Semantic data in ConTeXt?

Semantic data in ConTeXt?

[Matija Šuklje]

Hullo,

this is something that's been bothering me for quite a while:

Will ConTeXt support semantic meta-information?

A few examples:
* could ConTeXt automatically tag the PDF it creates e.g. via Nepomuk[1]?
* could the bibliography be enriched with RDF triples?
* by selecting an event or contact mentioned in a document made by ConTeXt, 
could you import that into your organiser or address book?
* if a document made by ConTeXt was put online, could meta-data inside it 
reveal the semantic meaning of its contents and creator for easier searching?
* ditto for local storage?

From my understanding this depends on whether PDF can have RDF included and/or 
whether ConTeXt could output to ODF.

Currently KOffice is leading the pace here with OOo just a bit behind it and 
AbiWord still needing to catch up. There's an interesting article[2] in Linux 
Magazine about how KOffice uses libferris to integrate RDF into ODF.

With semantic web and semantic desktop creeping up at a fast pace, it'd be a 
pity not to make use of it IMHO.


Cheers,
Matija
-.-.-
[1] http://nepomuk.kde.org/
[2] http://www.linux-magazine.com/w3/issue/116/020-022_rdf.pdf
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Semantic data in ConTeXt?

[Hans Hagen]

On 25-7-2010 12:50, Matija Šuklje wrote:
> Hullo,
>
> this is something that's been bothering me for quite a while:
>
> Will ConTeXt support semantic meta-information?
>
> A few examples:
> * could ConTeXt automatically tag the PDF it creates e.g. via Nepomuk[1]?
> * could the bibliography be enriched with RDF triples?
> * by selecting an event or contact mentioned in a document made by ConTeXt,
> could you import that into your organiser or address book?
> * if a document made by ConTeXt was put online, could meta-data inside it
> reveal the semantic meaning of its contents and creator for easier searching?
> * ditto for local storage?
>
>  From my understanding this depends on whether PDF can have RDF included and/or
> whether ConTeXt could output to ODF.
>
> Currently KOffice is leading the pace here with OOo just a bit behind it and
> AbiWord still needing to catch up. There's an interesting article[2] in Linux
> Magazine about how KOffice uses libferris to integrate RDF into ODF.
>
> With semantic web and semantic desktop creeping up at a fast pace, it'd be a
> pity not to make use of it IMHO.

Could be a nice topic for context conference.

We have tagging but the pdf spec leave handling tags to the application 
(it uses it for spoken text for instance). Technically tagged content 
can have user attributes (read rdf) but it's of no use if there is no 
application that does something with it.

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Semantic data in ConTeXt?

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne nedelja 25. julija 2010 ob 12:02:58 je Hans Hagen napisal(a):
> Could be a nice topic for context conference.

It would be, yes :]
 
> We have tagging but the pdf spec leave handling tags to the application
> (it uses it for spoken text for instance). Technically tagged content
> can have user attributes (read rdf) but it's of no use if there is no
> application that does something with it.

From a quick search on Wikipedia, I found out that PDF[1] indeed does support 
RDF[2] via XMP[3] embedded in the PDF file.

The problem here really does seem to be where ConTeXt comes into play.

I suppose it would be enough for ConTeXt if it would support embedding RDF via 
XMP into PDF.

How this semantic data would get to ConTeXt would get there should be a 
problem for the user and/or the editor (s)he uses.

* From the editor side, on the KDE SC[4] desktop I imagine getting Kile[5] to 
import RDF from NEPOMUK[6] and Akonadi[7] databases would be possible.

* Another possibility would be for ConTeXt to support importing RDF directly 
from iCal and vCard, FoaF[8], SIOC[9] etc.

...in both cases though I think it would be enough if ConTeXt could simply 
include or refer to an external XML file that includes the needed RDF data and 
generate a PDF from that. IMHO as a non/idiot coder on top of that additional 
modules could be written to e.g. automatically tag the PDF with NEPOMUK tags.

As far as the PDF end user side is concerned, I think we needn't worry. I've 
talked to some guys from the W3C and they are very much working in the 
direction of semantic data driving pretty much everything on the web and on 
the desktop. As already said, KDE is also very strong here and other big 
desktops (including MacOS and Windows) are trying to catch up as well. From 
what I gathered, both the semantic desktop side and the semantic web[10] seem 
to have a sure future and we should see widespread use in the next two years 
or so.


Cheers,
Matija
-.-.-
P.S. Is there a nicer wording then "(s)he" for referencing persona in unisex 
gender (other then "one")?
-.-.-
[1]	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF
[2]	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework
[3]	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Metadata_Platform
[4]	http://kde.org
[5]	http://kile.sf.net
[6]	http://nepomuk.kde.org
[7]	http://pim.kde.org/akonadi
[8]	http://www.foaf-project.org
[9]	http://sioc-project.org
[10]	http://semanticweb.org and
	http://www.w3.org/standards/semanticweb/
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Semantic data in ConTeXt?

[Martin Schröder]

2010/7/25 Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name>:
> P.S. Is there a nicer wording then "(s)he" for referencing persona in unisex
> gender (other then "one")?

You should get a copy of "The Joy of TeX: A Gourmet Guide to
Typesetting With the AMS-TeX Macro Package". :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun#Modern_English
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spivak_pronoun

Best
   Martin
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Semantic data in ConTeXt?

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne nedelja 25. julija 2010 ob 23:39:45 je Martin Schröder napisal(a):
> 2010/7/25 Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name>:
> > P.S. Is there a nicer wording then "(s)he" for referencing persona in
> > unisex gender (other then "one")?
> 
> You should get a copy of "The Joy of TeX: A Gourmet Guide to
> Typesetting With the AMS-TeX Macro Package". :-)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun#Modern_English
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spivak_pronoun

Thanks. A quick glance already proved entertaining ;)


Cheers,
Matija
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Semantic data in ConTeXt?

[Martin Schröder]

2010/7/25 Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name>:
> From a quick search on Wikipedia, I found out that PDF[1] indeed does support
> RDF[2] via XMP[3] embedded in the PDF file.
>
> The problem here really does seem to be where ConTeXt comes into play.

There are at least two LaTeX packages for embedding XMP-data into PDF.
I'm surprised that ConTeXt doesn't offer that yet.

> ...in both cases though I think it would be enough if ConTeXt could simply
> include or refer to an external XML file that includes the needed RDF data and
> generate a PDF from that. IMHO as a non/idiot coder on top of that additional
> modules could be written to e.g. automatically tag the PDF with NEPOMUK tags.

Yes.

Best
   Martin
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Semantic data in ConTeXt?

[Wolfgang Schuster]

  Am 25.07.10 23:41, schrieb Martin Schröder:
> 2010/7/25 Matija Šuklje<matija@suklje.name>:
>>  From a quick search on Wikipedia, I found out that PDF[1] indeed does support
>> RDF[2] via XMP[3] embedded in the PDF file.
>>
>> The problem here really does seem to be where ConTeXt comes into play.
>
> There are at least two LaTeX packages for embedding XMP-data into PDF.
> I'm surprised that ConTeXt doesn't offer that yet.

MkIV only: \setupinteraction[xmpfile=...]

Wolfgang

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Semantic data in ConTeXt?

[Hans Hagen]

On 25-7-2010 11:41, Martin Schröder wrote:
> 2010/7/25 Matija Šuklje<matija@suklje.name>:
>>  From a quick search on Wikipedia, I found out that PDF[1] indeed does support
>> RDF[2] via XMP[3] embedded in the PDF file.
>>
>> The problem here really does seem to be where ConTeXt comes into play.
>
> There are at least two LaTeX packages for embedding XMP-data into PDF.
> I'm surprised that ConTeXt doesn't offer that yet.

it does, but i got the impression that the question was about way more 
distributed rdf data i.e. more than that standard blob

Hans


-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar (was: Semantic data in ConTeXt?)

[David Rogers]

* Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name> [2010-07-25 23:33]:

>-.-.-
>P.S. Is there a nicer wording then "(s)he" for referencing persona in unisex
>gender (other then "one")?


The correct unisex pronoun is "he". This whole question is an invented
problem where no real problem exists.

"They" is usually acceptable, even though it's technically incorrect.
Many teachers of English are against its use, but in "real life" nobody
cares.





-- 
David
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar (was: Semantic data in ConTeXt?)

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne ponedeljek 26. julija 2010 ob 01:47:13 je David Rogers napisal(a):
> * Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name> [2010-07-25 23:33]:
> >-.-.-
> >P.S. Is there a nicer wording then "(s)he" for referencing persona in
> >unisex gender (other then "one")?
> 
> The correct unisex pronoun is "he". This whole question is an invented
> problem where no real problem exists.

Thanks for explaining. This unisex and other politically correct stuff is 
always a bit odd.


Cheers,
Matija
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar (was: Semantic data in ConTeXt?)

