I don’t use the word, since there are less offensive and better understood ones, like “stingy” and “miserly.”
This is my opinion also.
Jesus, people. Are you also afraid to ask for a bastard file at the hardware store? It’s just a word. Granted, the knuckleheads of the media and others have decided that we’re not supposed to use it because it sounds bad, but quit being such a bunch of sheep.
It’s not that there’s anything wrong with using it, and I’d love to feel free to do so. But the risk of being mis-overheard or misunderstood by someone with a lesser vocabulary is just too great. I’ll go with “miserly” or “tightfisted” and get on with bigger battles.
All words are “just words.” Some words impact people more than others. When I choose a word, I’m choosing what impact I have and what impression I’m giving. I’m choosing to communicate a lot of things, not just what a word means, but what my listeners think it means, what it brings to mind, what associations they have with it, what I will sound like saying it.
Language conveys meaning. I will use the tools of language to convey as precise a meaning as I can. Sometimes those meanings aren’t to be found in a dictionary.
Word choices matter.
Just how frequently does the average person even need to describe someone as being the quality that “niggardly” is supposed to describe? From this discussion, one would think “niggardly” is up there with “the” in best-all-around English cromulence. That’s what makes the recurrent threads about this word hilarious to me. We probably spend 1000 times as much time talking about the word and how unfair it is no one can use it without offending people, than we do using it naturally. So I ask again: why is “niggardly” such a coveted word?
For those who use it in conversation, do you remember the last time you did? It would be like me trying to remember the last time I’ve said the word “discombobulated”. I know I’ve done so, but it’s such a rare event and such a psychologically insignificant one that for me to tell you when and the actual context behind me saying “discombobulated” would be impossible. That’s really the way it should be, IMO. If it’s a memorable event for you, not because of anyone else’s reaction, but because you were so conscious of your word choice in that moment that it made a lasting impression in your long-term memory, then yeah…I’m gonna give you the side eye if you tell me that you use it naturally.
I honestly don’t even think of the possible confusion, not that I use niggardly very often. Maybe it’s because I read so much as a kid or because my parents used a lot of “10 dollar” words but niggardly, verbose, cromulent and so on are often the first word I think of when the need to use one of those concepts come up.
Can anyone think of a case of people using the word “niggardly” on the Straight Dope who weren’t making an allusion to the “nigger/niggardly” confusion?
Because I can’t. And that’s why I have hard time thinking that people are innocent of heart when they use that word. Not saying they’re racist, but I do wonder if that person is being deliberately obnoxious.
There are many intelligent people in my day-to-day life, and I’m sure they know the correct meaning of the word “niggardly”. But I would still expect them to look at me askance if I ever used it, and they’d have ever right to do that.
To Chefguy: I don’t have such a strong opinion about it that others shouldn’t use it. Ain’t no politically correct goody-goody, it’s simple enough for me to choose to not use the word.
Every example you’ve given - nipple, conspicuous, flipper, racoon, bastard file - aren’t good examples. I can think of reasons all these examples might be appropriate in a given scenario.
Can you tell me any reason why one might strive to use the word in question? Rather than why it shouldn’t be avoided? What I am asking is, when would the word truly benefit a conversation? When might using it be necessary in order to convey a subject, an idea? Ever?
Bolding mine. I know I used that word in this thread first, but now I am confused and can’t tell whether or not we are pulling legs or not.
I also use “parsimonious”, “penurious”, “frugal”, & “provident”.
My use of “Frugal” obviously proves I am biased against the Frug peoples, for whom the dance is named*.
“Parsimonious” shows I am anti-Church, *clearly. *
The use of “Penurious” means I am biased against the lowest denomination of US coinage.
"Provident means that I hate the capital of Rhode Island. No doubt. :rolleyes:
- (he’s lying)
Our confusion has been embiggened.
The issue isn’t that the word is coveted, commonly used, or even all that useful, really. Hell, I’m defending its use, and I don’t even use it myself! 
The issue is the variety of language. There is a value in having English be the sprawling, multifacited beast that it is, with lots of words holding various shades of meaning, some used by some folks and others by others.
Sure, if we buried “niggardly” under a stone, we wouldn’t be losing much. But to allow ignorance to do that burying would be a bad thing.
Yes. The words “niggardly” was used commonly in conversation by the famous *Lillian V. Mountweazel *, known for her esquivalience. She also discovered the species Petrophaga lorioti . She lived in Goblu, Ohio.
I wish to offer the OP my most enthusiastic contrafribularities.
I’m anispeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous to have caused you such pericombobulation. *
- Blackadder, actually.
Am I to understand that I shouldn’t use words that sound anything at all like a racial slur? I can’t say “A chink in one’s armor”? I can’t sing doo-wop music?
Orcenio, I don’t understand the use of the word “kite” in your quotes in post #9. Are you saying that some people would use “kite” as a hidden slur? I know that “kike” is a slur against Jews, and in my 48 years, have only heard it once (in a joke). I have never, ever heard anybody say “kite” except in regards to the toy, the bird, or as an action one might take with regards to a check.
Folks, Check it out for yourself.
Compare to a search for Stingy.
I looked at the first 30 results for niggardly. Every single one of them was a definition, a synopsis of the controversy, or a “hey, look at black folks getting all angry at me using a normal word, what morans!” post. Someone more diligent than me can look further.
For stingy, starting at the ninth link, you start just seeing the word used in headlines and such.
The word isn’t archaic, but it is obscure. And if you use it, folks’ most common experience is the word’s controversy. It’s rational for them to assume (barring more detail) that you’re deliberately engaging with the controversy, since that’s how it’s most often used.
I entirely disagree. Communication is a two-way street: it succeeds when the audience understands the speaker’s intended message. At extremes this is obvious. If your audience is rural Peruvians, and they don’t understand the English language, the fault is almost certainly not theirs. If your audience is kindergarteners in Seattle, and they don’t understand the vocabulary you use, the fault is probably yours. If your audience is high-school dropouts, and they don’t understand the words you use, I’d say it’s probably your fault as well for not knowing your audience.
At what point does it become the audience’s responsibility to understand your message?
As I see it, if I want them to understand me, it’s ridiculous for me to abdicate the responsibility of getting them to understand me. It’s my job to know my audience and to tailor my communication to accomplish my aims.
If effective communication isn’t my aim–if my aim is some sort of solipsistic expressionism, then fine and dandy. But if I want to communicate, I need to communicate.
I did a search on “niggard,” the noun form that sounds more like the racial slur. I got 65 hits. The word has never been used in casual conversation on this board. It shows up in discussions like this one, and in quotes from Shakespeare, Pound, and Tolkien. That’s it. “Niggardly” gets 654 hits (about 50 of them this week), so I’m not going to look back over all those. But I did find one legit usage and it’s from only three months ago.
So we can say it happened once, but it’s used in discussions of the controversy way more than it’s used on its own.
All that means is that it’s a hot news topic. You can also search for “Barack”, which is a not rare name.
Before Obama started running, you’d get hits on several of the other names. Now, all you get is the President.
Exactly my point, if better stated.
I remember when I was in the military we were told not to use the term “flip chart” any longer because it might offend our Filipino shipmates. So I asked some of my Filipino friends about it. First they thought I was joking, then were outraged that anybody would think them so stupid and small as to take offense where none was intended.