|From:||J Y S Czhang <czhang23@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, October 19, 2003, 21:29|
In a message dated 2003:10:19 12:18:00 AM, butsuri@BUTSURI.FREESERVE.CO.UK
>While I agree both that the dichotomy is false (as a description of
>Eurasian civilization), and that "Oriental" carries too much baggage,
>is _Asian_ really any better? Hardly any useful generalization holds
>across the whole of Asia, and this kind of use of the term "Asian"
>doesn't, generally, refer to all of Asia, but to some specific subset
>(and as we've seen, a different subset is usually implied in Britain
>than in America).
Like a journalist, I was just reporting the current facts or data or
whatever - as I understand them or see/hear them.
>Mind you, I don't have any ideas for a suitable replacement.
Me either ::makes note to self to consult Roget's...::
--- *DiDJiBuNgA!!* ---
Hanuman "Stitch" Zhang, MangaLanger
Language[s] change[s]: vowels shift, phonologies crash-&-burn, grammars
leak, morpho-syntactics implode, lexico-semantics mutate, lexicons explode,
orthographies reform, typographies blip-&-beep, slang flashes, stylistics
warp... linguistic (R)evolutions mark each-&-every quantum leap...
"Some Languages Are Crushed to Powder but Rise Again as New Ones" -
title of a chapter on pidgins and creoles, John McWhorter,
_The Power of Babel: A Natural History of Language_
= ! gw3rraa leg0set kaakaa!
! riis3rvaa, saaIlvaa, riikuu, sk0paa-g0mii aen riizijkl0! =
(Fight Linguistic Waste! Save, Salvage, Recover, Scavenge and Recycle!)