[John Haltiwanger]

Whether it is useless/'no problem exists' is not up to you to decide:
it is up to those who do find it important. As long as some people
find it important, no childish dismissals will remove that importance.

It seems the most successful/widely adopted form is to vary from 'he'
to 'she' (so that in one sentence you use one, in the next another).
Some authors even change the gender within a sentence. This method was
adopted because 'one' (the "real" correct unisex pronoun) is just too
awkward for extended use. The morphographic he/she/he/she method reads
surprisingly well.

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name> wrote:
> Dne ponedeljek 26. julija 2010 ob 01:47:13 je David Rogers napisal(a):
>> * Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name> [2010-07-25 23:33]:
>> >-.-.-
>> >P.S. Is there a nicer wording then "(s)he" for referencing persona in
>> >unisex gender (other then "one")?
>>
>> The correct unisex pronoun is "he". This whole question is an invented
>> problem where no real problem exists.
>
> Thanks for explaining. This unisex and other politically correct stuff is
> always a bit odd.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Matija
> --
> gsm: +386 41 849 552
> www: http://matija.suklje.name
> xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
>
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
> archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
>
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Hans Hagen]

On 26-7-2010 11:48, John Haltiwanger wrote:

> It seems the most successful/widely adopted form is to vary from 'he'
> to 'she' (so that in one sentence you use one, in the next another).
> Some authors even change the gender within a sentence. This method was
> adopted because 'one' (the "real" correct unisex pronoun) is just too
> awkward for extended use. The morphographic he/she/he/she method reads
> surprisingly well.

maybe male authors could use he and female authors could use she 
consistently (or we could get accustomed to 'it')

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[luigi scarso]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:
> On 26-7-2010 11:48, John Haltiwanger wrote:
>
>> It seems the most successful/widely adopted form is to vary from 'he'
>> to 'she' (so that in one sentence you use one, in the next another).
>> Some authors even change the gender within a sentence. This method was
>> adopted because 'one' (the "real" correct unisex pronoun) is just too
>> awkward for extended use. The morphographic he/she/he/she method reads
>> surprisingly well.
>
> maybe male authors could use he and female authors could use she
> consistently (or we could get accustomed to 'it')

I try  to use "one" and "we" .

-- 
luigi
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne ponedeljek 26. julija 2010 ob 12:20:14 je luigi scarso napisal(a):
> I try  to use "one" and "we" .

I used to use "one" as well, but after a while it starts looking weird. for 
now I settled for "(s)he", but I wondered if there's a nice widely adopted 
option like the Swiss use "*Innen":
e.g. "StudentInnen" means "Studenten und Studentinnen"



Cheers,
Matija
--
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Hans Hagen]

On 26-7-2010 1:56, Matija Šuklje wrote:
> Dne ponedeljek 26. julija 2010 ob 12:20:14 je luigi scarso napisal(a):
>> I try  to use "one" and "we" .
>
> I used to use "one" as well, but after a while it starts looking weird. for
> now I settled for "(s)he", but I wondered if there's a nice widely adopted
> option like the Swiss use "*Innen":
> e.g. "StudentInnen" means "Studenten und Studentinnen"

Don Knuth at the Q&A session at Oxford 1999 (reprinted in TeX's 2^5 
anniversary):

"And I also go through every paper and put it into the form in which I 
would like it to be remembered. So if a paper was was written in the 70s 
and I used sexist pronouns, I change that; I try to rework it so that 
instead of saying 'he did it', I'll say 'they did it' or something. Also 
I change 'which' to 'that' a lot. It's an American thing."


-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Martin Schröder]

2010/7/26 Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name>:
> I used to use "one" as well, but after a while it starts looking weird. for
> now I settled for "(s)he", but I wondered if there's a nice widely adopted
> option like the Swiss use "*Innen":
> e.g. "StudentInnen" means "Studenten und Studentinnen"

Please not the "erigiertes Binnen-I" :-)
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binnen-I

Best
   Martin
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne ponedeljek 26. julija 2010 ob 21:33:44 je Martin Schröder napisal(a):
> Please not the "erigiertes Binnen-I" :-)
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binnen-I

I kinda like that :]

Dne ponedeljek 26. julija 2010 ob 18:23:57 je Richard Stephens napisal(a):
> The trend that I have noticed (and which trips off the tongue most easily
> for British english-speakers) is to use the plural 'they' in place of the
> singular pronoun 'he' or 'she'. This avoids having to choose! For purists,
> it rankles, but then we have to accept that the language will change.
> Personally, for serious writing, I use the rather cumbersome, but
> grammatically correct, 'he or she'. I personally don't like 'he/she'. The
> use of 'one' as a pronoun in British english is pretty much dead and sounds
> very stilted to us - only the Queen and old school masters still use it!
> Using 'it' is not an option.

"They" sounds like a pretty good compromise. I'll try it out when I next write 
an article.


Cheers,
Matija
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar (was: Semantic data in ConTeXt?)

[Rory Molinari]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 2:48 AM, John Haltiwanger
<john.haltiwanger@gmail.com> wrote:
> Whether it is useless/'no problem exists' is not up to you to decide:
> it is up to those who do find it important. As long as some people
> find it important, no childish dismissals will remove that importance.
>
> It seems the most successful/widely adopted form is to vary from 'he'
> to 'she' (so that in one sentence you use one, in the next another).
> Some authors even change the gender within a sentence. This method was
> adopted because 'one' (the "real" correct unisex pronoun) is just too
> awkward for extended use. The morphographic he/she/he/she method reads
> surprisingly well.

I would find a switch like that weird and disconcerting, as if the
text were "unmoored" in some sense.

I usually flip a coin to choose between "he" and "she" before I start
a document, and stick with it.  (If I think the issue might be of
interest to the reader I add a footnote explaining this.)

I very much dislike the singular "they", though its use goes back centuries.

Cheers,
Rory

>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name> wrote:
>> Dne ponedeljek 26. julija 2010 ob 01:47:13 je David Rogers napisal(a):
>>> * Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name> [2010-07-25 23:33]:
>>> >-.-.-
>>> >P.S. Is there a nicer wording then "(s)he" for referencing persona in
>>> >unisex gender (other then "one")?
>>>
>>> The correct unisex pronoun is "he". This whole question is an invented
>>> problem where no real problem exists.
>>
>> Thanks for explaining. This unisex and other politically correct stuff is
>> always a bit odd.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Matija
>> --
>> gsm: +386 41 849 552
>> www: http://matija.suklje.name
>> xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
>> ___________________________________________________________________________________
>> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
>>
>> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
>> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
>> archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
>> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
>> ___________________________________________________________________________________
>>
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
>
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
> archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
>
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar (was: Semantic data in ConTeXt?)

[Marcin Borkowski]

Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Rory Molinari napisał(a):
> I usually flip a coin to choose between "he" and "she" before I start
> a document, and stick with it.  (If I think the issue might be of
> interest to the reader I add a footnote explaining this.)

I like that!  Although I bet that sooner or later some stupid feminist
will accuse you of cheating (unless you toss the "female" side more
often, in which case she'll be waiting for this tendency to change;)...)

Regards

-- 
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Hans Hagen]

On 28-7-2010 1:12, Marcin Borkowski wrote:
> Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Rory Molinari napisał(a):
>> I usually flip a coin to choose between "he" and "she" before I start
>> a document, and stick with it.  (If I think the issue might be of
>> interest to the reader I add a footnote explaining this.)
>
> I like that!  Although I bet that sooner or later some stupid feminist
> will accuse you of cheating (unless you toss the "female" side more
> often, in which case she'll be waiting for this tendency to change;)...)

as normally one can swap he/she without problems, we can make a module 
for that ..

% Of course one can now wonder if \heshe or \shehe should be defined first.

\getrandomcount\scratchcounter{0}{10}

\ifnum\scratchcounter<5
     \enablemode[gender:male]
     \edef\heshe {he}
     \edef\HeShe {He}
     \edef\hisher{His}
\else
     \enablemode[gender:female]
     \edef\heshe {she}
     \edef\HeShe {She}
     \edef\hisher{Her}
\fi

\let\shehe \heshe
\let\SheHe \HeShe
\let\herhis\hisher

\starttext

I wonder if \heshe\ likes reading this article.

