew" or "She's a Jew" may be better English than "He's Jewish" or
> "She's Jewish" (both of which make it sound as though you're dancing
> around the point because of the "ish").
He's British.
> I mean, nobody says you're
> Catholicish or Protestantish;
Of course not, those aren't words. You also don't say "a Catholicish
wedding" or "a Babtistish upbringing."
> you're a Catholic or a Protestant.
Or "I am Catholic" or "I am Protestant". There's nothing wrong with
following a linking verb with an adjective, and those nouns don't take
-ish to form the adjective, they remain the same.
Of course, using -ish as the ethnic adjectivizer (Finnish, Polish)
interferes with its use as a de-intensifier (redish, roundish). I proposed
"Jewoid" to describe a kind-of Jewish friend, but he prefered "Jewishish".
>
> Now, on that note, are there any people of Welsh descent who object to
> the use of "welshing" on a bet?
Yes. Dad's Mom doesn't like it. Mom's Mom says you can't gyp someone,
either. Dad's Dad doesn't mind if you polish your car, though.
"Pennsylvania Dutch" isn't used as a verb, so Mom's Dad is off the hook.
Xho
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet for the Web
ctc...@hotmail.com
>
> This reminds me of some American white folks who think "Mexican" is
> somehow a bad word and will purposefully avoid the adjective for fear of
> offending anyone.
Would "anyone" happen to consist of non-Mexican Latinos?
Al Yellon
news:9bnl8...@enews3.newsguy.com...
> USAGE NOTES: It is widely recognized that the attributive use of the noun
> _Jew,_ in phrases such as _Jew lawyer_ or _Jew ethics,_ is both vulgar and
> highly offensive. In such contexts _Jewish_ is the only acceptable
> possibility. Some people, however, have become so wary of this
construction
> that they have extended the stigma to any use of _Jew_ as a noun, a
practice
> that carries risks of its own. In a sentence such as "There are now
several
> Jews on the council," which is unobjectionable, the substitution of a
> circumlocution like "Jewish people" or "persons of Jewish background" may
in
> itself cause offense for seeming to imply that _Jew_ has a negative
> connotation when used as a noun.
What's interesting here is that what this quote calls "attributive use of
the noun" actually makes it an adjective, right?
JmG
>But generally, not really a problem. (Although for some reason "Jewess" has
>always irked me, I'm not sure whether that's because it sounds anti-semitic
>or sexist.)
We've already had this conversation. Kinda. Sorta. Remember when we talked about
the use of "goy"?
J
ctc...@hotmail.com
> "mplsray" <illi...@NOSPAM.mninter.net.invalid> wrote in message
> > noun _Jew,_ in phrases such as _Jew lawyer_ or _Jew ethics,_ is both
> > vulgar and highly offensive. In such contexts _Jewish_ is the only
> What's interesting here is that what this quote calls "attributive use of
> the noun" actually makes it an adjective, right?
It's like the difference between a dead President and sick President.
Sometimes the vice president becomes an adjective, sometimes it just acts
as an adjective.
JmG
>that carries risks of its own. In a sentence such as "There are now several
>Jews on the council," which is unobjectionable, the substitution of a
>circumlocution like "Jewish people" or "persons of Jewish background" may in
>itself cause offense for seeming to imply that _Jew_ has a negative
>connotation when used as a noun.
"There are three Jews, two Blacks and an Italian on the board," seems perfectly
acceptable to me - or, I am really that out-of-touch?
J (I don't like hyphens)
WKRP
On topic, I'm fond of getting laughs by coming back from a successful
negotiaton with a signed contract in hand and reporting to the rest of the
staff, "Well, I really Christianed him up!"
Jeff Wisnia W1BSV Brass Rat '57 ee
"Things which go away by themselves usually come back by themselves."
Mirhanda Sarko wrote:
> On one of my mailing lists, there was a discussion about a dictionary that
> has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case) as a verb anymore
> because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the price down). In response to
> that, someone else posted the following:
>
> "On a tangent, I choose not to use the word Jew as a noun either. There's
> just something about it that I find sort of hard-edged. Instead, I always
> say something like "There were several Jewish people who took today off
> for Passover." But to say "Some Jews took off today for Passover" doesn't
> sound right to my ears."
>
> So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew offensive
> to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not Jewish.
> I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of other
> religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have a
> Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
>
> Mirhanda
>
> --
> Decapitate my addy to email me
>
> I know who you are!! You are the character who occasionally appears in the
> comic strip "Sylvia", as "The Woman Who Does Everything More Beautifully
> Than You Do".
>
> Les, speaking of me, in alt.fan.cecil-adams
--
rob...@bestweb.net
>On one of my mailing lists, there was a discussion about a
>dictionary that has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case)
>as a verb anymore because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the
>price down). In response to that, someone else posted the
>following:
>"On a tangent, I choose not to use the word Jew as a noun either.
>There's just something about it that I find sort of hard-edged.
>Instead, I always say something like "There were several Jewish
>people who took today off for Passover." But to say "Some Jews took
>off today for Passover" doesn't sound right to my ears."
>So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew
>offensive to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all,
>but I'm not Jewish. I certainly wouldn't think it would be
>offensive with members of other religions (For example: "In our
>comparitive religions class we have a Christian, a Jew, a Pagan,
>and a Hindu")
>Mirhanda
>--
It's funny, but true. Somehow the word "Jew" got replaced in genteel
language by "Jewish person" some decades ago, although I sense that "Jew"
has made a comeback. By "genteel" I guess I mean the predecessor of PC.
Robert
rob...@bestweb.net
>I mean, nobody says you're Catholicish or Protestantish; you're a
>Catholic or a Protestant.
Yeah, but that's CatholIC and ProtestANT. The adjectival endings are
already there. Not that that stops people from writing "psychological",
etc.
