Just in case you were wondering “were is that in Hamlet?!?!”
…you’ve got some nerve.
act 3 sc 1
Um, no, I don’t believe I used the "tee hee that you have so kindly (?) inserted into my words.
I do not bellieve that I would be “deliberately communicting poorly”.
Yes, it **is **always good to have your ignorance fought , Indeed so: that, after all, is the point.
Shall I explain, I merely pulled that example into the thread for fear the someone might say "but the racism issue is not SO much in the U.K. as in the U.S.A. (whether that assertion would be true or not, I do not address, but it would make a worthwile and educational discussion on another thread, perhaps).
It is ALL very very unfortunate: no point in picking a fight with those with whom you disagree on one point.
But, then again, if you want to, I always beccome all bad-tempered and grumpy about the misuse of the word "hopefully"too.
Swords at dawns, then?
I do hope not. I like sleeping through dawn myself, and I have no sword, only a blunt Swiss knife.
Also have a can-opener? Would that be any use? Oh dear - a definite can of wormy things.
So, Celyn whinges, who shall be my second for the “swords at dawn” game? (Would that it be someone who works early in a bakery, then we can ALL just enjoy cakes, bread and doughnuts at dawn.
Don’t knife me too fierce Holly woman! I think DW’s point (excellently made BTW) was that if you know better the “tee hee” is implicit as an annoying little gotcha and is in bad form and questionable taste if another word will do.
First, let it be known and remembered here in the U.S. (and by extention, anywhere our servers touch): Everyone in the whole wide world has the right to offend everyone else in the whole damn world.
And people who are offended by this word are ignorant on a whole new scale. If a person hears this word and thinks that nigger-ly is being said, they have a right to be offended, up till the person pronounces the word properly. But they have no reason to be offended by a word that sounds similar.
And, let it be known that I will defend to my last breath these people’s right to make themselves look like utter gluteal headgear. That’s what freedom of speech means.
Nope, and I’m glad that it wasn’t taught in my 4th grade class as the next several weeks would have been made even worse. (“I said niggard, that’s not a bad word, I didn’t actually call you a name.”) It seems to me that some of you are giving 4th graders too much credit.
It shouldn’t have been taught, but the teacher still should not have been reprimanded.
Ah, memories of being in the 4th grade and other kids saying “your epidermis is showing.”
I can’t recall the last time I used the word niggardly in conversation, but then that could be said about a lot of rarely used words or phrases. Some of them could cause offense if misinterpreted, but they’re not inherently offensive.
I don’t think the teacher should have been reprimanded at all, rather I agree the school should have stood by her and explained things to the parents.
What also concerns me here is that not only was the teacher reprimanded unjustly, (for which the principal should apologize and remove it from her record) but because of this incident, books or stories that contain that word, or others that MAY be offensive in some context, will be removed from the curriculum or banned altogether.
If anything, I think it SHOULD be taught-and I would also have said, “Now, some people think this word is related to a very hurtful word that people use against of different races,(whatever). However, it is important that we know it DOESN’T mean that, and such and such…etc”
See, if more people had been taught about this word and what it means, perhaps there would never have been such a big fuss in the first place.
Oh, I can. Some people are just DYING to find something to be offended about.
What about the woman who made a fuss about a city council member talking about an 800 pound gorilla, and the phrase, “call a spade a spade?”
It’s sad, and it’s no wonder It’s Taking Longer Than We Thought.
Daniel: kuroi’s political agenda is to fight against ignorance. Communication is part of the Social Contract and thus newcomers to that contract must be educated into the meanings we’ve chosen as a society to apply to the sounds.
Well, that’s kinda my point. If, as a society, we’re attaching the meaning, “possibly a racial epithet” to the sounds “niggardly,” then we’ve gotta educate people to that effect.
Words derive their meanings, denotations and connotations both, from different places. A word’s derivation is only one of those places.
Now, I do think it’s appropriate to let folks know about the history of the word “niggardly,” and since it’s a useful word, I think it’s useful to try to strip the “racial epithet” connotation from the word. However, that’s gonna be difficult to do, I think, and you’re sure not going to do it by using the word “niggardly” in a confrontational fashion, rudely insulting anyone who does associate the word with a racial epithet.
Guinastasia, I agree with your approach, although I’m not sure that the subtlety of the point will be appreciated by fourth graders. I’m no child psychologist, but I suspect that at that age, kids will just think that you’ve given them a loophole by which they can call one another “niggard.”
And Celyn, my apologies if I wasn’t clear. The question mark at the end of the sentence,
meant that I was asking you whether you’d be snickering as you used the word. If I’d been accusing you of snickering (almost typed “sniggering” – yikes! :D), I woulda used different punctuation. I was not suggesting you’re some freakish anti-Catholic bigot; I was using your analogy to describe what I think are some subtle differences in the way that people might use words.