\stoptext

(looks like i need to move some initialization code as the seed is set 
at starttext time which is too late)


-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[John Haltiwanger]

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:
> On 28-7-2010 1:12, Marcin Borkowski wrote:
>>
>> Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Rory Molinari napisa&#322;(a):
>>>
>>> I usually flip a coin to choose between "he" and "she" before I start
>>> a document, and stick with it.  (If I think the issue might be of
>>> interest to the reader I add a footnote explaining this.)
>>
>> I like that!  Although I bet that sooner or later some stupid feminist
>> will accuse you of cheating (unless you toss the "female" side more
>> often, in which case she'll be waiting for this tendency to change;)...)
>
> as normally one can swap he/she without problems, we can make a module for
> that ..
>
> % Of course one can now wonder if \heshe or \shehe should be defined first.
>
> \getrandomcount\scratchcounter{0}{10}
>
> \ifnum\scratchcounter<5
>    \enablemode[gender:male]
>    \edef\heshe {he}
>    \edef\HeShe {He}
>    \edef\hisher{His}
> \else
>    \enablemode[gender:female]
>    \edef\heshe {she}
>    \edef\HeShe {She}
>    \edef\hisher{Her}
> \fi
>
> \let\shehe \heshe
> \let\SheHe \HeShe
> \let\herhis\hisher
>
> \starttext
>
> I wonder if \heshe\ likes reading this article.
>
> \stoptext
>
> (looks like i need to move some initialization code as the seed is set at
> starttext time which is too late)


This is really cool :)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar (was: Semantic data in ConTeXt?)

[Rory Molinari]

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Marcin Borkowski
<mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> I like that!  Although I bet that sooner or later some stupid feminist
> will accuse you of cheating (unless you toss the "female" side more
> often, in which case she'll be waiting for this tendency to change;)...)

I doubt I will ever write enough documents for my coin to be subjected
to a statistically rigorous test of fairness!

Cheers,
Rory
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar (was: Semantic data in ConTeXt?)

[Marcin Borkowski]

Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 05:18:55PM -0700, Rory Molinari napisał(a):
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Marcin Borkowski
> <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> > I like that!  Although I bet that sooner or later some stupid feminist
> > will accuse you of cheating (unless you toss the "female" side more
> > often, in which case she'll be waiting for this tendency to change;)...)
> 
> I doubt I will ever write enough documents for my coin to be subjected
> to a statistically rigorous test of fairness!

Agree, but try to explain that to a fanatic feminist!

> Cheers,
> Rory

Best,

-- 
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar (was: Semantic data in ConTeXt?)

[Alan BRASLAU]

On Monday 26 July 2010 01:47:13 David Rogers wrote:
> * Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name> [2010-07-25 23:33]:
> >-.-.-
> >P.S. Is there a nicer wording then "(s)he" for referencing persona in
> >unisex gender (other then "one")?
> 
> The correct unisex pronoun is "he". This whole question is an invented
> problem where no real problem exists.
> 
> "They" is usually acceptable, even though it's technically incorrect.
> Many teachers of English are against its use, but in "real life" nobody
> cares.

He sells sea shells by the sea shore?

Alan
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Richard Stephens]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1780 bytes --]

>
> On 26-7-2010 11:48, John Haltiwanger wrote:
>
>  It seems the most successful/widely adopted form is to vary from 'he'
>> to 'she' (so that in one sentence you use one, in the next another).
>> Some authors even change the gender within a sentence. This method was
>> adopted because 'one' (the "real" correct unisex pronoun) is just too
>> awkward for extended use. The morphographic he/she/he/she method reads
>> surprisingly well.
>>
>
> maybe male authors could use he and female authors could use she
> consistently (or we could get accustomed to 'it')
>
> Hans
>
>
The trend that I have noticed (and which trips off the tongue most easily
for British english-speakers) is to use the plural 'they' in place of the
singular pronoun 'he' or 'she'. This avoids having to choose! For purists,
it rankles, but then we have to accept that the language will change.
Personally, for serious writing, I use the rather cumbersome, but
grammatically correct, 'he or she'. I personally don't like 'he/she'. The
use of 'one' as a pronoun in British english is pretty much dead and sounds
very stilted to us - only the Queen and old school masters still use it!
Using 'it' is not an option.

Best regards,

Richard

Converteam UK Ltd. Registration Number: 5571739 and Converteam Ltd. Registration Number: 2416188 Registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Boughton Road, Rugby, Warwickshire, CV21 1BU.

CONFIDENTIALITY : This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.
If you are not a named recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to another person, use it for any purpose or store or copy the information in any medium.

http://www.converteam.com

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2283 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 486 bytes --]

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[John Haltiwanger]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Richard Stephens
<richard.stephens@converteam.com> wrote:
>> On 26-7-2010 11:48, John Haltiwanger wrote:
>>
>>> It seems the most successful/widely adopted form is to vary from 'he'
>>> to 'she' (so that in one sentence you use one, in the next another).
>>> Some authors even change the gender within a sentence. This method was
>>> adopted because 'one' (the "real" correct unisex pronoun) is just too
>>> awkward for extended use. The morphographic he/she/he/she method reads
>>> surprisingly well.
>>
>> maybe male authors could use he and female authors could use she
>> consistently (or we could get accustomed to 'it')
>>
>> Hans
>>
>
> The trend that I have noticed (and which trips off the tongue most easily
> for British english-speakers) is to use the plural 'they' in place of the
> singular pronoun 'he' or 'she'. This avoids having to choose! For purists,
> it rankles, but then we have to accept that the language will change.
> Personally, for serious writing, I use the rather cumbersome, but
> grammatically correct, 'he or she'. I personally don't like 'he/she'. The
> use of 'one' as a pronoun in British english is pretty much dead and sounds
> very stilted to us - only the Queen and old school masters still use it!
> Using 'it' is not an option.
> Best regards,
> Richard

The best thing about switching the pronouns between uses (so, not even
on a sentence basis--in case that is how my first explanation was
perceives--but on the 'usage' of a pronoun. So, generally restricted
to a paragraph) is that you are making the explicit ('he or she')
implicit. You demonstrate that it is equally normal for one to occur
in the place of another in the current of your explanation, without
being cumbersome to speak within any given sentence (unless one is
uncomfortable with the subject noun of a given sentence being
feminine, of course).

The solution of sticking to your own gender is complicated by the
historical-and-ongoing trend to male dominance in academia. The
problematic of the gendered pronoun emerges as male voices normalize
the male as the subject of discourse. In this way Hans' solution would
only perpetuate the issue at hand, which is that feminine pronouns
appear as an "other" when all you ever see is male pronouns. It's
invocation is, simply by virtue of its disparity in appearance, an
edge case. Language has deep roots in the mind such that a linguistic
framing of something as Other can and in fact does 'other' the subject
at which the framing is directed. Some theorists, both male and
female, take it to the position of only using feminine pronouns in
their examples that require third-person. Others change it within
individual sentences in a more extreme demonstration of juxtaposition.

Personally, I find it a sign of forward-thinking when pronouns are
'neutralized' through this juxtaposition of possibility (ie both are
shown to fit equally the examples provided). Perhaps it is simply the
times I grew up in, but reading a man only ever writing 'he' implies a
crucial non-existence of concern re: the subject in the writer's mind.
I don't throw out their theory as a result of it, but it is certainly
something I note.

Then again, I'm a fringe member of a fringe discipline (new media), so
perhaps what I can do/what is expected linguistically is irrelevant
for the majority.

> Converteam UK Ltd. Registration Number: 5571739 and Converteam Ltd.
> Registration Number: 2416188 Registered in England and Wales. Registered
> office: Boughton Road, Rugby, Warwickshire, CV21 1BU.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY : This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may
> be privileged.
> If you are not a named recipient, please notify the sender immediately and
> do not disclose the contents to another person, use it for any purpose or
> store or copy the information in any medium.
>
> http://www.converteam.com
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to
> the Wiki!
>
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl /
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
> archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Khaled Hosny]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 08:20:32PM +0000, John Haltiwanger wrote:
> 
> Personally, I find it a sign of forward-thinking when pronouns are
> 'neutralized' through this juxtaposition of possibility (ie both are
> shown to fit equally the examples provided). Perhaps it is simply the
> times I grew up in, but reading a man only ever writing 'he' implies a
> crucial non-existence of concern re: the subject in the writer's mind.
> I don't throw out their theory as a result of it, but it is certainly
> something I note.

I personally find it very annoying and distracting from the main subject
that I usually stop reading at that point.

Regards,
 Khaled

-- 
 Khaled Hosny
 Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team
 Free font developer
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Hans Hagen]

On 26-7-2010 10:20, John Haltiwanger wrote:

> Then again, I'm a fringe member of a fringe discipline (new media), so
> perhaps what I can do/what is expected linguistically is irrelevant
> for the majority.

Well, new trends have to come from your dicipline I guess. (Or maybe 
some new shortcut boils up from the sms universe some day.)

I think that this he/she issue is a nice example of something that a lot 
of brainpower is put into ... each writer (male of female) at one point 
has to think about it ... btw, thinking of it, 'the reader' sounds quite 
neutral.

In education using 'you' is common which also avoids the problem.

Anyhow, an interesting thread and a nice topic for a discussion at the 
context conference when we discuss manuals and manual writing.

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Marcin Borkowski]

Hi,

what an interesting discussion!