Robert
an Americ
E. Morris
kitte...@aol.comnospam says...
> Now, on that note, are there any people of Welsh descent who object to the use
> of "welshing" on a bet?
Yeah, lots of us. "Welsh rabbit" (not "rarebit") is OK, though.
rob...@bestweb.net
>Doesn't bother me at all.
>On topic, I'm fond of getting laughs by coming back from a
>successful negotiaton with a signed contract in hand and reporting
>to the rest of the staff, "Well, I really Christianed him up!"
>Jeff Wisnia W1BSV Brass Rat '57 ee
Howard A. Stern appreciates those who can Gentile others down on price. I
forgot who on his show came up with that one; might've been Gilbert
Gottfried.
Robert
rob...@bestweb.net
>"There are three Jews, two Blacks and an Italian on the board,"
>seems perfectly acceptable to me - or, I am really that
>out-of-touch?
And it's only a 3-person board!
mplsray
"Bob Ward" <rcw...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:cttudt84akpntoaka...@4ax.com...
Observation on that particular cat. Her master taught her to stand up on her
hind legs to receive a crunchy treat. The cat later decided to stand up on
her hind legs in the bathroom whenever her master went in there, because
there was a tube of salmon-flavored hairball remedy stored in there. The
master began giving the cat the hairball remedy when the cat stood up like
that in the bathroom. Arguably, the cat trained the master to give her a
salmon-flavored "treat."
Billy Sunday
>kitteridge wrote:
>>I mean, nobody says you're
>>Catholicish or Protestantish;
>
>Of course not, those aren't words. You also don't say "a Catholicish
>wedding" or "a Babtistish upbringing."
No. But one can refer to a "popish" or "romish" wedding (both terms being
pejorative appelations from the Prots).
And "Baptistic" is an acceptable, non-pejorative, adjective referring to
Baptist doctrine or practice.
mplsray
"david" <dfo...@example.com> wrote in message
news:slrn9dupph....@tristan.local.dom...
That article reminded me of another _-ess_ word which has fallen out of
favor: _Negress._
In the past, when speaking of a white woman, one had no special word for it.
If it was thought important to note that a woman was white, one used an
expression: "white woman." It was similarly necessary to use an expression
if one wished to specify a white baby or a white child. Why then should
there be special words for women of certain races--_squaw_ and
_Negress_--and special words for a Native American baby--_papoose_--and an
African-American child--_pickaninny_? I'd call those additional examples of
inappropriate marking. At least, they are _now_ thought to be inappropriate:
When they were first used in English I suppose no one gave it a second
thought.
Nick Spalding
> Context is all, in my opinion, when you use the word "Jew" as a noun. "He's a
> Jew" or "She's a Jew" may be better English than "He's Jewish" or "She's
> Jewish" (both of which make it sound as though you're dancing around the point
> because of the "ish"). I mean, nobody says you're Catholicish or Protestantish;
> you're a Catholic or a Protestant. So there's no logical reasoning behind it; I
> sense it's just a matter of those who tend to use Jew as a noun have, for a
> long time, used it pejoratively. Additionally, common parlance seems to lean
> towards "Jewish," which makes "Jew" stand out.
About 40 years ago in the revue "Beyond the Fringe" Jonathan Miller,
one of whose parents is a Jew, was referred to by one of the others as
a Jew. He said "Not really a Jew, just Jewish".
--
Nick Spalding
Boron Elgar
Completely out of touch. It is more likely: "There are six men on the
board."
Boron
Tank
Always wanted to try that. I've always seen & heard it
as "rarebit", however, I have seen attributions to the source "rabbit".
--
Tank
"Remember to pillage before you burn"
Randy Poe
<illi...@NOSPAM.mninter.net.invalid> wrote:
>That article reminded me of another _-ess_ word which has fallen out of
>favor: _Negress._
I'm glad to see that one, and "Jewess", fallen out of favor. It always
sounded like you were treating certain people as a member of a
different species.
In the interest of fairness, I should also be fine with the fact that
"actor" is now being commonly used [at least among young members of
the acting profession in the USA] as a generic word for both males and
females. But I'm not. It bugs me, just a little, when a female calls
herself an "actor". No rational reason.
- Randy
JmG
>>"There are three Jews, two Blacks and an Italian on the board," seems perfectly
>>acceptable to me - or, I am really that out-of-touch?
>>
>Completely out of touch. It is more likely: "There are six men on the
>board."
Really? It's a community based civil rights board, too.
>Boron
J
ra...@westnet.poe.com
Why? You aren't one of those pitiable folks whop belive that they are
owned by their cat, are you?
Pussywhipped.
John
--
Remove the dead poet to e-mail, tho CC'd posts are unwelcome.
Ask me about joining the NRA.
Boron Elgar
Love it love it love it
boron
Dana Carpender
Me, I call myself "Billion's mom."
kay w
>Why then should
>there be special words for women of certain races--_squaw_ and
>_Negress_--and special words for a Native American baby--_papoose_--and an
>African-American child--_pickaninny_? I'd call those additional examples of
>inappropriate marking. At least, they are _now_ thought to be inappropriate:
>When they were first used in English I suppose no one gave it a second
>thought.
I'm at work, with nary a reference to hand, but weren't those words (not
"negress," perhaps, which I don't think I've ever read without the word
"comely" preceeding it) but "squaw," "papoose" and "pickaninny" simply foreign
words assimilated into English? "Pickaninny" I think we've discussed here
before as derivative from some Jamacian phrase, and the other two were words
from a native dialect, like teepee, maybe.
Perhaps someone with actual books within reach could confirm or deny?
kay w
Address munged. AOL isn't necessarily comatose, evidence to the contrary not
withstanding.
