For strong womyn everywhere: "Internet Plus Equality"
- Thread starter Gahars
- Start date
- Views 151,867
- Replies 1,749
- Likes 13
- Status
Oh, Veho...
Linguistic relativity and its stronger form, linguistic determinism, are notions which state that the structure of language determines the cognitive process of its speakers. This creates a certain pattern of behaviour in native speakers which can be observed in how they create their discourse, as described by Robert Kaplan:
Fig. 1: Discourse Patterns, Kaplan, Robert. "Cultural Thought in Patterns in Intercultural Education"
Of course Kaplan himself additionally stressed the impact of culture overall, but that's besides the point, his model is a good illustration of the phenomenon. Essentially what he proposed is that the structure of the language, its syntax, grammar and other structural elements partially pre-determine the way we construct our train of thought. For example, a native English speaker will start his/her discourse with a thesis, present arguments throughout the piece and reach a conclusion - this kind of logic is a straight line. In contrast, an Oriental speaker is likely to be circular about the argumentation, often times recreating the original thesis throughout the course of the piece, opting to meander, spiral around the ever-growing subject, sometimes never actually reaching the point and presenting various views instead - this pattern is a spiral. A Romance speaker will start with a thesis and present arguments just like an English speaker would, however will depart from the main point in order to explore the presented material numerous times in digressions before drawing the final conclusion - this pattern is a corrugated line.
Linguistic relativity as presented by Benjamin Whorf further describes how language structure can influence drawing logical conclusions. I quote:
He supported this claim using Native American tribes as an example, comparing their world views with commonly accepted European views. He described how the Hopi tribe has several names for different "kinds" of water, for example drinking water, water in a lake etc. whereas Europeans have only one concept of water which is supplemented with additional classifiers if needs be (mineral, tap, dirty, salty, murky etc.). In other words, the Hopi somewhat "instinctively" differentiate between various kinds of water whereas Europeans classify it on the basis of its properties.
Sapir was more interested in the social aspect of Linguistics and concluded that if language is the tool with which we describe reality, by proxy, speakers of different languages must perceive reality differently.
He wasn't a proponent of linguistic determinism though and disagreed with the idea that the worldview is pre-determined by language - after all, humans are creatures of reason and they're perfectly capable of adjusting to the environment they find themselves in. We have an innate drive towards communicating, so we're capable of overcoming differences when it's required.
The tl;dr version of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is that speakers of different languages think and behave differently, and this principle is generally widely accepted - it's the extent of influence language has on behavioural patterns that's under constant debate.
I'm not entirely sure why you drew this card in the reference of a crooked understanding of pronouns since it sort of works against you here. The reason why English as a language has a set of pronouns is because it's a Germanic language - the masculine, feminine and neuter genders are an intrinsic part of the language code and refer not only to animate objects with clearly distinguishable gender such as men and women, boars and sows or bulls and cows but also completely inanimate objects such as the feminine ships or countries. Such "inanimate oddities" are remainders of Old English which actually had a full-blown system of inflected grammatical gender. This system has since disappeared over the course of various language transformations such as the Great Vowel Shift as well as numerous conquests (Vikings/Norse, Romans, Normans, you name it), however its traces can still be found in commonly used words. The previously masculine engel is still angel while the feminine scip is still ship. That said, due to the disappearance of inflected forms, Modern English utilizes the aforementioned pronouns instead.
Fig. 2: Old English gender and case inflection examples
Naturally as a follower of the slavic written discourse pattern, I've digressed from the main point on numerous occasions to draw your attention to certain linguistic phenomenons, but at this point you must be asking yourself the question... why? Let me conclude.
If you're not a linguist and happen to consider yourself to be some form of a quasi-gender being of course you're going to be upset by the use of personal pronouns and of course you're going to disregard the most basic rule of all languages - the presence of a formal system.
Ferdinand de Saussure in his "Course in General Linguistics" described the sound-to-idea relation all words have - this is the relation between the Signifier and the Signified which together create the Linguistic Sign. To briefly explain what the Linguistic Sign is, I'll use a very simple example. There is nothing innately canine about the word "Dog", it has nothing to do with the real-life object of a dog, however upon hearing or seeing it, it draws the mental image of a dog in the mind of the person you are communicating with. "Dog" as a compound of sounds is the Signifier, the physical realization of the word, whereas the mental image of a dog, or rather, the collection of all mental images related to dogs is the Signified. Together, those two create an inseparable pair called the Sign, or in everyday terms, a word.
Fig.3a: The relation between the Concept (mental image, the Signified) and the Sound-Image (physical realization of the Sign, the Signifier)
Now, when communicating with a person who has feminine features such as a pair of breasts, wide hips, narrow shoulders and a feminine face, the speaker is likely going to use the Sign "woman" because the physical image the speaker sees matches the mental image of that sign. This doesn't make the speaker intolerant, this makes the speaker observant.
Fig.3b: Signifier and Signified in practice
If you're going to fault people for calling a tree a tree, you might as well go the extra mile and gauge their eyes out.
Of course... life is never simple and logical, is it? There always has to be this one group who takes all this carefully documented and meticulously described clockwork and spoil it... guess what group that is?
Aaaaand then we fall into a world of hurt with such idiotic proposals as "womyn" even though it makes completely no sense in English. The Old English word for woman is wīf (female, wife) whereas the word for man is wēr (male, husband). Man/Mann just means human, you dolts! If you want to make things equal, just state "woman and wirman*" and get on with your lives, you uneducated dimwits!
EDIT: Actually, having the Great Vowel Shift in consideration, the Old English /wer/ would've probably changed into /wir/, hence wirman. Similarly /wif/ changed into /waif/, meaning the contemporarily used "wife".