My personal point of view is that the so-called "political correctness"
is something I actively fight against, by means of NOT using "they" or
"Afroamericans" or other such strange inventions.  These new words
somehow remind me of Orwell's 1984...

Regards

-- 
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[John Haltiwanger]

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Marcin Borkowski
<mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what an interesting discussion!
>
> My personal point of view is that the so-called "political correctness"
> is something I actively fight against, by means of NOT using "they" or
> "Afroamericans" or other such strange inventions.  These new words
> somehow remind me of Orwell's 1984...

So what do you write instead? Negro?

'Political correctness' can be onerous, and often contradictory to my
anti-authoritarian nature, but in the end it is not "the Man" who
issues requests for language changes so much as the marginalized
groups that take issue with existing phrasing. Afroamericans, for
instance, was deprecated sometime around that year 1984.. It all boils
down to whether you care about what the people concerned are saying,
which is why I note the author's position when I encounter it. (Rather
than throwing their paper away, ala Khaled).

This is always a contentious issue when software/coder types are
involved, one of the serious reasons why female participation in IT
(in general) and FLoSS (in particular) are so low: many men in these
circles will not, or can not, give room to critical complaints. The
problem always originates in the person complaining---they need to be
less serious, no one around here cares so stfu, etc. This is a serious
issue, and this is probably one of the least contentious starting
points for encountering it. That theory would be thrown away because
it attempts to consciously address real gender inequalities is a
depressing thought.

I for one have always thought it would be interesting to develop a
Unicode character that provides a symbol representing a neutral gender
pronoun. Then, anyone reading can insert he/she or another option to
their own taste.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Hans Hagen]

On 27-7-2010 3:06, John Haltiwanger wrote:

> I for one have always thought it would be interesting to develop a
> Unicode character that provides a symbol representing a neutral gender
> pronoun. Then, anyone reading can insert he/she or another option to
> their own taste.

Interesting ... if we can come up with a nice symbol that we can agree 
on it should be doable to get it included in quite some tex related 
fonts (the group involved in maintaining them is not so large) ... and 
then we can set a standard. After all, symbols like copyright and 
registered made it into fonts and those are used (if at all) only a few 
times in documents and in unseen places.

Maybe arthur knows if there are scripts that have such a symbol. Of 
course then there is the issue of how to pronounce it.

Hans


-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[luigi scarso]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 951 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:

> On 27-7-2010 3:06, John Haltiwanger wrote:
>
>  I for one have always thought it would be interesting to develop a
>> Unicode character that provides a symbol representing a neutral gender
>> pronoun. Then, anyone reading can insert he/she or another option to
>> their own taste.
>>
>
> Interesting ... if we can come up with a nice symbol that we can agree on
> it should be doable to get it included in quite some tex related fonts (the
> group involved in maintaining them is not so large) ... and then we can set
> a standard. After all, symbols like copyright and registered made it into
> fonts and those are used (if at all) only a few times in documents and in
> unseen places.
>
> Maybe arthur knows if there are scripts that have such a symbol. Of course
> then there is the issue of how to pronounce it.
>

U+26A7 MALE WITH STROKE AND MALE AND FEMALE SIGN
?

-- 
luigi

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1445 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 486 bytes --]

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Procházka Lukáš]

... When I remove "+" and "/^" from general gender symbols

O
+

and

   ^
  /
O

I get simply "0", so why not use this for (wo)man in general :)

Lukas


On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:17:51 +0200, Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:

> On 27-7-2010 3:06, John Haltiwanger wrote:
>
>> I for one have always thought it would be interesting to develop a
>> Unicode character that provides a symbol representing a neutral gender
>> pronoun. Then, anyone reading can insert he/she or another option to
>> their own taste.
>
> Interesting ... if we can come up with a nice symbol that we can agree  
> on it should be doable to get it included in quite some tex related  
> fonts (the group involved in maintaining them is not so large) ... and  
> then we can set a standard. After all, symbols like copyright and  
> registered made it into fonts and those are used (if at all) only a few  
> times in documents and in unseen places.
>
> Maybe arthur knows if there are scripts that have such a symbol. Of  
> course then there is the issue of how to pronounce it.
>
> Hans
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>                                            Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
>                Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
>      tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
>                                               | www.pragma-pod.nl
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry  
> to the Wiki!
>
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl /  
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
> archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
> ___________________________________________________________________________________



___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Taco Hoekwater]

On 07/27/2010 03:26 PM, Procházka Lukáš wrote:
> ... When I remove "+" and "/^" from general gender symbols
>
> O
> +
>
> and
>
> ^
> /
> O
>
> I get simply "0", so why not use this for (wo)man in general :)

This actually exists as Unicode character U+26AA, but its purpose
is to mark 'sexless' which is not the quite same as gender-neutral.

Best wishes,
Taco

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne torek 27. julija 2010 ob 15:26:22 je Procházka Lukáš napisal(a):
> I get simply "0", so why not use this for (wo)man in general :)

Hmmm, this could work. You could pronounce it simply as "O". "I" already 
represents the first person, so "O" shouldn't be too weird to represent the 
unisex third person, right?

Also it sounds similar to "on" which can be used in French (e.g. "on parle").


Cheers,
Matija
-.-.-
P.S. Both "homme" and "on" in French comes from the Latin "homo".
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Arthur Reutenauer]

> P.S. Both "homme" and "on" in French comes from the Latin "homo".

  Yes, and the derivation of “on” from “homme” was apparently inspired
by the Early German construct Mann -> man (that was maybe not spelt that
way at the time).  Ironic, that now some advocate the use of “mensch” in
German to replace “man”...

	Arthur
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne torek 27. julija 2010 ob 17:28:51 je Arthur Reutenauer napisal(a):
> > P.S. Both "homme" and "on" in French comes from the Latin "homo".
> 
>   Yes, and the derivation of “on” from “homme” was apparently inspired
> by the Early German construct Mann -> man (that was maybe not spelt that
> way at the time).  Ironic, that now some advocate the use of “mensch” in
> German to replace “man”...

History of languages is a funny thing, yeah... :]


Cheers,
Matija
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Arthur Reutenauer]

> I for one have always thought it would be interesting to develop a
> Unicode character that provides a symbol representing a neutral gender
> pronoun.

  Unicode encodes scripts, not languages, so that's outside of its
scope.  Even if you were to develop a new character that would function
as a neutral gender pronoun in English or other languages, it would
still be attached to one (or several) language(s).  You're of course
free to advocate its use in all existing languages with a written
standard, but that would take some time ;-)  And even then, it would
leave out the vast majority of languages, those that are only spoken.

	Arthur
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[John Haltiwanger]

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Arthur Reutenauer
<arthur.reutenauer@normalesup.org> wrote:
>> I for one have always thought it would be interesting to develop a
>> Unicode character that provides a symbol representing a neutral gender
>> pronoun.
>
>  Unicode encodes scripts, not languages, so that's outside of its
> scope.  Even if you were to develop a new character that would function
> as a neutral gender pronoun in English or other languages, it would
> still be attached to one (or several) language(s).  You're of course
> free to advocate its use in all existing languages with a written
> standard, but that would take some time ;-)  And even then, it would
> leave out the vast majority of languages, those that are only spoken.

I don't see how this applies: there are plenty of characters provided
by Unicode that can be used regardless of which language I am writing
in.. such as the male/female symbols already mentioned. So in this
case, it would be a symbol for the 'language of the internet', not
simply for a single language. Some symbols are available regardless of
the general language used, correct?

Granted, I know next to nothing about font encodings, so I'll defer
here to the knowledge of others.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Arthur Reutenauer]

> I don't see how this applies: there are plenty of characters provided
> by Unicode that can be used regardless of which language I am writing
> in..

  Yes, but they're symbols, not letters (nor ideographs or characters
from a syllabary, etc.); and they're even less words.  Are you
suggesting we replace some pronoun(s) by a symbol?  I don't see how that
would work.  And even if it was adopted in writing, it would inevitably
be used in speech, too, and would just as inevitably gain some
particular pronounciation in actual language(s).[*]

>      such as the male/female symbols already mentioned.

  But those are symbols; they do not replace the English words “male”
and “female” nor their translation in any other language.

>                                                         So in this
> case, it would be a symbol for the 'language of the internet', not
> simply for a single language.

  That there be a “language of the Internet” is a strange notion to me.
I personally use 6 or 7 seven natural languages to communicate over the
Internet, mostly in written form (that does not include HTTP or SMTP ;-)
Whatever I read or write correspond to actual words that may be
pronounced by speakers of those languages; if I were to use the symbol
you would like to invent (and I'm not saying I wouldn't use it, if it
existed), it would have to correspond to actual words in the respective
languages, otherwise you would just have invented a way of making people
mute.

  In other words, you cannot invent a new symbol if what you want is a
new word.  They're just two different things.  Of course, you may want
to invent both at the same time.