Dana Carpender
I especially like the way we're assuming that the three Jews, two Black
and the Italian are all men...
N Jill Marsh
kay w <scu...@aol.comatose> wrote in message
news:20010420120914...@ng-fl1.aol.com...
>
> I'm at work, with nary a reference to hand, but weren't those words (not
> "negress," perhaps, which I don't think I've ever read without the word
> "comely" preceeding it) but "squaw," "papoose" and "pickaninny" simply
foreign
> words assimilated into English? "Pickaninny" I think we've discussed here
> before as derivative from some Jamacian phrase, and the other two were
words
> from a native dialect, like teepee, maybe.
> Perhaps someone with actual books within reach could confirm or deny?
>
Not I. But whether or not they were assimilated from other languages has
little to do with the way those words were used in English. That is, they
were words used by English/white people to identify a human as a female
member of an undesirable racial or religious group. There's little reason
to acquire such a word for anything other than sub-categorization by race
and sex, and there's seldom a reason to do that that doesn't carry some sort
of racist overtone, even when the word is preceded by "comely" (particularly
then, for me).
I find them all pretty distasteful, except for papoose. Probably because
this word was/is used quite a bit in my part of the world, generally as an
affectionate reference for /any/ child carried on the back, it has lost most
of its racial overtone to me, unless used in nastier context.
njm
--
"Mrs. Gardiner and Elizabeth talked of all that had occurred, during their
visit, as they returned, except what had particularly interested them both."
Margaret Kane
"Boron Elgar" <kalk...@bwu.edu> wrote in message
news:a5nudt87a6p0qml90...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 15:12:07 -0400, "Margaret Kane"
> <margar...@zdnet.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Al Yellon" <tvdir...@REMOVETHISdbfc.org> wrote in message
> >news:tduc2qp...@corp.supernews.com...
> >> "Boron Elgar" <Kalk...@bwu.edu> wrote in message
> >> news:3aec29d6...@news.carroll.com...
> >> > >So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew
> >> offensive
> >> > >to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not
> >> Jewish.
> >> > >I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of
other
> >> > >religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have
a
> >> > >Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Nor me.
> >
> >Well how are you saying it? "Oh yes, Margaret is a Jew (and will not be
> >attending Easter services)"? or "Yes, Margaret's a *Jew* (that's why
she's
> >so cheap)"?
>
> You have to admit, Margaret, that if the latter inflection & intent
> had been implied, no matter what the noun, an insult would have been
> evident.
True.
>
> >But generally, not really a problem. (Although for some reason "Jewess"
has
> >always irked me, I'm not sure whether that's because it sounds
anti-semitic
> >or sexist.)
>
> Me too...it was always used in bizarre ways.
> >
> >Jew as an adjective can be troublesome; I've generally only heard it used
> >that way as an epithet i.e. Jew lawyer.
>
> You forgot my personal favorite...Jew bastard! And, my goodness, don't
> forget Dirty Jew. I actually got called that once when I was 16 and
> working at my first job. I think it was the first time in my young
> life that I talked back to an adult that way... even greater
> invective.
>
> Boron (nee Goldman)
An interesting linguistic side along these lines: There was a flap recently
about a certain former first lady and current Senator (whose name I'm not
even going to say because this is not an invitation to discuss her so STOP
WRITING!) allegedly using an anti-Semitic slur.
When the story first surfaced, the accounts I read did not print the actual
slur, so I assumed it to be something along the lines of, say "kike" or
"hebe." But when I finally did see what the accusation was, the quote was
referring to someone as a "Jew bastard." So the New York Times, at least,
regards the word Jew as an ethnic slur when used in this context.
Haven't we had this discussion? Where a word had a benign meaning but also
gets used as a slur, and eventually people just assume it is one?
And are the Gentiles out there offended by being referred to that way? How
about goy?
Margaret
Bob Ward
>Bob Ward <rcw...@gte.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:44:25 -0500, "mplsray"
>> <illi...@NOSPAM.mninter.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>mistress (in the sense of "owner of an animal": I personally know a woman
>>>who describes herself as her cat's _master._ I would be surprised if many
>>>other Americans did not follow this usage.)
>
>> I find it hard to believe that ANYONE who lives with a cat or cats
>> would describe themselves as the cat's master.
>
>Why? You aren't one of those pitiable folks whop belive that they are
>owned by their cat, are you?
>
>Pussywhipped.
>
>
>
>John
You've never actually lived with a cat, have you?
Bob Ward
wrote:
>
>
>Boron Elgar wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:29:05 GMT, JmG <jmg...@bestweb.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Kalk...@bwu.edu (Boron Elgar) wrote:
>> >
>> >>>"There are three Jews, two Blacks and an Italian on the board," seems perfectly
>> >>>acceptable to me - or, I am really that out-of-touch?
>> >>>
>> >
>> >>Completely out of touch. It is more likely: "There are six men on the
>> >>board."
>> >
>> >Really? It's a community based civil rights board, too.
>> >
>> >>Boron
>> >
>> >J
>>
>> Love it love it love it
>
>I especially like the way we're assuming that the three Jews, two Black
>and the Italian are all men...
Whooooooosh!!!!!!!!
Duck, Dana!
Boron Elgar
<margar...@zdnet.com> wrote:
.
>>
>> You forgot my personal favorite...Jew bastard! And, my goodness, don't
>> forget Dirty Jew. I actually got called that once when I was 16 and
>> working at my first job. I think it was the first time in my young
>> life that I talked back to an adult that way... even greater
>> invective.
>>
>> Boron (nee Goldman)
>
>An interesting linguistic side along these lines: There was a flap recently
>about a certain former first lady and current Senator (whose name I'm not
>even going to say because this is not an invitation to discuss her so STOP
>WRITING!) allegedly using an anti-Semitic slur.
