I wouldn’t know; I’m not black.
I give up. You guys do what you want; I would rather consider the feelings of people around me and eschew the use of a word that automatically raises hackles.
I think y’all are missing the point of the OP. The question isn’t whether it’s appropriate to go around intentionally trying to offend people with our choice of words. The question is whether it’s appropriate to discuss an author’s use of words in literature. Are we to expect that all literature should be scrubbed to remove references to words (or concepts, for that matter) which we find offensive in today’s world? The teacher was reprimanded for discussing “niggardly” within the context of discussing a book. For all we know, the teacher could have seen an opportunity to teach her student’s about a word that might have raised questions in their minds as to meaning. Heaven forbid that we ask our teacher’s to actually teach their student’s how to look up a word to see what it means.
Okay, gobear, let’s us have a little discussion on automatically offensive words, shall we? We’ll start with, oh, I don’t know, maybe “bitch.” I don’t know any women who don’t take offense at being called a bitch, but according to you that word’s just fine. It hurts my feelings, though, so people can’t say it anymore.
Since you’re such a wonderfully sensitive and considerate person, I know you’ll also refrain from using the following list: itch, snitch, witch, which, pitch, stitch, hitch, and kitsch. Thanks, nigga!
Oh, but you can still say beeyotch and biznitch, cause those are affectionate terms.
Black people can call each other “nigger”; white people can’t. But that’s a separate discussion.
To be brief, “niggardly” is the unfortunate victim of its similarity to “nigger.” Using the word, even with the best intentions, will cause misunderstandings and hard feelings, even after you explain the word’s true meaning. Now if you don’t care about how you appear to others , go ahead, use the word.
Dinsdale
No problem, someone mentioned “Dancing Queen” by Abba in another thread. [sub]young and (whatever), only seventeen…GOOD GOD, MAKE IT STOP![/sub]
Does the word automatically raise hackles? I hadn’t heard anything about this controversy until the events in Washington DC a couple of years ago.
I think that for the most part the controversy is raised by those who don’t know the meaning of the word and those who excessively pursue the ideal of political correctness. I say “for the most part” because from Daniel’s posts I’m under the impression that despite his knowing the meaning of the word, he still finds it offensive. To be honest, I am amazed that this is so, for many of the reasons cited by other posters (e.g., similarly spelled or sounding words).
As for “niggardly” being used as a “gotcha” word, if the meaning of the word is understood, that “gotcha” loses most of its power, and if it is used as such, I believe that an educated person would not consider it to be so much a problem with the word, but with the speaker’s apparent intent to offend. Besides, the similarly spelled or sounding words could be used the same way; does that mean that they should also be retired? If the offensive intent is apparent, then the use of that word is offensive, but the lack of such clear intent should lead the listener to accept the word for its correct meaning without offensive connotation, as there is no grounds for gleaning an offensive connotation.
With certain words there is no need to determine the intent of the speaker, as the words by their own meaning carry that offensive connotation, like the word “nigger” at the center of this bizarre controversy. Sure, I could act as if in using the word I do not mean offense, but I would be an idiot not to recognize the word’s connotation over the past two hundred years. The only negative connotation I have seen in the word “niggardly” is from two articles in which people didn’t know the word’s meaning, and from this very thread.
With “niggardly”, I think it is necessary to determine the speaker’s intent, as the meaning of the word has nothing to do with “nigger”.
As for gobear’s challenge to call the fictional Kenisha “niggardly”, I wouldn’t call any of my co-workers “niggardly”, “stingy” or “miserly”, not if I wanted that fiver.
As for the relative rarity of usage of the word: I rarely use “stingy” or “miserly” too.
Lastly, I’ll refer to my last post in this thread. Isn’t the ideal of the Straight Dope to fight ignorance? “Niggardly” has been an issue in the news at least twice over the past couple of years, but I think that the solution to the problem is not discarding the word and succumbing to ignorance, but to fight the ignorance by making the word’s meaning understood.
I am reminded of the “Peanuts” cartoon featuring Lucy in her Psychiatric Help 5 cents (dammit! There isn’t a “c” with a slash on the keyboard). Charlie Brown brings her a litaney of woes: People don’t respect me, I feel like a failure, etc.
Lucy’s solution? “Get over it.”