  (I should really have asked for Saussure's _Cours de linguistique
générale_ for my birthday as I originally intended.  I would have much
more insights on the subject.  Instead, I got a grammar of Etruscan :-)

>                               Some symbols are available regardless of
> the general language used, correct?

  Of course, you may use any Unicode character you want in your texts.
It may make no sense, though.

> Granted, I know next to nothing about font encodings, so I'll defer
> here to the knowledge of others.

  This has nothing to do with font encodings, really.  It happens at
another conceptual level.  The issue at hand here is not technical.

	Arthur

[*] It's admittedly a very specific example, but this is exactly what
happens with the Hebrew Tetragrammaton, for example
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[David Rogers]

* John Haltiwanger <john.haltiwanger@gmail.com> [2010-07-27 13:06]:

>'Political correctness' can be onerous, and often contradictory to my
>anti-authoritarian nature, but in the end it is not "the Man" who
>issues requests for language changes so much as the marginalized
>groups that take issue with existing phrasing. Afroamericans, for
>instance, was deprecated sometime around that year 1984.. It all boils
>down to whether you care about what the people concerned are saying,
>which is why I note the author's position when I encounter it. (Rather
>than throwing their paper away, ala Khaled).
>
>This is always a contentious issue when software/coder types are
>involved, one of the serious reasons why female participation in IT
>(in general) and FLoSS (in particular) are so low: many men in these
>circles will not, or can not, give room to critical complaints. The
>problem always originates in the person complaining---they need to be
>less serious, no one around here cares so stfu, etc. This is a serious
>issue, and this is probably one of the least contentious starting
>points for encountering it. That theory would be thrown away because
>it attempts to consciously address real gender inequalities is a
>depressing thought.
>
>I for one have always thought it would be interesting to develop a
>Unicode character that provides a symbol representing a neutral gender
>pronoun. Then, anyone reading can insert he/she or another option to
>their own taste.

That's an interesting idea, and in a way gets neatly around some of the
clumsiness of he/she and other constructions.

One of the difficulties with ALL the alternative ways of writing
pronouns, including new proposals, is that the mere use of any of them
places the writer into a sort of self-constructed ghetto. There is no
way around that that I can see, other than the hope that all other
writers adopt the same alternative way and turn it into the standard.

In the mean time, alternative constructions will continue to call
attention to the writer's personal and political views, for both good
and ill; as long as the writer's audience includes people who remember
standard English, any new pronouns (or old ones used in different ways)
become not just pronouns but part of the writer's message.

In academic writing especially, it's necessary to weigh the effect of
this distraction before using anything other than standard
constructions. Sometimes this kind of focus on the writer's personality
and politics may be welcome, or even necessary; but in some situations
it is not.

-- 
Thanks
David
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Hans Hagen]

On 27-7-2010 4:10, David Rogers wrote:

> In academic writing especially, it's necessary to weigh the effect of
> this distraction before using anything other than standard
> constructions. Sometimes this kind of focus on the writer's personality
> and politics may be welcome, or even necessary; but in some situations
> it is not.

so what do copy editors of scientific publications do when they see 
mixed (or inconsistent) usage of he/she/etc?

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[David Rogers]

* Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> [2010-07-27 16:15]:

>On 27-7-2010 4:10, David Rogers wrote:
>
>>In academic writing especially, it's necessary to weigh the effect of
>>this distraction before using anything other than standard
>>constructions. Sometimes this kind of focus on the writer's personality
>>and politics may be welcome, or even necessary; but in some situations
>>it is not.
>
>so what do copy editors of scientific publications do when they see 
>mixed (or inconsistent) usage of he/she/etc?

I'm not a regular reader of any scientific publications. I suspect there
are different de facto standards in different fields.

-- 
David
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne torek 27. julija 2010 ob 18:33:34 je David Rogers napisal(a):
> I'm not a regular reader of any scientific publications. I suspect there
> are different de facto standards in different fields.

In legal texts we usually help ourselves with definitions in the beginning of 
the text:

"landlord or landlady hereinafter referred to as 'bastard'"

but this obviously doesn't work well in non-legal texts.


Cheers,
Matija
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Taco Hoekwater]

On 07/27/2010 06:59 PM, Matija Šuklje wrote:
> Dne torek 27. julija 2010 ob 18:33:34 je David Rogers napisal(a):
>> I'm not a regular reader of any scientific publications. I suspect there
>> are different de facto standards in different fields.
>
> In legal texts we usually help ourselves with definitions in the beginning of
> the text:
>
> "landlord or landlady hereinafter referred to as 'bastard'"

In some types of document, you can introduce a fake name, like Knuth
does in the TeXbook.

Best wishes,
Taco
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Matija Šuklje]

Dne torek 27. julija 2010 ob 15:06:27 je John Haltiwanger napisal(a):
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Marcin Borkowski
> 
> <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > what an interesting discussion!
> > 
> > My personal point of view is that the so-called "political correctness"
> > is something I actively fight against, by means of NOT using "they" or
> > "Afroamericans" or other such strange inventions.  These new words
> > somehow remind me of Orwell's 1984...
> 
> So what do you write instead? Negro?

Personally I feel that the political correctness has gone a bit too far, but 
where the line should be drawn, I don't know.

I can provide a few examples of where political correctness *has* gone too far 
and can actually be even counter-productive:

In Slovenia it is rude to call Bosnians "Bosanci", Albanians "Šiptarji" and 
Gypsies "Cigani" and the official political correct terms for them are: 
"Bošnjaki", "Albanci" and "Romi".

With first two the problem is that they even officially call _themselves_ 
"Bosanci" and "Šiptarji" in their own language.

With the so called Roma people, the problem is even bigger, since to my 
knowledge Roma are just one of the tribes. So by having to call _all_ gypsies 
Roma, you are effectively putting one tribe in front of the others and denying 
the existence of the others.

I have nothing against any of those ethnic groups, I'm merely trying to point 
out a problem.


Cheers,
Matija
-- 
gsm: +386 41 849 552
www: http://matija.suklje.name
xmpp: matija.suklje@gabbler.org
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[John Haltiwanger]

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Matija Šuklje <matija@suklje.name> wrote:

> Personally I feel that the political correctness has gone a bit too far, but
> where the line should be drawn, I don't know.
>
> I can provide a few examples of where political correctness *has* gone too far
> and can actually be even counter-productive:
>
> In Slovenia it is rude to call Bosnians "Bosanci", Albanians "Šiptarji" and
> Gypsies "Cigani" and the official political correct terms for them are:
> "Bošnjaki", "Albanci" and "Romi".
>
> With first two the problem is that they even officially call _themselves_
> "Bosanci" and "Šiptarji" in their own language.

Who is considering it rude? Do the Bosanci consider it rude when you
call them Bosanci and prefer that you would use Bošnjaki? Or is it a
different set of people who are offended? This is my personal litmus
test for navigating the preferred naming of groups (preferred by the
groups themselves, that is).

There are many cases in American culture at least of groups using a
term within themselves that they do not want others to use, but not
usually the names used by that population when politely referring to
themselves (i.e. generally these terms are loaded slang words
appropriated from the dominating culture and internalized in order to
redistribute the balance of power that forms around that word.) So I'm
wondering if the situation you describe in Slovenia is being driven by
these groups, or if those groups would actually prefer to go by the
name they call themselves.

> With the so called Roma people, the problem is even bigger, since to my
> knowledge Roma are just one of the tribes. So by having to call _all_ gypsies
> Roma, you are effectively putting one tribe in front of the others and denying
> the existence of the others.

I have to ask the same question: Do the tribes in general prefer Romi
over Cigani? Also: am I going to far in assuming that any movement to
encourage them to all be called by their individual tribal names would
inevitably be referred to as pushing a 'politically correct' agenda?

In proper synchronistic fashion, I came across this piece today that
fits our topic of discussion:

  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703467304575383131592767868.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read
-- Lost in Translation
-- New cognitive research suggests that language profoundly influences
the way people see the world; a different sense of blame in Japanese
and Spanish

"All this new research shows us that the languages we speak not only
reflect or express our thoughts, but also shape the very thoughts we
wish to express. The structures that exist in our languages profoundly
shape how we construct reality, and help make us as smart and
sophisticated as we are."
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Marcin Borkowski]

Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 05:27:11PM +0200, Matija Šuklje napisał(a):
> With the so called Roma people, the problem is even bigger, since to my 
> knowledge Roma are just one of the tribes. So by having to call _all_ gypsies 
> Roma, you are effectively putting one tribe in front of the others and denying 
> the existence of the others.