>
>When the story first surfaced, the accounts I read did not print the actual
>slur, so I assumed it to be something along the lines of, say "kike" or
>"hebe." But when I finally did see what the accusation was, the quote was
>referring to someone as a "Jew bastard." So the New York Times, at least,
>regards the word Jew as an ethnic slur when used in this context.
And a certain notorious president of a quarter of a century ago was
reputed to have referred to Henry Kissinger in similar, though not
exact terms, I believe.
I do not think this means the word "Jew" is the slur, then, in the way
that "kike" is, but the combination of Jew & bastard that creates the
nastiness. Thus, one could take any number of words, in and of
themselves, used as nouns or adjectives with no inate ill-intent about
them and combine them with another, similarly innocent word and have
one helluva term. "Black" combined with "bastard" gives the same
effect...in fact almost *anything* combined with bastard gets there.
Hmmmmm....words are so much fun, perhaps all the ethnic refs are ok,
but it is the word "bastard" which we must do away with.
Boron
rob...@bestweb.net
>I'm at work, with nary a reference to hand, but weren't those words
>(not "negress," perhaps, which I don't think I've ever read without
>the word "comely" preceeding it) but "squaw," "papoose" and
>"pickaninny" simply foreign words assimilated into English?
>"Pickaninny" I think we've discussed here before as derivative from
>some Jamacian phrase, and the other two were words from a native
>dialect, like teepee, maybe.
I thought "papoose" referred to the thing the baby was carried in, not the
baby itself.
david
>
>
>An interesting linguistic side along these lines: There was a flap recently
>about a certain former first lady and current Senator (whose name I'm not
>even going to say because this is not an invitation to discuss her so STOP
>WRITING!) allegedly using an anti-Semitic slur.
>
>When the story first surfaced, the accounts I read did not print the actual
>slur, so I assumed it to be something along the lines of, say "kike" or
>"hebe." But when I finally did see what the accusation was, the quote was
>referring to someone as a "Jew bastard." So the New York Times, at least,
>regards the word Jew as an ethnic slur when used in this context.
The decision of newspapers not to print epithets just drives me nuts.
I can understand avoiding classic four-letter words in quotes 'n'
stuff, but when the entire story is about the word in question it's
ridiculous not to at least do the asterisk thing ("j** Bas****"???).
Even worse, it slants the story. In this case, leaving the specific
slur out left people to imagine the worse, while the actual phrase in
question was fairly ambiguous and easily misheard.
The recent Bustamante case in California was like this as well. All
news reports simply mentioned he had used a racial slur for blacks,
leaving the reader to assume he had called somebody a n***er. Nobody
quoted the actual statement due to a misplaced sense of propriety, and
it turned out he had simply slipped up while reading off a list of
19th Cent. Black organizations (i.e., he accidentally said the N-word
rather than "Negro" when mentioning one of the organizations).
>Haven't we had this discussion? Where a word had a benign meaning but also
>gets used as a slur, and eventually people just assume it is one?
True in both cases here, I guess. "Bastard" used to be fairly
non-pejorative (to the degree that it could be) and certainly wasn't
considered obscene.
kay w
> But whether or not they were assimilated from other languages has
>little to do with the way those words were used in English. That is, they
>were words used by English/white people to identify a human as a female
>member of an undesirable racial or religious group. There's little reason
>to acquire such a word for anything other than sub-categorization by race
>and sex, and there's seldom a reason to do that that doesn't carry some sort
>of racist overtone, even when the word is preceded by "comely" (particularly
>then, for me).
You're quite right, concerning the usage of these words. It seems that *any*
word used to sub-categorize people by race or sex or religion or creed or
country of national origin can (and does) pick up negative connotations, even
innocent little words like "girl" or "boy," regardless of the word's origins
or innocuous intent.
Maybe the best thing to do is to call everything "marklar," as the Marklar do
on the planet of Marklar, as to not offend any marklar, and then all the
marklar and the marklar can live in marklar forever.
Scott Wilson
Dana Carpender <dcar...@kiva.net> wrote:
>
>Next2TheMoon wrote:
>>
>> This reminds me of some American white folks who think "Mexican" is somehow a
>> bad word and will purposefully avoid the adjective for fear of offending
>> anyone.
>
>Huh. I would have figured that Mexican was simply a designation of
>nationality, like American, or English, or French. I do get flummoxed
>about "Hispanic" versus "Latino", which, of course, are over-broad. But
>I can't generally tell by accent or whatever if a person is from
>Guatamala versus El Salvador versus Columbia, or where ever.
If you accidentally call a Puerto Rican (or whatever) a Mexican, you could
easily come to the conclusion that "Mexican" was a bad word. People will
occasionally assume that any Latin American is "Mexican", and they will
react to that as if Mexican were a bad word.
Hispanic and Latino are just too vague, but there isn't a good way around
it. While the different Latin American countries do have different
cultures, they aren't so different that a generic grouping is useless.
But you run into problems since most people think that both Hispanic and
Latino mean "non-white". This is often truish, as many of them have
some Native American ancestry, but is no where near a consistant thing.
You could call my wife Latino or Hispanic, I guess... but she doesn't like
either moniker. She prefers Colombian or Basque. (Or, well, probably
American unless it specifically was about her ancestry.)
BTW.... It's "Colombia" unless you are talking about the college...
(One of my wife's pet peeves...)
--
Scott Wilson "As long as there is, you know, sex and drugs,
swi...@uchicago.edu I can do without the rock 'n' roll." Mick Shrimpton
Lalbert1
writes:
>I do not think this means the word "Jew" is the slur, then, in the way
>that "kike" is, but the combination of Jew & bastard that creates the
>nastiness. Thus, one could take any number of words, in and of
>themselves, used as nouns or adjectives with no inate ill-intent about
>them and combine them with another, similarly innocent word and have
>one helluva term. "Black" combined with "bastard" gives the same
>effect...in fact almost *anything* combined with bastard gets there.