Brief drive-by post: it seems to me that gobear is not condemning “niggardly” while also endorsing “niggaz” on any kind of etymological or even psychological basis. I think he’s simpling perpetuating the underlying subtext of controversies like these: a tiny minority of black “activists” and “leaders” are entitled (nay, encouraged) to use any issue issue they want as a political bludgeon, no matter how hypocritically or irrationally. In fact, the more apparently irrational the better, because that just goes to strengthen their position that ItsABlackThingYouWouldn’tUnderstand.
Does your computer operating system have a “character map”(look under “accessories”)? Just copy and paste it from there. It just makes ¢ents. 
All of this censorship of good english words shows how political correctness will wind up destroying the english language. We used to call a fireman a fireman-now its “fireperson”. Or “spokesperson” for spokesman. I fully expect that the ACLU will issue a new dictionary, with all “potentially offense” words removed.
Okay, a couple of things. Strictly, I do find the word offensive, but that might be misleading. What I mean is that the word makes me cringe: it produces an unpleasant sensation in me. Clearly, for me that’s an almost Pavlovian response because of the first two syllables. I’m not likely to be angry at a person using the word.
If, however, I think they’re using the word as a “gotcha,” I’ll be irritated at them. If I think they’re using it understanding that it makes people cringe, and that they implicitly think I’m ignorant for cringing, then I’ll be pissed at them. I probably know more about the word, and more about etymologies in general, than some joker who thinks they’re fighting ignorance by using “niggardly.”
Second, I do encourage people to do a google on the word. You’ll find a huge number of dictionary entries, a huge number of stories about a certain Washington, DC incident, but very few uses of the word. Here are the first three google entries I’ve found that relate neither to the definition (and its potential for offensiveness) nor to the Washington incident:
(actually, I’m ignoring links to “niggardly the eighth dwarf,” since they’re both inappropriate and inexplicable)
Politically Incorrect and Niggardly Terms to Avoid! – definitely used in a “gotcha!” sense on this “white people have civil rights too, y’know!” Web site.
Being Niggardly – this is a weird rant about Popeye’s Chicken. It appears to be a satire of people that find niggardly offensive – yet the word “niggardly” in no way applies to the contents of the rant. There is, of course, a stereotype about black people and fried chicken. This looks like another “gotcha!” usage to me.
A Waspish, Niggardly Slur. This link is broken. Given the slang meaning of “wasp,” however, this is clearly playing on an implied meaning of “niggardly.”
The Quran and Hadiths on the poor and needy: a topical index: at last, we get to a use of the word in context, with no smarmy implied racial jokes. Interestingly, it’s in a quote from the Quran. Relevantly, it’s in a translation of a book over a thousand years old, a translation that makes free use of old-fashion-sounding words (likely because the translation is itself at least several decades old, although I’m unable to determine when this translation was done).
For those of you who doubt that people would actually use this word in a “gotcha!” context: convinced now?
Again, for those of you who missed it, I’m not saying every use of this is done with a “tee hee” implied. I’m not saying that it’s right to be angry at someone who uses the word straightforwardly, with no intent to tweak the audience. I’m not saying that it’s okay to punish anyone who uses the word (unless they’re incontrivertibly trying to tweak their audience).
I am saying that if you use the word straightforwardly, you should anticipate that the listener’s attention might be diverted onto that one word, that they might question your motives for using it, and that your discussion might veer off into a discussion of etymologies. If you’re okay with that possibility, then booyah for you. If not, you might want to use a different word.
This is my advice with my writing tutor hat on, by the way: I’m trying to be practical here, not talking principles. Use of the word may detract from your message, and that’s something you should take into consideration.
Daniel
oh – I wanted to mention that on the fourth page of results, I found the first modern usage of the word in context, in a car review. Here’s the relevant passage, which contains exactly the sort of side-trek that I think is almost necessary with a use of this word today. FWIW, I would find it bizarre to object to the word’s usage in this article:
(They forgot an end parenthesis, but that’s another Great Debate entirely.)
Daniel
DanielWithrow:
…in which case they wouldn’t be “getting away” with something, they would be directly flouting the so-called rule. My point was that there seems to be an underlying assumption that some racist is going to try and slip “niggardly” into normal conversation in order to denigrate black people and there’s nothing anyone would be able to do about it because it’s a legitimate word. Can anyone show me an instance of someone using “niggardly” in this sense, outside of discussions of the propriety of the word itself?
And once again, why “niggardly” and not “snigger”? It doesn’t seem to have the same problems, even though it appears to me to be a lot more similar to the n-bomb.