Feel free to bring your sword out at dawn. I warn you, though – I sleep late.
Daniel
BTW, I have actually heard individuals not far off of my age use the terms “masonic” and “catholic” when they’re neither Masons nor Catholics.
“Masonic” can mean “keeping within the group.” I’m checking every dictionary site I’ve ever heard of to see if this particular usage has been elevated from descriptive to prescriptive. Will let you know if I find any joy in that task.
Here’s the Merriam-Webster online dictionary’s entry for “catholic”:
I invite your attention to definition 2.
The problem, Daniel, is that the fact is that we’re not attaching a racist meaning to that particular word. The educated society doesn’t. I was recently enlightened on this very message board regarding the origin of the term “scotch” when it’s used to mean “cancel or reject.” I’d always heard that its origin had something negative to do with my particular heritage (Scottish). Turns out that was wrong. I was educated to the actual fact of the matter and thanked the individual for so educating me. I didn’t go off on a continued rant like the woman who got the teacher reprimanded is doing.
The problem, Daniel, is that the fact is that we’re not attaching a racist meaning to that particular word. The educated society doesn’t. I was recently enlightened on this very message board regarding the origin of the term “scotch” when it’s used to mean “cancel or reject.” I’d always heard that its origin had something negative to do with my particular heritage (Scottish). Turns out that was wrong. I was educated to the actual fact of the matter and thanked the individual for so educating me. I didn’t go off on a continued rant like the woman who got the teacher reprimanded is doing.
Monty:
- First, I’m aware of the definition of “catholic” to mean “comprehensive”; thanks all the same!
- You say:
Here’s my disagreement. It’s not the formally-educated society that gets to describe what connotations a word has. It’s small groups of society, clumps and clusters. Words develop new meanings, new connotations, new allusions, all the time. Some become prominent, some remain faddish, some die out. Others become the word’s main meaning.
So I don’t consider words’ meanings be determined by those with book-learning – especially not when we’re discussing their meaning in speech, not books.
If people with a formal education don’t generally associate “niggardly” with a racial epithet, super. Use the word around them without worrying about any connotations.
If people without a formal education do generally associate the word “niggardly” with a racial epithet, deal with it. That connotation is in no sense “false” (the idea of a false connotation is itself kinda meaningless), and you ignore that connotation at a peril to your ability to communicate effectively.
Daniel
Retire the word Nigardly because of illiteracy and ignorance?
Never! That would mean the retirement of “cock” (A rooster), “ass” (A donkey), “queer” (Strange), and “faggot” (A bundle of sticks)!
It should also be noted that the word found its way into the vocabulary lesson in question in response to a class project. The class was talking about character traits, and one of the kids used the word “stingy.” This apparently led to a discussion of what that word meant, and other words with similar meanings. While checking the thesaurus, the teacher ran across “niggardly” and thought it would be a really good word for her students to know and understand.
The mother who started the whole stink was shown the dictionary and thesaurus, and still insists that it’s a horribly offensive word. Personally, I find “cheapskate” to be more offensive, but that’s just me.
Whether niggardly is an acceptable word is beyond debate – it’s a perfectly cromulent word (heh). I tend to agree with gobear when I wonder why anyone would use it, when the synonyms (miserly, stingy, etc) are much “safer.” I also agree with Daniel Withrow and question the motives of anyone in this day and age who uses the word. However, as I stated at the beginning of this paragraph, it’s a perfectly valid word.
But look at the title of this thread: “Is ‘niggardly’ an acceptable word for a 4th grade teacher to use?” Replace “niggardly” with cock, ass, queer, and faggot. Hell, throw in “bitch” while you’re at it. Then answer the thread question. Is it (or any of these other words) acceptable for a fourth grade class? I think not.
Quix
Actually, quixotic78, we ran across cock, ass, queer, and faggot (all four of them) in our textbooks in 3rd and 4th grade. Our teachers explained the technical meaning of them in a perfectly matter-of-fact way, and went on. Yeah, we snickered a little about it on the playground, but then somebody would fart and we’d pretty much forget about it.
Besides, according to the articles I’ve read about it, the kids were just fine with the whole thing, and handled it a lot more maturely than some of the grownups involved.
It seems to me that “niggardly” is uncommon enough that if a teacher uses it, a good thing to do would be to define and explain the etymology of the word soon after it is used.
I really don’t see how we expect to expand vocabularies if we stick to the equivalent of “run Spot run,” i.e. only words that the students hear over and over anyway.