When will they realize...

[Strange Dreamer]

Over the course of my life so far it has come to my attention that words have a tendency to change meaning over time. That does not cause me concern in itself, but the manner in which some transitions are facilitated does.

The method I am refering to is when a behavior, ideal, philosophy, or lifestyle that is generally not considdered by society as acceptable is attempted to be propped up by applying a word to it that has a strong positive meaning. Unfortunately they only seem to demean and corrupt the meaning of such words for those who are not willing to go accept what they had previously considdered unacceptable simply due to a new window dressing.

Some of the words I have seen partially or completely corrupted so far are life, choice, gay, queer, rainbow, diversity, tolerance. Now in this election year it seems that some politicians are now trying to add the word HOPE to that list.

I find it rediculous that they would take such a meaningful and needed word and apply it to a mere political banner flag.

Thus, in addition to asking your opinion on this issue. I also ask when will they realize that they are not binging themselves up, but instead dragging other things down?

[davedes]

How have words like choice, gay, life, diversity and tolerance been corrupted?

I'm not sure I understand...

[Strange Dreamer]

when I say corrupted, I am trying to get the point across that the orriginal meaning has been so displaced by it's association with the new idea or behavior that the old meaning at best fades from prominence in reference or at worse is completely lost to the average person when the word is used.

[Jack]

The English language is dynamic. One of its strengths is that it's not static. It's an amalgamation of several other languages, thus it wasn't "pure" to begin with. Old words take on new meanings probably more often than new words are invented, but if used in the proper context, still retain their original meanings.

Look at how many meanings the word "drive" has. Only by the context can you tell how I'm using it.

"My drive failed, which gives me the drive to drive to the store for a new one." Hard drives are new, but in context you know if I mean to pilot a vehicle or to develop motivation, both older meanings.

[Strange Dreamer]

I understand and appreciate that the english language is not a static language. The particular item I am attempting to address in this thread is the manner in which words change meaning. Specifically where it appears that someone is attempting to 'latch' onto a word of phrase that has longstanding positive connentations in order to lend more credence to their own position in other peoples minds, but in the process ends up doing more to change the way the word or phrase is perceived.

Anyway, I'll let this simmer for a while and see if my meaning does get through despite how easy it can be misunderstood. Probably due to my presentation, but I have attempted to clarify.

[Jack]

Specifically where it appears that someone is attempting to 'latch' onto a word of phrase that has longstanding positive connentations in order to lend more credence to their own position in other peoples minds, but in the process ends up doing more to change the way the word or phrase is perceived.

I think I know what you're getting at, but by using examples particular to sexual orientation I have to wonder if you're discussing the language or have a more political motivation.

If we're talking language;
Take the words "windows", "screw", "killer"; all have taken on modern meanings that don't relate at all to their earlier uses.

If we're talking politics/orientation;
Homosexuals adopted the term "gay" specifically because it indicated joy and happiness. By using that term to apply to themselves, they wanted to convey an image at odds with the image being spread by heterosexuals, who call them "queer" as in odd or strange. Eventually they co-opted the word "queer" as well to take the sting out of its usage.

Another example of political word play; is someone anti-abortion or pro-life? It depends on who's using the words.

[Maryjane]

Back in my day the word gay meant happy. Now the homosexuals (faggots, pansey's, nancy boys, limp wristers) want to use it to describe themselves in a postive light. Well I don't like it!

Am I close?

[Jack]

Limp. Now there's another term I can't use without a smirk anymore, thanks to all those ED commercials.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: Maryjane Back in my day the word gay meant happy. Now the homosexuals (faggots, pansey's, nancy boys, limp wristers) want to use it to describe themselves in a postive light. Well I don't like it! Am I close?