We have the same issue in Polish.  Until now I didn't know that the
"Romowie" vs "Cyganie" (in Polish) has also this kind of problem.  This
particular example is even more interesting because of a few Polish
words, originating from the word "Cyganie", like "cyganeria" (which
means roughly "a group of artists, living (usually together) in a
leisurely way"), or "ocyganić", which means "to cheat" (this one is
rather old-fashioned").  I guess that maybe we (and groups like Gypsies)
have just to live with that - even if we try to eliminate such words,
another ones will emerge.  For instance: I think that "gay" was first
introduced by the LGBT lobby as a "positive" term, which now (at least
in Polish) is beginning to be derogatory.  Here, this works in exactly
the opposite direction: it is not the language which shapes our
thinking, but our attitudes which shape our language.  In the "Gypsy
case", instead of introducing a new word (Romowie), I would rather try
to discourage using "ocyganić" in the sense of "cheating".

BTW, I know of at least two derogatory terms concerning my nation:
"Polak" (which is exactly what a Polish man is called in Polish) is
considered rude in the US, and "polnische Wirtchaft" is very
derogatory in German.  I have to admit that I am not extremely happy
because of these terms, but it's not a real problem for me.

Regards

-- 
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)

Emacs: Escape-Meta-Alt-Control-Shift.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Hans Hagen]

On 28-7-2010 1:10, Marcin Borkowski wrote:

> BTW, I know of at least two derogatory terms concerning my nation:
> "Polak" (which is exactly what a Polish man is called in Polish) is
> considered rude in the US, and "polnische Wirtchaft" is very
> derogatory in German.  I have to admit that I am not extremely happy
> because of these terms, but it's not a real problem for me.

It's definitely good to know that when choosing names one should be 
careful. I just hope that none of the language related tags in context 
is problematic. (Years ago there was a really nasty discussion on the 
xetex list about naming languages in some latex package .. sort of got 
out of hands.)

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Henning Hraban Ramm]

Am 2010-07-28 um 01:10 schrieb Marcin Borkowski:
> BTW, I know of at least two derogatory terms concerning my nation:
> "Polak" (which is exactly what a Polish man is called in Polish) is
> considered rude in the US, and "polnische Wirtchaft" is very
> derogatory in German.  I have to admit that I am not extremely happy
> because of these terms, but it's not a real problem for me.

While I know "Polacken" as a derogatory word for Polish (or other  
Eastern European) people, I never encountered "polnische Wirtschaft".

Similar cuss words are "Itzig" for Jews (originally just a form of  
Isaak), "Molukker" for any black people (originally Dutch  
Indonesians), similar "Kaffer" (originally used as a rather neutral  
name for Xhosa in the German colonies, but meaning "unbeliever" in  
Arabian and "farmer" in Yiddish), "Kanake" for arbitrary Southern  
foreigners (originally Polynesian "human" and a positive name of  
German sailors for their Polynesian colleagues) etc.

Of course there are a lot of prejudices against several groups that  
lead to derogatory words, in German e.g.

türken ("turk") = to counterfeit (probably based on a chess playing  
machine fraud)
(herum)zigeunern ("gipsy (around)") = to leisurely wander, also sexually
Schwulitäten ("homosexualities") = difficulties
spanisch ("spanish") = dubious ("das kommt mir spanisch vor" = that is/ 
sounds dubious)
Schotten... ("scottish") = cheap (e.g. "Schottenpreise" = Scottish  
prices)

More on our gender topic is
herrlich ("lordlike") = great
dämlich ("ladylike") = stupid

Or some words that changed their meaning over the centuries:
Weib = shrew/broad (used to mean just "woman", while "Frau" meant  
"lady")

So, as several other posters already said: It's not the words who are  
to blame, but the speakers and their mind sets...


Grüßlinge vom Südsee!
Greetlings from Lake Constance!
Hraban
---
http://www.fiee.net/texnique/
http://wiki.contextgarden.net
https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer)

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Alain Delmotte]

Hi!

Henning Hraban Ramm a écrit :
> So, as several other posters already said: It's not the words who are to 
> blame, but the speakers and their mind sets...

Let me just add a comment about he/she and the willing of 
the speakers.

In Esperanto, there is
li = he
ŝi = she (same pronunciation)
ĝi = it (pronounce ĝ like j in just : dj)

The neutral is used when you do not specify the gender (like 
speaking about a cat without specifying male or female) or 
when there is no gender (for an object).
But Zamenhof, the initiator of Esperanto, said you also use 
it for young humans, like babies.
So it is a real neutral form.

But people want to keep their own use (the use from their 
language) and only keep ĝi for objects.
(even if, for example in English, one uses "she" when 
speaking about ones boat!!)
Some other want to have "ŝli" as neutral.
Other again want to suppress li and ŝi and only have "ri".

There is no solution to the problem; any solution will find 
people not agreeing for one or another reason.

But one has to try to avoid discrimination.

Alain

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Marcin Borkowski]

Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 01:06:27PM +0000, John Haltiwanger napisał(a):
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Marcin Borkowski
> <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > what an interesting discussion!
> >
> > My personal point of view is that the so-called "political correctness"
> > is something I actively fight against, by means of NOT using "they" or
> > "Afroamericans" or other such strange inventions.  These new words
> > somehow remind me of Orwell's 1984...
> 
> So what do you write instead? Negro?

And what's wrong with "Negro"?  AFAIK, it means "black", so it just
describes the reality.  This is what a word should do, right?  And btw,
the term "Afroamerican" doesn't really make much sense to me: what would
you call a Negro, born in France, and living in Germany, when you wanted
to distinguish him from a white man?  (Please note that by "man", I mean
"a human being of any sex";).)

To be more serious: I accept that there might be a problem caused by the
fact that I am not a native speaker of English.  I suspect that somehow
the neutral term "Negro" started being used in a derogatory fashion, and
that it might be unpleasant to black people to be called Negroes.  And
that's why I usually say just "black people".

> 'Political correctness' can be onerous, and often contradictory to my
> anti-authoritarian nature, but in the end it is not "the Man" who
> issues requests for language changes so much as the marginalized
> groups that take issue with existing phrasing. Afroamericans, for
> instance, was deprecated sometime around that year 1984.. It all boils
> down to whether you care about what the people concerned are saying,
> which is why I note the author's position when I encounter it. (Rather
> than throwing their paper away, ala Khaled).

Well, "onerous" might not be the best word.  "Scary" might be better.

You see, I am quite convinced that trying to manipulate language "by
hand" is a very bad idea.  Maybe this is partly because I live in a
former Communist country (Poland); we have seen such things in the past.
Another reason maybe that it seems to me that one of the first groups to
talk about "political correctness" (maybe even coining the phrase, I
don't know) were feminists, who did so much more harm to women in
general than we usually imagine.

> This is always a contentious issue when software/coder types are
> involved, one of the serious reasons why female participation in IT
> (in general) and FLoSS (in particular) are so low: many men in these
> circles will not, or can not, give room to critical complaints. The
> problem always originates in the person complaining---they need to be
> less serious, no one around here cares so stfu, etc. This is a serious
> issue, and this is probably one of the least contentious starting
> points for encountering it. That theory would be thrown away because
> it attempts to consciously address real gender inequalities is a
> depressing thought.

I am not sure that I understood your point, but I am quite convinced
that the low percentage of women in mathematics or IT is caused
primarily by the simple fact that an average female brain is not well
fit for this particular purpose.  (Of course, we all know notable
exceptions.  Also note that "better/worse fit for one particular
purpose" is completely unrelated to "better/worse in general".)

> I for one have always thought it would be interesting to develop a
> Unicode character that provides a symbol representing a neutral gender
> pronoun. Then, anyone reading can insert he/she or another option to
> their own taste.

Regards

-- 
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)

Emacs: Escape-Meta-Alt-Control-Shift.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[David Rogers]

* Marcin Borkowski <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> [2010-07-28 00:57]:

>Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 01:06:27PM +0000, John Haltiwanger napisa&#322;(a):
>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Marcin Borkowski
>> <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > what an interesting discussion!
>> >
>> > My personal point of view is that the so-called "political correctness"
>> > is something I actively fight against, by means of NOT using "they" or
>> > "Afroamericans" or other such strange inventions.  These new words
>> > somehow remind me of Orwell's 1984...
>>
>> So what do you write instead? Negro?
>
>And what's wrong with "Negro"?  AFAIK, it means "black", so it just
>describes the reality.  This is what a word should do, right?  And btw,
>the term "Afroamerican" doesn't really make much sense to me: what would
>you call a Negro, born in France, and living in Germany, when you wanted
>to distinguish him from a white man?  (Please note that by "man", I mean
>"a human being of any sex";).)
>
>To be more serious: I accept that there might be a problem caused by the
>fact that I am not a native speaker of English.  I suspect that somehow
>the neutral term "Negro" started being used in a derogatory fashion, and
>that it might be unpleasant to black people to be called Negroes.  And
>that's why I usually say just "black people".