>Hmmmmm....words are so much fun, perhaps all the ethnic refs are ok,
>but it is the word "bastard" which we must do away with.
You jest, of course. But it reminds me of the George Carlin (?) routine where
he says that we shouldn't make guns illegal. Guns should be O.K. to sell, but
bullets should be outlawed.
Les
Lalbert1
(kay w) writes:
Your post reminds me a scene from "Little Big Man", and I think it sort of fits
in here. In the movie Dustin Hoffman, a captured white child is raised by
American Indians and is recaptured years later by soldiers. After more years
pass he returns to his tribe where his "grandfather", played by Chief Dan
George, asks him about his adventures. Little Big Man tells him about the
Black cavalry soldiers. The old chief replies, "Oh, yes. The black white-men,
I have heard about them".
Les
Boron Elgar
I jest, of course. I haven't the heart to pull your leg more than once
in any 24 hr period.
Boron
Lalbert1
writes:
>>You jest, of course. But it reminds me of the George Carlin (?) routine
>where
>>he says that we shouldn't make guns illegal. Guns should be O.K. to sell,
>but
>>bullets should be outlawed.
>
>I jest, of course. I haven't the heart to pull your leg more than once
>in any 24 hr period.
>
>
Nope, you can't take credit for a leg-pull this time. See above. "You jest,
of course" is not a question. I knew you were joking. When you can zing me I
will gladly acknowledge it.
Les
("O fan from me the witless chaff of such a writer." - Proglogue to "The Two
Noble Kinsman")
Mirhanda Sarko
>
>I thought "papoose" referred to the thing the baby was carried in, not the
>baby itself.
>
According to The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language:
Fourth Edition.
papoose
SYLLABICATION: pa·poose
PRONUNCIATION: p-ps´, p-
NOUN : A Native American infant or very young child.
ETYMOLOGY: Narragansett papoòs, child.
And the Cambridge International Dictionary of English:
papoose noun a Native American baby or small child
And the good old WWWebster:
Main Entry: pa·poose
Pronunciation: pa-'püs, p&-
Function: noun
Etymology: Narraganset papoòs
Date: 1634
: a young child of American Indian parents
--
Decapitate my addy to email me
I know who you are!! You are the character who occasionally appears in the
comic strip "Sylvia", as "The Woman Who Does Everything More Beautifully
Than You Do".
Les, speaking of me, in alt.fan.cecil-adams
Boron Elgar
>In article <3aff829c...@news.carroll.com>, Kalk...@bwu.edu (Boron Elgar)
>writes:
>
>>>You jest, of course. But it reminds me of the George Carlin (?) routine
>>where
>>>he says that we shouldn't make guns illegal. Guns should be O.K. to sell,
>>but
>>>bullets should be outlawed.
>>
>>I jest, of course. I haven't the heart to pull your leg more than once
>>in any 24 hr period.
>>
>>
>
>Nope, you can't take credit for a leg-pull this time. See above. "You jest,
>of course" is not a question. I knew you were joking. When you can zing me I
>will gladly acknowledge it.
>
>Les
You see through me like a piece of cheese.
Boron
Stan
>"There are three Jews, two Blacks and an Italian on the board,"
And the Italian says...
--
There is something amiss
I am being insincere
In fact I don't mean any of this
Still my confession draws you near
To confuse the issue I refer
To familiar heroes from long ago
Ian Munro
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:35:07 -0400, "Margaret Kane"
> <margar...@zdnet.com> wrote:
> >When the story first surfaced, the accounts I read did not print the
> >actual slur, so I assumed it to be something along the lines of, say
> >"kike" or "hebe." But when I finally did see what the accusation was,
> >the quote was referring to someone as a "Jew bastard." So the New York
> >Times, at least, regards the word Jew as an ethnic slur when used in
> >this context.
> And a certain notorious president of a quarter of a century ago was
> reputed to have referred to Henry Kissinger in similar, though not
> exact terms, I believe.
Not that Kissinger didn't pander to his bigotry. Was this the occasion
when he replied, "Well, Mr. President, there are Jews and there are
Jews"?
> I do not think this means the word "Jew" is the slur, then, in the way
> that "kike" is, but the combination of Jew & bastard that creates the
> nastiness.
I think that "Jew" as an adjective is always a slur; at least, I can't
think of a contrary example. Think of the different connotations of
"Jewish mayor" and "Jew mayor," for example.
"Jewess" is used freely by a number of Jewish women of my acquaintance
(including my wife) but in a somewhat ironic, postmodern sort of way, I
think. I wouldn't use it myself.
Ian Munro
--
"A dusty thudding in his head made the scene before him beat like a
pulse. His mouth had been used as a latrine by some small creature of
the night, and then as its mausoleum. During the night, too, he'd
somehow been on a cross-country run and then been expertly beaten up by
secret police."--Kingsley Amis
Rick B.
>
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 02:52:49 GMT, JmG <jmg...@bestweb.net> wrote:
>
> >"There are three Jews, two Blacks and an Italian on the board,"
>
> And the Italian says...
"A German, an Irishman and a Puerto Rican walk into a bar, and the
bartender says..."
rob...@bestweb.net
>The recent Bustamante case in California was like this as well. All
>news reports simply mentioned he had used a racial slur for blacks,
>leaving the reader to assume he had called somebody a n***er.
>Nobody quoted the actual statement due to a misplaced sense of
>propriety, and it turned out he had simply slipped up while reading
>off a list of 19th Cent. Black organizations (i.e., he accidentally
>said the N-word rather than "Negro" when mentioning one of the
>organizations).