Oh, I think you got it right. Just another old fashioned guy who loves the sinner but hates the sin so much that he finds it impossible to stomach the idea that the sinner might not be so ashamed that he wouldn't willingly accept the fag, queer, nancy-boy, limp-wristed lable. How dare "those people" want to be treated as equally human when we all know they are perverts who want to rape children and sheep and marry both! And to top it all off, they want to destroy the English language, too! Such nerve, such...such...lack of feeling like the dirty little lost souls that they are! Chilling, isn't it?

[Piscean]

Oh, I think you got it right. Just another old fashioned guy who loves the sinner but hates the sin so much that he finds it impossible to stomach the idea that the sinner might not be so ashamed that he wouldn't willingly accept the fag, queer, nancy-boy, limp-wristed lable. How dare "those people" want to be treated as equally human when we all know they are perverts who want to rape children and sheep and marry both! And to top it all off, they want to destroy the English language, too! Such nerve, such...such...lack of feeling like the dirty little lost souls that they are! Chilling, isn't it?

Hmmm sombody is bitter. Hopefully you can let go of your biterness and just be gay all day;-)

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: Piscean Hmmm sombody is bitter. Hopefully you can let go of your biterness and just be gay all day;-)

Maybe I should have used the sarcasm alert...

[Maryjane]

when I say corrupted, I am trying to get the point across that the orriginal meaning has been so displaced by it's association with the new idea or behavior that the old meaning at best fades from prominence in reference or at worse is completely lost to the average person when the word is used.

Let's take the word cracker. Does the "average person" think saltine or Ritz? Look the word up in an urban dictionary and you get a new meaning. I suppose it depends on whom you consider "average."

Is it only when the word has been given a "positive spin" that you feel it's been corrupted?

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Strange Dreamer Thus, in addition to asking your opinion on this issue... ...I also ask when will they realize that they are not binging themselves up, but instead dragging other things down?

My opinion on this issue is that it's a pathetic, bigoted whine that people who should "know their place" have had the uppity audacity to re-define themselves. Or should we go back to calling African-Americans 'Negroes' and 'coloreds'?

Besides, english took on a life of its own when I found out that two centuries ago, 'awful' meant exactly what it sounds like it should mean... "full of awe". Amazing or awesome. If meanings like that can flip 180, who am I to complain about the dynamics of language.

To your second point, if people who have traditionally been persecuted and discriminated against, treated as 2nd class citizens or worse, want to break out of that role and re-define themselves in terms free from the baggage of old stereotypes, then more power to them.

Quote by: Maryjane Let's take the word cracker. Does the "average person" think saltine or Ritz?

Which, of course, leads to a whole 'nuther chapter in language, the consumer usurpation of trademarks. Both Saltine and Ritz are product trade names. Same with Kleenex, Frigidaire, Band-aid, Dumpster, Jello, Chapstick and many others.

I daresay the owners of those trademarks are more vexed about language than anyone here.

.

[Maryjane]

Besides, english took on a life of its own when I found out that two centuries ago, 'awful' meant exactly what it sounds like it should mean... "full of awe". Amazing or awesome. If meanings like that can flip 180, who am I to complain about the dynamics of language.

Isn't it awful that an uppity white woman along with an uppity black man use the word "hope" in their campaign?

[Strange Dreamer]

Quote by: Jack I think I know what you're getting at, but by using examples particular to sexual orientation I have to wonder if you're discussing the language or have a more political motivation. If we're talking language; Take the words "windows", "screw", "killer"; all have taken on modern meanings that don't relate at all to their earlier uses. If we're talking politics/orientation; Homosexuals adopted the term "gay" specifically because it indicated joy and happiness. By using that term to apply to themselves, they wanted to convey an image at odds with the image being spread by heterosexuals, who call them "queer" as in odd or strange. Eventually they co-opted the word "queer" as well to take the sting out of its usage. Another example of political word play; is someone anti-abortion or pro-life? It depends on who's using the words.

good points... As for the examples I put forward they were the most prominent ones that came to mind when I was writing my original post, and I did have misgivings about the potential of it being taken as a direct opinion about the gay lifestyle.