Precisely. Some people began to use an ordinary word in a derogatory
way. After that, the word came to be recognized as ONLY a derogatory
word, and lost its status as an ordinary word.

It then seemed that the best thing to do was to find a neutral word to
replace the derogatory one, so that people could speak without being
rude. But the new word became dirty as well, so a third word had to be
brought into service. And so on.

Part of the problem is that the meaning of a word can be changed by the
intention of the speaker. Here's an example:

I know a woman who moved here from another country. Іn the country where
she lived before, there was a group of people she hated. When she says
the name of that group, it is a dirty word. When I say the same word, it
is neutral. And if we teach my friend a new word for that group of
people, she will change our new word into a dirty word as well. Changing
the syllables she utters does not change her intention.

>> 'Political correctness' can be onerous, and often contradictory to my
>> anti-authoritarian nature, but in the end it is not "the Man" who
>> issues requests for language changes so much as the marginalized
>> groups that take issue with existing phrasing. Afroamericans, for
>> instance, was deprecated sometime around that year 1984.. It all boils
>> down to whether you care about what the people concerned are saying,
>> which is why I note the author's position when I encounter it. (Rather
>> than throwing their paper away, ala Khaled).
>
>Well, "onerous" might not be the best word.  "Scary" might be better.
>
>You see, I am quite convinced that trying to manipulate language "by
>hand" is a very bad idea.  Maybe this is partly because I live in a
>former Communist country (Poland); we have seen such things in the past.

In many cases, marginalized groups do request language changes, but very
often those requested changes then receive very strong support from "the
Man". Without that institutional support (mainly from government
agencies and schools), probably some of the new words would stick;
others would not. Some new words may be perfectly appropriate; others
are difficult to understand or even contrary to the truth. (One example:
in the area where I live, a person who requires treatment in a mental
hospital is called a "mental health consumer" - yet mental health is not
something that can be consumed. One of the local men, who has spent much
of his life in mental hospitals and has become an activist for improving
the conditions there, rejects such nonsensical labels and insists on
being called a "crazy person".)


-- 
David
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Marcin Borkowski]

Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 10:00:09PM -0700, David Rogers napisał(a):
> * Marcin Borkowski <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> [2010-07-28 00:57]:
> 
> >Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 01:06:27PM +0000, John Haltiwanger 
> >napisa&#322;(a):
> >>On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Marcin Borkowski
> >><mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> what an interesting discussion!
> >>>
> >>> My personal point of view is that the so-called "political correctness"
> >>> is something I actively fight against, by means of NOT using "they" or
> >>> "Afroamericans" or other such strange inventions.  These new words
> >>> somehow remind me of Orwell's 1984...
> >>
> >>So what do you write instead? Negro?
> >
> >And what's wrong with "Negro"?  AFAIK, it means "black", so it just
> >describes the reality.  This is what a word should do, right?  And btw,
> >the term "Afroamerican" doesn't really make much sense to me: what would
> >you call a Negro, born in France, and living in Germany, when you wanted
> >to distinguish him from a white man?  (Please note that by "man", I mean
> >"a human being of any sex";).)
> >
> >To be more serious: I accept that there might be a problem caused by the
> >fact that I am not a native speaker of English.  I suspect that somehow
> >the neutral term "Negro" started being used in a derogatory fashion, and
> >that it might be unpleasant to black people to be called Negroes.  And
> >that's why I usually say just "black people".
> 
> Precisely. Some people began to use an ordinary word in a derogatory
> way. After that, the word came to be recognized as ONLY a derogatory
> word, and lost its status as an ordinary word.
> 
> It then seemed that the best thing to do was to find a neutral word to
> replace the derogatory one, so that people could speak without being
> rude. But the new word became dirty as well, so a third word had to be
> brought into service. And so on.
> 
> Part of the problem is that the meaning of a word can be changed by the
> intention of the speaker. Here's an example:
> 
> I know a woman who moved here from another country. Іn the country where
> she lived before, there was a group of people she hated. When she says
> the name of that group, it is a dirty word. When I say the same word, it
> is neutral. And if we teach my friend a new word for that group of
> people, she will change our new word into a dirty word as well. Changing
> the syllables she utters does not change her intention.

Good point.  I would bet my money that "Afroamerican" would be rude in
some 10-20 years if it were a shorter word...  I suspect that it will be
shortened to "Afro" or "Afroam" or something like that and only then
will become derogatory...

> >>'Political correctness' can be onerous, and often contradictory to my
> >>anti-authoritarian nature, but in the end it is not "the Man" who
> >>issues requests for language changes so much as the marginalized
> >>groups that take issue with existing phrasing. Afroamericans, for
> >>instance, was deprecated sometime around that year 1984.. It all boils
> >>down to whether you care about what the people concerned are saying,
> >>which is why I note the author's position when I encounter it. (Rather
> >>than throwing their paper away, ala Khaled).
> >
> >Well, "onerous" might not be the best word.  "Scary" might be better.
> >
> >You see, I am quite convinced that trying to manipulate language "by
> >hand" is a very bad idea.  Maybe this is partly because I live in a
> >former Communist country (Poland); we have seen such things in the past.
> 
> In many cases, marginalized groups do request language changes, but very
> often those requested changes then receive very strong support from "the
> Man". Without that institutional support (mainly from government
> agencies and schools), probably some of the new words would stick;
> others would not. Some new words may be perfectly appropriate; others
> are difficult to understand or even contrary to the truth. (One example:
> in the area where I live, a person who requires treatment in a mental
> hospital is called a "mental health consumer" - yet mental health is not
> something that can be consumed. One of the local men, who has spent much
> of his life in mental hospitals and has become an activist for improving
> the conditions there, rejects such nonsensical labels and insists on
> being called a "crazy person".)

And that's both funny and quite reasonable.

Regards

-- 
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[John Haltiwanger]

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Marcin Borkowski
<mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 01:06:27PM +0000, John Haltiwanger napisa&#322;(a):
>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Marcin Borkowski
>> <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > what an interesting discussion!
>> >
>> > My personal point of view is that the so-called "political correctness"
>> > is something I actively fight against, by means of NOT using "they" or
>> > "Afroamericans" or other such strange inventions.  These new words
>> > somehow remind me of Orwell's 1984...
>>
>> So what do you write instead? Negro?
>
> And what's wrong with "Negro"?  AFAIK, it means "black", so it just
> describes the reality.  This is what a word should do, right?  And btw,
> the term "Afroamerican" doesn't really make much sense to me: what would
> you call a Negro, born in France, and living in Germany, when you wanted
> to distinguish him from a white man?  (Please note that by "man", I mean
> "a human being of any sex";).)
>
> To be more serious: I accept that there might be a problem caused by the
> fact that I am not a native speaker of English.  I suspect that somehow
> the neutral term "Negro" started being used in a derogatory fashion, and
> that it might be unpleasant to black people to be called Negroes.  And
> that's why I usually say just "black people".

So what is your issue here then? You are already working by the rules
I proposed:

using the words that the group wishes to be called by (or at least not
using the words which they don't).

BTW, 'Negro' is definitely not a term to be used for referring to
black Americans. IIRC, it is a positive term in Brazil. The point is
to be aware of these things and to respect people's wishes regarding
them, rather than blithely pretending that any name you use should
automatically be fine simply because, well, YOU don't see the problem
with using the term Negro (for instance).

>> 'Political correctness' can be onerous, and often contradictory to my
>> anti-authoritarian nature, but in the end it is not "the Man" who
>> issues requests for language changes so much as the marginalized
>> groups that take issue with existing phrasing. Afroamericans, for
>> instance, was deprecated sometime around that year 1984.. It all boils
>> down to whether you care about what the people concerned are saying,
>> which is why I note the author's position when I encounter it. (Rather
>> than throwing their paper away, ala Khaled).
>
> Well, "onerous" might not be the best word.  "Scary" might be better.
>
> You see, I am quite convinced that trying to manipulate language "by
> hand" is a very bad idea.  Maybe this is partly because I live in a
> former Communist country (Poland); we have seen such things in the past.
> Another reason maybe that it seems to me that one of the first groups to
> talk about "political correctness" (maybe even coining the phrase, I
> don't know) were feminists, who did so much more harm to women in
> general than we usually imagine.

I understand your sensitivity vis a vis Regime Imposed language
tuning. You have got to be kidding me with that anti-feminist talk,
though. I'm not going to go there with you, especially after your
explanation below.

>> This is always a contentious issue when software/coder types are
>> involved, one of the serious reasons why female participation in IT
>> (in general) and FLoSS (in particular) are so low: many men in these
>> circles will not, or can not, give room to critical complaints. The
>> problem always originates in the person complaining---they need to be
>> less serious, no one around here cares so stfu, etc. This is a serious
>> issue, and this is probably one of the least contentious starting
>> points for encountering it. That theory would be thrown away because
>> it attempts to consciously address real gender inequalities is a
>> depressing thought.
>
> I am not sure that I understood your point, but I am quite convinced
> that the low percentage of women in mathematics or IT is caused
> primarily by the simple fact that an average female brain is not well
> fit for this particular purpose.  (Of course, we all know notable
> exceptions.  Also note that "better/worse fit for one particular
> purpose" is completely unrelated to "better/worse in general".)