Thanks for being so explicit. I'd worried he might've said "National Ass'n
for the Advancement of Coon People", another common mistake.
rob...@bestweb.net
>According to The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English
>Language: Fourth Edition.
>papoose
>SYLLABICATION: pa·poose
>PRONUNCIATION: p-ps´, p-
>NOUN : A Native American infant or very young child.
>ETYMOLOGY: Narragansett papoòs, child.
>And the Cambridge International Dictionary of English:
>papoose noun a Native American baby or small child
>And the good old WWWebster:
>Main Entry: pa·poose
>Pronunciation: pa-'püs, p&-
>Function: noun
>Etymology: Narraganset papoòs
>Date: 1634
>: a young child of American Indian parents
>--
And my Random House agrees. Then how to reconcile that with the widespread
association of "papoose" with a sack on the back? Could it have been that
someone asked, "What's that?", and the Indian said, "Oh, that's my papoose",
and some people thought it meant the child itself and others the device?
Robert
Boron Elgar
>Not that Kissinger didn't pander to his bigotry. Was this the occasion
>when he replied, "Well, Mr. President, there are Jews and there are
>Jews"?
Ahhh...that is a new one for me. Hey, I already had a long list of
reasons for not liking Kissinger. What's one more.
>
>I think that "Jew" as an adjective is always a slur; at least, I can't
>think of a contrary example. Think of the different connotations of
>"Jewish mayor" and "Jew mayor," for example.
I cannot think of one offhand, myself. Of course, They Hub often sings
the old Sonny & Cher song to me as "I got Jew-Babe....but I don't
think that is what you had in mind at all.
And we have the old joke:
Jeet?
Jew?
Jwana?
Skoh.
>
>"Jewess" is used freely by a number of Jewish women of my acquaintance
>(including my wife) but in a somewhat ironic, postmodern sort of way, I
>think. I wouldn't use it myself.
I don't think I have every heard it used in conversation, except as a
quotation of literature. I have certainly never thought to use it to
describe myself in any way whatsoever. Could the use be
regional/national, perhaps, even in the way you mention it?
Boron
Journey into Dutch Courage
Date: 4/20/2001 7:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time writes:
> >According to The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English
> >Language: Fourth Edition.
> >papoose
> >SYLLABICATION: pa·poose
> >PRONUNCIATION: p-ps´, p-
> >NOUN : A Native American infant or very young child.
> >ETYMOLOGY: Narragansett papoòs, child.
>
> >And the Cambridge International Dictionary of English:
> >papoose noun a Native American baby or small child
> >And the good old WWWebster:
> >Main Entry: pa·poose
> >Pronunciation: pa-'püs, p&-
> >Function: noun
> >Etymology: Narraganset papoòs
> >Date: 1634
> >: a young child of American Indian parents
> >--
>And my Random House agrees. Then how to reconcile that with the widespread
>association of "papoose" with a sack on the back?
Are you sure it's widespread?
Imperious Rex!
ctc...@hotmail.com
> >And my Random House agrees. Then how to reconcile that with the
> >widespread association of "papoose" with a sack on the back?
>
> Are you sure it's widespread?
I always thought backpack-crib was the primary meaning and
injun ankle biter was secondary.
Xho
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet for the Web
Mirhanda Sarko
>mutigho...@aol.comMMMS (Journey into Dutch Courage) wrote:
>> >And my Random House agrees. Then how to reconcile that with the
>> >widespread association of "papoose" with a sack on the back?
>>
>> Are you sure it's widespread?
>
>I always thought backpack-crib was the primary meaning and
>injun ankle biter was secondary.
Apparently you have been mistaken. I posted three of the dictionary cites
I found. Not one mentioned the backpack being the papoose..
ng
> <margar...@zdnet.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> Boron (nee Goldman)
Are we related?
Netta Goldman.
ctc...@hotmail.com
> ctc...@hotmail.com wrote in alt.fan.cecil-adams:
>
> >mutigho...@aol.comMMMS (Journey into Dutch Courage) wrote:
> >> >And my Random House agrees. Then how to reconcile that with the
> >> >widespread association of "papoose" with a sack on the back?
> >>
> >> Are you sure it's widespread?
> >
> >I always thought backpack-crib was the primary meaning and
> >injun ankle biter was secondary.
>
> Apparently you have been mistaken.
Actually, I wasn't. I correctly reported what I had thought.
> I posted three of the dictionary
> cites I found.
You can cite a thousand dics, it doesn't change the fact the other
usage exists. In my experience (which is probably much different
from Bronx Bob), the usage he gives is widespread. The dictionaries
may not acknowledge that, but they can't negate it.
> Not one mentioned the backpack being the papoose..
Then they are probably lacking as descriptive instruments of the language.
N Jill Marsh
<rob...@bestweb.net> wrote in message
news:SI3E6.4023$Uu6.3...@monger.newsread.com...
> And my Random House agrees. Then how to reconcile that with the
widespread
> association of "papoose" with a sack on the back? Could it have been that
> someone asked, "What's that?", and the Indian said, "Oh, that's my
papoose",
> and some people thought it meant the child itself and others the device?
>
I think it likely has to do with the very widespread image of Indian babies
on the very unique looking papoose boards (which is what we called them up
north in English, even the Indians, though it was usually shortened to just
"board").
As I said, it was/is very common in this area to refer to a child carried on
the back, as a papoose, though it's still the kid being referred to.
njm
--
"At Sing Sing, where each had spent several happy years of early manhood,
they had run neck and neck for the prizes which that institution has to
offer."
Bill Diamond
alt.fan.cecil-adams back on Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:55:04 GMT that ...