Quote by: Maryjane Let's take the word cracker. Does the "average person" think saltine or Ritz? Look the word up in an urban dictionary and you get a new meaning. I suppose it depends on whom you consider "average." Is it only when the word has been given a "positive spin" that you feel it's been corrupted?

Point taken on the matter of who may fit average, as it can vary depending on local to regional circumstances. As for my choice of saying 'corrupted' in regard to what I considder a
'positive' being turned 'negative' or at least diminished, it seemed an appropriate way to present my perspective on wanting to keep many uplifting things in the same light that I have known them. Perhaps that is selfish of me, but alas I am just a human being.

Quote by: Sonart . My opinion on this issue is that it's a pathetic, bigoted whine that people who should "know their place" have had the uppity audacity to re-define themselves. Or should we go back to calling African-Americans 'Negroes' and 'coloreds'? .

I had anticipated that my post may be taken as such, though it was not my intent to have it be an attack aimed at a particular group of people.

Quote by: Sonart . To your second point, if people who have traditionally been persecuted and discriminated against, treated as 2nd class citizens or worse, want to break out of that role and re-define themselves in terms free from the baggage of old stereotypes, then more power to them. .

I have never felt it was fair of valid to treat anyone as a second class citizen, but that isn't the point I was trying to make here. What I am trying to get to is that attempting to improve your image by creating a new association with something that has a previously had a popular/healthy/positive/good meaning attatched to it has a distinct potential to backfire. That in turn ends up changing the thing you were trying to use into something else entirely.

Of course you are free to think what you want about what I have said, I take that risk knowingly when I post here.

[Strange Dreamer]

Quote by: Maryjane Isn't it awful that an uppity white woman along with an uppity black man use the word "hope" in their campaign?

My assesment of the Clinton and Obama campaigns using 'hope' as their slogan is actually geared more toward the fact that I have yet to see anything I considder remotely close to supporting such an offer. Politics in general has had little of it to offer for a long time.

[Jack]

The language suffers most when terms are adopted by campaigns and reinterpreted or distorted to fit their agenda. Instead of a word changing meaning through common usage they turn that on its head and attempt to get people to use the term as they define it. Personally, when I hear Obama talk about hope, I think he must mean "I hope I can accomplish all I'm promising to do".

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Strange Dreamer I have never felt it was fair of valid to treat anyone as a second class citizen, but that isn't the point I was trying to make here. What I am trying to get to is that attempting to improve your image by creating a new association with something that has a previously had a popular/healthy/positive/good meaning attatched to it has a distinct potential to backfire. That in turn ends up changing the thing you were trying to use into something else entirely.

And what I'm saying, Dreamer, is that whether you felt it was valid or not, that was the facts of life for several minority groups. And I'm saying that if they want to create a new association where none existed -- after all, there were no terms you could use that didn't carry the old negative connections; negro or colored, homo, queer, Mexican, whatever -- then by gawd, why not let them try it. If your image is universally and unfairly negative, then by all means, do whatever you think it takes to change that image. How does it hurt anyone? You want to be an Executive Assistant instead of a secretary, have at it. And it's not like english hasn't changed in a couple dozen ways every ten years.

Quote by: Strange Dreamer I had anticipated that my post may be taken as such, though it was not my intent to have it be an attack aimed at a particular group of people.

Yes, I'm sure you did, considering that you specificially complained about language as it applied to particular groups of people.

Me, my complaint is with people using the word 'good' when they should be using 'well'. "He did real good." "It went good." Eeek!!! Everytime I hear that, I can hear my fathers voice, correcting me.

Quote by: Strange Dreamer My assessment of the Clinton and Obama campaigns using 'hope' as their slogan is actually geared more toward the fact that I have yet to see anything I considder remotely close to supporting such an offer.

It's politics, dood. Besides, given the last eight years, I suspect a lot of people really would like to think there's hope that we can somehow snatch improvement from the jaws of disaster. Gawd forbid things keep heading the way they are.

.