You’re bothered by the sound of the word? That’s actually kind of funny, in a sad sort of way.
After all, there’s only a finite number of sounds that it’s possible for the human speech apparatus to form.
In short, you’re exactly like the parent who raised the ruckus: looking for an excuse to shout prejudice where no prejudice exists.
Monty, surely you can see that you’re misrepresenting what I’m saying. Argue honestly or not at all, please.
Daniel
The teacher didn’t use the work casually in a sentence. She explained its meaning, which was in context with another word the students were studying.
From this article :
***The word came up Aug. 20 during a comparison of two characters from different stories. One character was a Hispanic girl; the other was a white boy. The class talked briefly about the proper words to use when describing a person’s race, Ms. Bell said.
Then, the class discussed other ways to describe people. One child described the boy as stingy.
Ms. Bell said she thought this would be a good chance to find a word for the day, a practice she has used this year.
“The idea for the word of the day is to pick part of the curriculum or something you can extend from it,” she said.
She began looking for a synonym for “stingy.” The children’s dictionary offered “self-centered.” But Ms. Bell said most of the children already knew that word.
That’s when she landed on the word “niggard.” She added the “-ly” because the class was studying adverbs. Ms. Bell explained the meaning of the word and told the students how to use it in a sentence, something they would have to do on their spelling tests to gain extra points.
“And that was it,” she said. “These words for the day are used solely as extra credit. They have to use the word in a sentence that shows they understand the meaning.”
Her students did that on their vocabulary tests, she said.
A few days later, Ms. Bell received a letter from Ms. Walker saying the word was not allowed in her house, no matter what it means.
The students knew the meaning of the word in advance, it was discussed in context, and it was used in a sentence. To censure a teacher for teaching vocabulary words to her class is idiotic.
:rolleyes:
RR
RR, I think everyone here agrees with you.
Daniel
I just sent the following email to Dr. Susan Hahn, the principal of the school where this controversy originated:
I hope that she or one of the other officials of the school accepts the invitation.
If any of you are interested in directing your thoughts to members of the New Hanover County School Board, you can find their email addresses here.
Don’t call me a liar nor insinuate it when I did no such thing, Daniel.
Your entire rationale against the word is completely dishonest: assigning motives that don’t exist to people and ignoring the facts of the matter.
I apologize, Monty, if it came across that I was insinuating that you were a liar. I meant to state very explicitly that you were intentionally misrepresenting what I was saying. No insinuation about it.
Care, then, to show me where I’m “shouting prejudice where no prejudice exists”?
Daniel
It’s possible, I should say, that I’m doing a spectacular job of not saying what I mean to say, or that you’re doing a terrific job of misunderstanding me. In that case, I apologize for saying that you can see that you’re misrepresenting me.
To wit:
-Some people don’t like the word “niggardly”.
-Not all reasons for disliking the words are based on ignorance (although you may think they’re foolish reasons – I’m not disputing whether they’re foolish, and indeed that has no effect on my argument)
-Some people, as cited repeatedly, use “niggardly” deliberately to tweak people.
-I consider that behavior to be assholish.
-Whether that behavior is racist (or, in your phrasing, prejudiced) is immaterial to my point: it’s obnoxious in any case.
-Some people do not use the word to tweak others.
-If they don’t use it in that sense, they’re not being obnoxious – although they may be undercutting their message.
-I kinda feel like people who use the word knowing it’ll upset other folks and don’t try to explain why they use the word are being jerks. I do not, however, think they’re displaying prejudice or racism.
Is that clear enough?
Daniel
To all of you who think words are words, to hell with connation, audience perception, and underlying motivations for verbal usage, you have a poor understanding of the purpose of language. You want to prove how smart you are by unearthing a antiquated word that has plenty of more conventional, noncontroversial synonyms? Good for you! I just think its pathetic so many of you supposedly enlightened folks get your rocks off by throwing around a word which, like it or not, will tick some people off because of a phonetic resemblence. It makes me wonder what you are trying to prove. That you got a 800 on your SAT’s?
Oh yeah and another thing: one of several meanings for “faggot” is cigarette but how many people go around saying “can I bum a fag from you, man?”. Not too many people, at least in the States. But, please, if you’re going to start using the word niggardly to eliminate ignorance, feel free to use faggot, too. And be sure to tell the man who socks you in the face because he “misunderstood” you that he is an idiot for being offended, okay?
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr . . . big word make Grog mad . . . grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr . . . make Grog feel like he shoulda done better on SAT . . . Grog demand ebberbody speak on level he unnerstan . . . .
Looks to me like it’s subtlety, not big words, making Grog mad.
Daniel
Dammit! Obviously, that snarky comment was made by me, not by burundi. Don’t want to draw her into this morass.
Daniel
This latest gem by Doghouse Reilly makes me think God was a bit niggardly when he was passing out debating skills. What do yall think?
Nope, DanielWithrow, it look like Grog don’t unnerstan subble-tee either. Make Grog Mad!
I know. I just had all I could take and had to vent, something I rarely do. I apologize for the interruption.
Antiquated? You mean like in [this 1999 car review (last updated in 2002)?