“Digger” and “nigger” are minimal pairs in English. There is only one phonetic switch between the two and that difference is enough to change the meaning of the word. “Nigger” and “Niggard” are not minimal pairs as there is not a lone phonetic substitution, but rather an addition and, depending on the person’s accent (As in mine: if I were to use the “n-word” I would have the “er” sound at the end; when I do use the word “niggard,” the “ar” is pronounced like the “ar” of “art.”), there’s a change in pronunciation, thus making two phonetic differences between the words.
IMHO, the word “niggard” has zero emotional baggage. Ignorance, on the other hand, appears to be holding the winning lottery ticket.
Is it just me or is gobear’s argument something like this:
- Black people can call each other nigga, there’s nothing offensive about the word in that context even though the word itself is an offensive epithet.
- No one, however, can use niggardly, despite its definition, despite its utility as something other than an insult, because the word is too offensive solely because it sounds like an epithet which the insulted parties themselves are permitted to use.
The mind boggles.
Monty, what about my link above to Being Niggardly? Although I’m not entirely clear on what the author is trying to say with this Web site, it sure looks to me like he’s trying to make fun of black people.
The problem with showing exactly what you’re asking for is that it’s so hard to find anyone using the word today outside of a context of examining the word itself.
Compare to “stingy”: you’ve got the Stingy Investor, articles on Stingy Stepgrandparents, a complaint about Stingy Nations, etc.
Why, if “niggardly” is as common as “stingy,” don’t you see similar sites? Why is there no “niggardly investor”? Why no articles about “niggardly stepgrandparents”? Surely there are some “niggardly nations”?
I submit that there are two reasons for this:
- Stingy is a more common word than niggardly; and
- Folks who know both words generally know that niggardly comes with attached baggage for some folks and, in an effort to avoid sidetracking their message, choose the word “stingy” instead.
By the way, I’m ignoring the whole “niggaz wid biznatches” versus “niggers” discussion because I think it’s founded on a fallacy: words have no inherent offensive value to them, and teh offensiveness of a word is actually a complex social interaction.
If I go to Kenya and start prancing down the street pointing at dark-skinned people and singing, “Nigger, la la la!” I’ll probably get the same confused looks as I would get singing, “Bubblegum, la la la!” If I tried the same experiment in downtown Durham, NC, I better be wearing some good running shoes. That’s because I wasn’t being offensive in the first scenario, whereas I was being offensive in the second one. (I may have been trying to be offensive in the first scenario, but I obviously hadn’t done my homework). Any discussion that looks to a word for offensiveness and not to the people who say and hear the word is missing the point.
Daniel
After three pages in this thread I think we’re beating a dead horse. Oops! I said horse. Do you suppose the proselytes, I mean prostitutes, will be offended? :rolleyes:
People who take ofense at any word are responsible for their own feelings. No one can even be offended unless he allows himself to be, whatever the intent of the utterer of the “offensive” word. If I were to call someone a name, intending to offend, I would have only the power my intended victim gave me.
Anyway, we’ve gotten away from the OP question which was, “is ‘niggardly’ an acceptable word for a fourth grade teacher to use?” If used as part of a lesson, I would say yes. If used without explanation to children of that age, no. The suitability of the word in other contexts was not part of the original question, but, as usual, we have digressed.
That website is just more proof of ignorance holding the ticket to which I referred, Daniel.
As a black man:
- I see both sides to this story. Honestly,if I didn’t know what the word meant, I would have been offended by it. My previous definiton of “niggardly” comes from racist who used it to mean “Acting like a nigger.” I’ve heard it used this way (and directed at me) many times before heaing the “miserly” definition. So it comes from ignorance on both sides,those who use the word for hurtful reasons improperly (or with it’s second definition,though not a definition according to the dictonary) and those who do not know the true meaning.
2.If someone was using that word around me in everyday speech,I would have the feeling they were just trying to pis me off. There’s only so many times you would use the word “miserly” anyway.
3. Shoud it be taught to kids? Sure,but only for a lit. class (i.e explaining the meaning of the word for Jane Eyre.)
-
Reimnds me of intermediate school. The high school put on a production of Carlie Brown for us,and it was one of the scenes at the baseball field. The girl playing Lucy had a bad lisp,and so,when she said “let’s put the BENCH over here, or let’s put the BENCH over there…” both students and faculty erupted with laughter due to bad pronouciation.
-
Ah,Kuroi,your name is kuroi,but are you a kokujin or a kurobito?