I'd laugh at this if it wasn't the same shit that's been going around
for years in the math/IT circles. Socialization is the cause behind
this, not natural differences in brain structure. If the society has
decided to accept and repeat this "fact" over and over, and men will
generally act as if it is true (pushing out females who make the
attempt), then it will come to "appear" as true. But that doesn't make
it any less BS.

Put out some science for that one, dude.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Thomas A. Schmitz]

On Jul 28, 2010, at 11:29 AM, John Haltiwanger wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Marcin Borkowski
>>
>> I am not sure that I understood your point, but I am quite convinced
>> that the low percentage of women in mathematics or IT is caused
>> primarily by the simple fact that an average female brain is not well
>> fit for this particular purpose.  (Of course, we all know notable
>> exceptions.  Also note that "better/worse fit for one particular
>> purpose" is completely unrelated to "better/worse in general".)
>
> I'd laugh at this if it wasn't the same shit that's been going around
> for years in the math/IT circles. Socialization is the cause behind
> this, not natural differences in brain structure. If the society has
> decided to accept and repeat this "fact" over and over, and men will
> generally act as if it is true (pushing out females who make the
> attempt), then it will come to "appear" as true. But that doesn't make
> it any less BS.

No no, I've seen excellent scientific research on this question. It  
was in a German periodical of 1938. The article explained why women  
can't do math. I also gave a rigorous demonstration that Poles are  
genetically inferior to Germans and can only be plumbers or thieves...

But seriously: Marcin, I would recommend you stop posting on this. All  
you show is your complete lack of intellectual awareness. You're  
embarrassing yourself, and that's all.

Thomas
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Marcin Borkowski]

Dnia Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:39:09AM +0200, Thomas A. Schmitz napisał(a):
> 
> On Jul 28, 2010, at 11:29 AM, John Haltiwanger wrote:
> 
> >On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Marcin Borkowski
> >>
> >>I am not sure that I understood your point, but I am quite convinced
> >>that the low percentage of women in mathematics or IT is caused
> >>primarily by the simple fact that an average female brain is not well
> >>fit for this particular purpose.  (Of course, we all know notable
> >>exceptions.  Also note that "better/worse fit for one particular
> >>purpose" is completely unrelated to "better/worse in general".)
> >
> >I'd laugh at this if it wasn't the same shit that's been going around
> >for years in the math/IT circles. Socialization is the cause behind
> >this, not natural differences in brain structure. If the society has
> >decided to accept and repeat this "fact" over and over, and men will
> >generally act as if it is true (pushing out females who make the
> >attempt), then it will come to "appear" as true. But that doesn't make
> >it any less BS.
> 
> No no, I've seen excellent scientific research on this question. It  
> was in a German periodical of 1938. The article explained why women  
> can't do math. I also gave a rigorous demonstration that Poles are  
> genetically inferior to Germans and can only be plumbers or thieves...
> 
> But seriously: Marcin, I would recommend you stop posting on this. All  
> you show is your complete lack of intellectual awareness. You're  
> embarrassing yourself, and that's all.

Why?  Only because I don't believe some claims I find to be highly
controversial?  And BTW, where's the famous freedom of speech?  I do not
claim that I have any research behind my opinion, but I claim that
neither have you.  Any experiment in social science involves so many
factors that obtaining any certain results is imho nearly impossible.
And I do not find anything which would mean that women are "worse" than
men just because they are different.  Of course, it might be the case
that I am just not right, but I don't think that being not right is
embarassing when you have no proofs in either direction.

In other words: I cannot imagine an experiment which might prove any of
us wrong on this subject, and I can see some hints which support your
claim and some which support mine.

Regards

-- 
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Grammar

[Marcin Borkowski]

Dnia Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 09:29:49AM +0000, John Haltiwanger napisał(a):
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Marcin Borkowski
> <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> > Dnia Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 01:06:27PM +0000, John Haltiwanger napisa&#322;(a):
> >> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Marcin Borkowski
> >> <mbork@atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > what an interesting discussion!
> >> >
> >> > My personal point of view is that the so-called "political correctness"
> >> > is something I actively fight against, by means of NOT using "they" or
> >> > "Afroamericans" or other such strange inventions.  These new words
> >> > somehow remind me of Orwell's 1984...
> >>
> >> So what do you write instead? Negro?
> >
> > And what's wrong with "Negro"?  AFAIK, it means "black", so it just
> > describes the reality.  This is what a word should do, right?  And btw,
> > the term "Afroamerican" doesn't really make much sense to me: what would
> > you call a Negro, born in France, and living in Germany, when you wanted
> > to distinguish him from a white man?  (Please note that by "man", I mean
> > "a human being of any sex";).)
> >
> > To be more serious: I accept that there might be a problem caused by the
> > fact that I am not a native speaker of English.  I suspect that somehow
> > the neutral term "Negro" started being used in a derogatory fashion, and
> > that it might be unpleasant to black people to be called Negroes.  And
> > that's why I usually say just "black people".
> 
> So what is your issue here then? You are already working by the rules
> I proposed:
> 
> using the words that the group wishes to be called by (or at least not
> using the words which they don't).

I guess the difference lies at least in one point:  "black man" is
something that *means* a black man.  "Afroamerican" means nothing or
something different.  I prefer to use words in *their* meanings.

And (though I am not sure about it at all) I think it might be the case
that the introduction of "black people" instead of "Negroes" might have
been more spontaneous, and "Afroamericans" seems to be supported by some
governmental/lobbyist groups.

> BTW, 'Negro' is definitely not a term to be used for referring to
> black Americans. IIRC, it is a positive term in Brazil. The point is
> to be aware of these things and to respect people's wishes regarding
> them, rather than blithely pretending that any name you use should
> automatically be fine simply because, well, YOU don't see the problem
> with using the term Negro (for instance).

The point is, is it the wishes of the people involved, or the wishes of
some groups who *claim* to represent them?

> >> 'Political correctness' can be onerous, and often contradictory to my
> >> anti-authoritarian nature, but in the end it is not "the Man" who
> >> issues requests for language changes so much as the marginalized
> >> groups that take issue with existing phrasing. Afroamericans, for
> >> instance, was deprecated sometime around that year 1984.. It all boils
> >> down to whether you care about what the people concerned are saying,
> >> which is why I note the author's position when I encounter it. (Rather
> >> than throwing their paper away, ala Khaled).
> >
> > Well, "onerous" might not be the best word.  "Scary" might be better.
> >
> > You see, I am quite convinced that trying to manipulate language "by
> > hand" is a very bad idea.  Maybe this is partly because I live in a
> > former Communist country (Poland); we have seen such things in the past.
> > Another reason maybe that it seems to me that one of the first groups to
> > talk about "political correctness" (maybe even coining the phrase, I
> > don't know) were feminists, who did so much more harm to women in
> > general than we usually imagine.
> 
> I understand your sensitivity vis a vis Regime Imposed language
> tuning. You have got to be kidding me with that anti-feminist talk,
> though. I'm not going to go there with you, especially after your
> explanation below.

Well, you don't have to.  Maybe it would be a good idea to mention that
I know some women who have the same opinion as me on feminism.

> >> This is always a contentious issue when software/coder types are
> >> involved, one of the serious reasons why female participation in IT
> >> (in general) and FLoSS (in particular) are so low: many men in these
> >> circles will not, or can not, give room to critical complaints. The
> >> problem always originates in the person complaining---they need to be
> >> less serious, no one around here cares so stfu, etc. This is a serious
> >> issue, and this is probably one of the least contentious starting
> >> points for encountering it. That theory would be thrown away because
> >> it attempts to consciously address real gender inequalities is a
> >> depressing thought.
> >
> > I am not sure that I understood your point, but I am quite convinced
> > that the low percentage of women in mathematics or IT is caused
> > primarily by the simple fact that an average female brain is not well
> > fit for this particular purpose.  (Of course, we all know notable
> > exceptions.  Also note that "better/worse fit for one particular
> > purpose" is completely unrelated to "better/worse in general".)
> 
> I'd laugh at this if it wasn't the same shit that's been going around
> for years in the math/IT circles. Socialization is the cause behind
> this, not natural differences in brain structure. If the society has
> decided to accept and repeat this "fact" over and over, and men will
> generally act as if it is true (pushing out females who make the
> attempt), then it will come to "appear" as true. But that doesn't make
> it any less BS.
> 
> Put out some science for that one, dude.

As I wrote a minute ago - I can't, and neither can you, I guess.

Regards

-- 
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________