Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Self-Use of Ethnic Insults (was: Re: Ebonic Christmas )

From:BP Jonsson <bpj@...>
Date:Monday, January 17, 2000, 21:09
At 23:49 -0500 15.1.2000, Steg Belsky wrote:
> >Don't worry about it :-) The more you, me, and everyone else uses the >word "jew" instead of "jewish person" (it's so much shorter, anyway!) the >more normal it'll sound. For some reason it just sounds somewhat >shocking, as if it was not-quite-polite or something.
As a vocative it definitely does, but then I think that being addressed as "Hey <nationality> | <"race"> | <religious affiliation> would sound shocking/not-quite-polite to most people -- if used by an "outsider". I definitely don't stir if a guy in a wheelchair addresses me with "Hey, cripple", but if someone "abled" did. (BTW, remember the scene where Woody Allen complains over someone saying "d'you" after every second sentence? :-)
>I had a Torah >teacher freshie-year in highschool who specifically addressed the class >as "jews!" for a vocative, *in English* even though the class was >conducted in Hebrew, for the specific purpose of getting us used to the >sound of it. The Hebrew word _yehudim_ sounds completely value-neutral.
But that's insider use! BTW it occurred to me today that the fact that _Schikse_ means 'whore' in German slang suggests a somewhat tarnished usage of the word among Yiddish speakers in bygone times... Or am I wrong that the Hebrew etymon of the word (dang! where *is* that German etymological dictionary?) was originally value-neutral, just as was _barbaros_ in Greek, or at least more so than what it has become.
>My friends in college probably use "jew" for the same reason, although >more *for* it's shock value than to purposely diminish it's shock value. >You get people's attention better that way. Someone might have noticed >that in my posts on Jûdajca i switched constantly back and forth between >"Jews" and "Judeans" - the second noun, like "Swedes" or "Buddhists", is >completely value-neutral.
"Buddhist" is hardly value neutral to Buddhists, or to non-Buddhist fundamentalists of various descriptions. As one of the Tibetan Lamas I've met liked to say (when people treated him very deferentially): "Come on, I'm not a very special person. Let's all be buddies together!" ("Buddies" and "Buddhist(s)" are usually homonyms in Tibetan-accented English :-) /BP B.Philip Jonsson <mailto: bpj@...> <mailto: melroch@...> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__ Anant' avanaute quettalmar! \ \ __ ____ ____ _____________ ___ __ __ __ / / \ \/___ \\__ \ /___ _____/\ \\__ \\ \ \ \\ \ / / / / / / / \ / /Melroch\ \_/ // / / // / / / / /___/ /_ / /\ \ / /Melarocco\_ // /__/ // /__/ / /_________//_/ \_\/ /Eowine__ / / \___/\_\\___/\_\ I neer Pityancalimeo\ \_____/ /ar/ /_atar Mercasso naan ~~~~~~~~~Cuinondil~~~\_______/~~~\__/~~~Noolendur~~~~~~ || Lenda lenda pellalenda pellatellenda cuivie aiya! || "A coincidence, as we say in Middle-Earth" (JRR Tolkien)