Or [this National Lampoon piece?
And I, in turn, think it’s ridiculous to revile other people without even bothering to answer the objections raised so far. What about do-wop music? Saltine crackers? Chinks in the armor? Spic-n-Span cleaner? I had a greaseball in my sink trap: I must hate Italians! Look at that frog! Whoops! – there might be some French people around. I haven’t seen a friend of mine in a coon’s age: oh, no! Another term! Got to stay out of the honky-tonk, too, you know . . .
:rolleyes:
RR
School board meets to discuss teacher’s use of disputed word
http://www.heraldsun.com/state/6-265688.html
RR, if a friend of yours told you that they hate the word “deluge,” and would be mighty obliged if you’d just use a synonym instead, how would you respond? I can think of three different ways to respond:
You’ll note that my friend’s reasons for disliking the word don’t enter into it. That’s because it’s trivially easy for me to comply with the request. If my friend were asking me not to use the word “cracker,” I’d be a lot more inclined to ignore the request: “cracker” is far and away the most common word in the US for hard baked unleavened wheat things, and it’d be a pain in the butt to dance around the word every time I want to ask for a HBUWT.
Now, I know that there are people that don’t like the word “niggardly.” Their reasons for disliking it aren’t really my concern (although if I know they dislike it because they misunderstand its etymology, and if I’m feeling all arrogant and busybodyish, I might correct them). All that’s my concern is that it’s simple politeness to use the easily available alternatives – and, as a bonus, I’m less likely to sidetrack myself if I use a different word.
Riverrunner, your examples of other offensive words (do-wop, chink, cracker, etc.) are interesting, but they fail as analogies on three crucial points:
If one of these words satisfied all three of these criteria, I’d probably avoid it as well. I like being both kind and clear in my spoken communications.
december, thanks for posting that link. I’m baffled by the NAACP president’s comments: what new information has come to light to make him change his mind?
Daniel
“Beard and Cerf, in The Official Politically Correct Handbook, p. 123, report that an administrator at the University of California at Santa Cruz campaigned for the banning of such phrases like “a chink in his armor” and “a nip in the air”, because “chink” and “nip” are also derogatory terms for “Chinese person” and “Japanese person” respectively.”
Also, this article appears pertinent to this debate. A few quotes:
So even in a university environment, discussed in a context where the term is wholly germane to the discussion (a quote from Chaucer, for crying out loud), somebody still demands that the word be expunged. Christ, I guess we’d just better not teach Chaucer anymore.
Oh, and by the way:
I’d say that cleansing the word “niggardly” represents the thin edge of the wedge here, folks. So yer darn tootin’ that I’ll say it loud and say it proud: NIGGARDLY, NIGGARDLY, NIGGARDLY.
And you’re right, I delight in the term’s offensiveness. Not to African-Americans, but to the thought police of all colors and backgrounds who would try to curtail my vocabulary and my range of thought.
Doghouse_Reilly, I’d consider you a cad, then. I’m not with the thought police, as (please dear God tell me) you’ve figured out by now: I don’t believe in censuring people for using words for their denoted meaning. But I also don’t believe in offending for the sake of offending, and folks who do are jerks in my book. Either jerks, or teenagers.
You’ve come closer than I thought possible in satisfying my criteria; however, you’ve missed an important one:
Now, you can go around going “There’s a (huh huh huh) nip in the air!” But one crank won’t meet this criterion.
Because people are sometimes loathe to admit nuance in argument, I’ll say it again: the use of “niggardly” in discussing Chaucer is perfectly appropriate, and the teacher who used the word and the students who used the words were in no wise acting jerkishly. Also, because folks want to lump in the polite with the speech-police, I’ll repeat that I am no way no how calling for the banning of any particular phrase. I’m just talking about two things:
Daniel
Antiquated in the sense that even among the educated segment of society, the word is usually superceded in use by “miserly” and “stingy”; most people don’t go around saying “don’t be niggardly with the potato chips”. The fact that you have to go searching on the internet to provide examples of its use only supports this assertion. It is antiquated because even the most well-read members of society do not place “niggardly” in their personal lexicon for use in casual or even formal discourse.
BTW, I probably learned this word in elementary school and it meant nothing volatile to me. But like other people, if I heard someone use it in a conversation, I’d have to wonder exactly what their motivations are. Simple communication? Somehow I doubt that.
“Cracker” is not on par with “nigger”, my friend. Check the history books if you want to disagree; I don’t feel like launching into a lengthy discussion about why this is so. But regardless, the terms you mention are used in fairly specific ways (how many synonyms for do-wop can you come up with) and are not as loaded because they are adjectives that can’t really stand alone. Can’t say the same thing about niggardly. “He is niggardly” can mean two different things, without the proper context. You don’t use “do-wop” or “chinks in armour” or “saltine crackers” to describe people; you use them to describe things. That’s an important difference.
Okay, so I’ve explained why the phrases and terms you’ve come up with are not as loaded as niggardly. But how about “faggot”? The word is just as problematic, in my eyes, as niggardly. How many of you will be using that word in reference to cigarettes? If you use niggardly and not faggots, why not? This is a sincere question.