Fig.4: Me, tired after way too many courses that filled my head with useless knowledge. They also made me a terribly boring person
I hope my rebuttal was satisfactory. In the end, if your point was that "people who use crooked language come to crooked conclusions about the life, the universe and everything", you are entirely correct.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 14,575
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 29
- Location
- I forgot
- Website
- POCKET.LIKEITS
- XP
- 19,223
- Country
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 14,575
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 29
- Location
- I forgot
- Website
- POCKET.LIKEITS
- XP
- 19,223
- Country
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/15/phyllis-schlafly-equal-pay_n_5154150.html
Bitch also needs to check her privilege
Bitch also needs to check her privilege
Wait, so am I allowed to use words with son in or do I have to use people (postman -> post person -> post people)?
Tom Bombadildo sadly we can not all be enlightened layabouts with sugar mommas.
I was not seeking a good giggle but that provided one anyway.
I wonder what would happen if someone informed the author that fat deposits growing on arses rather than all over is considered something of an evolutionary asset when one's lineage may well have started out in a hot land and you do not really need the insulation (energy deposits tending to be good wherever and whenever until around about 1970).
I am also wondering if there is any instance of something being stuck before celebrity and used in a positive.
I wonder what would happen if someone informed the author that fat deposits growing on arses rather than all over is considered something of an evolutionary asset when one's lineage may well have started out in a hot land and you do not really need the insulation (energy deposits tending to be good wherever and whenever until around about 1970).
I am also wondering if there is any instance of something being stuck before celebrity and used in a positive.
As far as I'm concerned, you can use whatever term you want. As far as the feminist theory goes, you should probably get comfortable with "courier", unless you feel like using pronouns that are stupid and don't actually exist. ;O;
I am not sure I can use courier either -- the French equivalent is a male gendered word.
Not sure if sudden "brain fart" or "don't understand what a trend is". Also, body parts are totally trendy. Thousands of years ago in Mesopotamia, the cradle of civilization, being obese was "trendy" and considered a sign of wealth. Dial a couple centuries later and you reach the classical period when we began appreciating pale complexion and a more athletic body built which strongly underlined masculine/feminine features. Hop into a time machine and travel to the late 20th century, note how plastic surgery is flourishing, men and women alike are getting ripped at the gym and getting a tan is considered attractive. Our entire bodies are subject to trends, making this entire article dumb since it's suspended on a false premise. The author claims that [our bodies] are not subjected to trends and then goes to great lengths explaining exactly why she's wrong.
...also massive butt jellyness is jelly! Hue! ;O;
The French are historically a natural enemy of the English, nobody will mind! Go on ahead. Alternatively you can opt for "unspecified postbeing", but that's just silly.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 14,575
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 29
- Location
- I forgot
- Website
- POCKET.LIKEITS
- XP
- 19,223
- Country
Also... this.
If you have a GPA of 3.5 and an ACT score of 23 (out of 36!), you deserve to get into one of the best schools in the country... because reasons?
To be fair, for Detroit, that makes her a goddamn genius.
"I didn't meet the requirements, however I am a person of colour, therefore a victim". ;O;
A king of fools is still a fool. ;O;
So let's recap, shall we? Words have connotations broader than their narrow vocabulary definition, they evoke a set of preconceptions about the subject, used as labels they shape our perception and they inform thought: affect the way we think. Personal pronouns inherently carry a large number of assumptions, associations, preconcieved roles and stereotypes. If someone doesn't want to identify with the mental image a certain word (or in this case personal pronoun) evokes in people's minds, along with the culturally preordained norms and roles it carries with it, they can either work to change the connotations of the word (through societal consensus), or start calling themselves something else. But they shouldn't do that because you don't like it and change is bad ;O;
Let me know if I missed something.
Also, let me know how any of what you said refutes a connection between people trying to change the current culturally conditioned connotations (hah) of personal pronouns, and linguistic determinism.
Also, Oglaf:
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 14,575
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 29
- Location
- I forgot
- Website
- POCKET.LIKEITS
- XP
- 19,223
- Country
Except they're not trying to change "the current culturally conditioned connotations to personal pronouns" - they're trying to get rid of personal pronouns altogether, replacing them with a universal pronoun which isn't gender-specific. This in and out of itself makes no sense because the only grammatical reason for having the personal pronoun is to denote gender because inflections have disappeared from English. If you don't like gender distinctions, don't use personal pronouns. At all. Forgive me for contesting a modest grammatical proposal which is ungrammatical. ;O;
As for linguistic determinism, the hypothesis states that it's the language that influences the worldview, not the worldview that influences the language, so you picked the wrong hypothesis to support your claim. ;O;
Moreover, it's the privilege* of the person who's describing another person to use pronouns which fit their concept of who they're describing on the basis of what they know about that person (which often times is limited to what they can see), much like it's the privilege* of the painter to paint his model the way he/she sees fit. They cannot choose the pseudo-correct pronoun the subject feels comfortable with because they weren't informed about his/her/its quasi-gender identity prior. That is, unless we expect people to magically develop clairvoyance. The subject may not like it. The subject also has nothing to say in the matter. ;O;
*My privilege, Cis-privilege.
But you are right with Oglaf, we should probably stop talking about language and start talking about white privilege:
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 14,575
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 29
- Location
- I forgot
- Website
- POCKET.LIKEITS
- XP
- 19,223
- Country
Google it. It's not my job to educate you.
- Status
Similar threads
-
- Locked
-
AncientBoi
-
K3Nv2
-
Xdqwerty
what are you looking at?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
A @ Aglae Pheryl:Is anyone familiar with former forum opg.life ? I missed the transition to the new forum over the week end (was scuba diving in the sticks with no internet connection). If anyone in touch with any members please pm me.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
(