>On one of my mailing lists, there was a discussion about a dictionary that
>has decided not to list the word "jew" (lower case) as a verb anymore
>because it's offensive. (Example "to jew the price down). In response to
>that, someone else posted the following:
>
>"On a tangent, I choose not to use the word Jew as a noun either. There's
>just something about it that I find sort of hard-edged. Instead, I always
>say something like "There were several Jewish people who took today off
>for Passover." But to say "Some Jews took off today for Passover" doesn't
>sound right to my ears."
>
>So, I wanted to ask the Jewish people here, is being called a Jew offensive
>to you? It doesn't sound offensive to my ears at all, but I'm not Jewish.
>I certainly wouldn't think it would be offensive with members of other
>religions (For example: "In our comparitive religions class we have a
>Christian, a Jew, a Pagan, and a Hindu")
>
>Mirhanda
Doesn't bother me. But, I do prefer the more formal title of "Bill,
the faygele wunderjud". Preferably set to the "Mighty Mouse" theme
song.
Bill
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS d++ s-:+ a+ C++ UA--- P+++ L+ E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w++
O M V PS+ PE+++ Y PGP t 5-- X- R+ tv+++ b+++ DI++++ D+
G e++ h--- r+++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
dan
alt.fan.cecil-adams mine and will die if we don't mount a rescue by
Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:35:14 GMT:
Kangaroo?
JmG
>> >"There are three Jews, two Blacks and an Italian on the board,"
>>
>> And the Italian says...
>
>"A German, an Irishman and a Puerto Rican walk into a bar, and the
>bartender says..."
"Which one of you is the Jew?"
J
Boron Elgar
I thought of that, but to the best of my knowledge, I have no one in
Eretz Yisrael.
We are Goldmans from Detroit. Along with the Sherman side of the
family, Russia is the origin. On the other side there are Sterns,
Greenspans & Firestones from around Hungary... near Munkacz.
Boron
Nostradamus
>mutigho...@aol.comMMMS (Journey into Dutch Courage) wrote:
>> >And my Random House agrees. Then how to reconcile that with the
>> >widespread association of "papoose" with a sack on the back?
>>
>> Are you sure it's widespread?
>
>I always thought backpack-crib was the primary meaning and
>injun ankle biter was secondary.
>
Your usage is hardly obscure. See, for example:
http://www.google.com/search?q=Bill+Amberg+papoose&btnG=Google+Search&hl=en&lr=&safe=off
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=cloth-papoose&btnG=Google+Search
http://www.cc.nih.gov/nursing/papoose.html
http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/9/9-202.html
JmG
>Doesn't bother me. But, I do prefer the more formal title of "Bill,
>the faygele wunderjud". Preferably set to the "Mighty Mouse" theme
>song.
....here he comes to save the day...."
J
mplsray
"Ian Munro" <ian....@ualberta.ca> wrote in message
news:9bqcrr$7to$3...@pulp.srv.ualberta.ca...
[snip]
>
> I think that "Jew" as an adjective is always a slur; at least, I can't
> think of a contrary example. Think of the different connotations of
> "Jewish mayor" and "Jew mayor," for example.
>
I am inevitably reminded of the slur use of the noun _Democrat_ as an
adjective by Republicans, to the extent that they even refer to the
_Democratic National Committee_ (it's official name) as the "Democrat
National Committee."
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
Nostradamus
That bugs the heck out of me. Do you know anything of the history of
that usage?
david
It's relatively new. At least up until the early 20th Century
Republicans thought nothing of attacking "the Democracy", as did the
Whigs before them.
Opus the Penguin
>mplsray wrote:
>>I am inevitably reminded of the slur use of the noun _Democrat_ as an
>>adjective by Republicans, to the extent that they even refer to the
>>_Democratic National Committee_ (it's official name) as the "Democrat
>>National Committee."
>>
>That bugs the heck out of me.
Then I'm guessing they would say "Mission accomplished." ;-)
>Do you know anything of the history of that usage?
I've heard it more and more over the last 10 years or so. I think it
predates Clinton, but I'm not sure. (It would be interesting to find out
that the usage developed as a response to his administration.) I wonder if
it's a Limbaugh thing.
Anyway, when an explanation is offered, it's usually along these lines:
"Democratic" is an approbatory adjective referring to a governmental process
in which everyone is given an equal right to take part. Republicans no less
than Democrats (and probably more, so THERE! haha) support such government.
Therefore to imply that only one of the two parties supports democracy and
is therefore "democratic" is misleading.
Big Iron5
>Anyway, when an explanation is offered, it's usually along these lines:
>"Democratic" is an approbatory adjective referring to a governmental process
>in which everyone is given an equal right to take part.
So is "republican," you know?
Republicans no less
>than Democrats (and probably more, so THERE! haha) support such government.
"Ha ha" is right, that's for sure.
Greg Goss
The non-listed version is the one that I learned.
Greg Goss
>It's a matter of what linguists call _marking._ Many words in English are
>marked when they refer to a female, but are unmarked when they refer to a
>male. Sometimes marking habits are changed when it begins to be seen as
>inappropriate. No one is annoyed when reference is made to a _princess,_ but
>many people would be offended to find an Episcopal priest who happens to be
>a woman called a "priestess," nor is "editress" acceptable any longer.
>
>Recently, for another newsgroup ( alt.usage.english ) I made up a list of
>words ending in -ess which have in my opinion fallen out of favor. _Jewess_
>would be a suitable addition to the list:
Actress is going that way. There are many female actors who are only
an "actress" for a particular Sunday evening in March.
Greg Goss
>I find it hard to believe that ANYONE who lives with a cat or cats
>would describe themselves as the cat's master.
"Dogs have owners. Cats have staff".
It's one of my favorite quotes. It came from AFCA, but I don't
remember who to attribute it to.
Greg Goss
>And are the Gentiles out there offended by being referred to that way? How
>about goy?
Gentile is a technical term. I have no offense. Besides, it is
nicely congruent with Gentle. I like it.
Goy might be offensive except for one fact. I *AM* goy. I consider
myself the archetype of the wrong side of that interminable thread a
couple of months back.
(to me, chicken soup is either flavour power sprinkled over ramen, or
if I'm feeling extravagant, perhaps Campbell's. I live 3/4 of a mile
from a WalMart and like their shopping hours and their selection, and
their prices. I want to see prices clearly marked. I like flea
markets and garage sales, but I hate the negotiation part of it all.
I hate buying a car because you HAVE TO fight over the price. I'm
goy.)
Greg Goss
>BTW.... It's "Colombia" unless you are talking about the college...
>(One of my wife's pet peeves...)
Or the British version. (my home)
Dana Carpender
Greg Goss wrote:
>
> Bob Ward <rcw...@gte.net> wrote:
>
> >I find it hard to believe that ANYONE who lives with a cat or cats
> >would describe themselves as the cat's master.
>
> "Dogs have owners. Cats have staff".
Ferrets have big, animated toys.
--
Dana W. Carpender
Author, How I Gave Up My Low Fat Diet -- And Lost Forty Pounds!
http://www.holdthetoast.com
Check out our FREE Low Carb Ezine!
ctc...@hotmail.com
>
> (to me, chicken soup is either flavour power sprinkled over ramen, or
> if I'm feeling extravagant, perhaps Campbell's.
You know you are goy when you sprinkle power over your food. You
WASP males just have it all, don't you?
GrapeApe
>
>Ferrets have big, animated toys.
Do ferrets shit all over the house?
pemulung
>
> Greg Goss wrote:
> >
> > Bob Ward <rcw...@gte.net> wrote:
> >
> > >I find it hard to believe that ANYONE who lives with a cat or cats
> > >would describe themselves as the cat's master.
> >
> > "Dogs have owners. Cats have staff".
>
> Ferrets have big, animated toys.
>
I once heard someone call ferrets a cross between a cat and a torpedo.
Poodle was "a cat with a perm."
Dana Carpender
Ferrets can be kinda-sorta box trained, but aren't completely reliable
about it. However, they will *always* pick a corner for their
elimination, and if you let them run loose a lot, you can figure out
which one or two corners they like, and put a box or papers there. We
only let ours run in a couple of rooms in the house, and the only room
they can run in unsupervised is the bathroom, because there's no way
they can get in to trouble in there -- unless, of course, I leave my
diaphragm in reach again.
They do have a *big* cage outdoors (6'x4'x4') that we call Happy Ferret
Fun Land, with different levels, and tubes to run through, and toys and
such. In nice weather, they spend several hours a day out there.
GrapeApe
>about it. However, they will *always* pick a corner for their
>elimination, and if you let them run loose a lot, you can figure out
>which one or two corners they like, and put a box or papers there. We
>only let ours run in a couple of rooms in the house, and the only room
>they can run in unsupervised is the bathroom, because there's no way
>they can get in to trouble in there -- unless, of course, I leave my
>diaphragm in reach again.
In Happy Ferret Fun Land? Does Richard Gere know about this?
ng
> Goy might be offensive except for one fact. I *AM* goy.
So are Jews, technically.
In Hebrew, where these terms originated, Yehudi means Jew and Jewish, and
Goy means nation.
e.g. "Tihiyu li mamlechet Cohanim ve goy kadosh. You shall be a Priestly
kingdom and a holy nation unto me."
refers to the Jews.
Netta
Robert St. Amant
> Bob Ward wrote:
> > I find it hard to believe that ANYONE who lives with a cat or cats
> > would describe themselves as the cat's master.
>
My wife calls herself Squeak's mom (we have two cats, Bubble and
Squeak.) I surprised her the other day, though, by saying that her
"son" had just killed a field mouse and left it on the deck. She
explained that, of course, the parental relationship is from the cat's
point of view. I call myself the owner of our cats--my point of view.
--
Rob St. Amant
ra...@westnet.poe.com
> mutigho...@aol.comMMMS (Journey into Dutch Courage) wrote:
>> >And my Random House agrees. Then how to reconcile that with the
>> >widespread association of "papoose" with a sack on the back?
>>
>> Are you sure it's widespread?
> I always thought backpack-crib was the primary meaning and
> injun ankle biter was secondary.
I had never heard of the term used in reference to a kid, and always in
reference to the backpack crib,
Go to Google and type in "golden dollar papoose" and you'll see tons of
references to the baby in the papoose, but I noticed a few to the papoose
as a reference to the baby.
John
--
Remove the dead poet to e-mail, tho CC'd posts are unwelcome.
Ask me about joining the NRA.
Bob Ward
St. Amant) wrote:
There is now an album at www.communityzero.com/afca where you can post
photos of your AFCAts - there are two there already - hope to see some
more of our furry friends posted soon.
ra...@westnet.poe.com
> Bob Ward <rcw...@gte.net> wrote:
>> I find it hard to believe that ANYONE who lives with a cat or cats
>> would describe themselves as the cat's master.
> Why? You aren't one of those pitiable folks whop belive that they are
> owned by their cat, are you?
> Pussywhipped.
To which Bob replied:
B> You've never actually lived with a cat, have you?
Excluding the time I've been in boot camp and college, I've never had
fewer than two cats, not more than 15. Belive me, I know cats.
N Jill Marsh
Bob Ward <rcw...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:pbtbetonpg6tta99b...@4ax.com...
>
> There is now an album at www.communityzero.com/afca where you can post
> photos of your AFCAts - there are two there already - hope to see some
> more of our furry friends posted soon.
>
Hey, there's a puppy there too!
nj"little Miss Sunshine"m
--
"She wrestled with her better self and finally succeeded in bringing it to
the surface by the scruff of its neck."