GaryK wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 5:57 am
Looks like dictionaries are keeping up with the times...
an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth:
She was the first trans woman elected to a national office.
mary is a woman who was assigned male at birth.
Language changes. Dictionaries reflect changes in language. I don't see you speaking and writing in Elizabethean English.
O changing dictionaries of language's sway,
How oft thy pages must be rearranged!
For words are fleeting and with them decay,
Adapting as our tongues their forms exchange.
When old-world terms fall from modern day use,
Thou must reflect the speech that we now speak;
Though ancient meanings still may we peruse,
Our present age doth render them quite weak.
To capture each new phrase becomes thy task,
No matter how obscure or quaint its form;
That thou art ever up for any ask,
'Tis cause for us to celebrate in storm.
For when our language changes and shifts its course,
Thou art the one who keeps our words in force.
Come on man, at least make an attempt at intellectually honesty. A dictionary is to reflect the common use of the language, and that definition is not how the vast majority of english speakers use the word woman.
Since you appear to appear to support this change, and I can only assume from your rapidly progressive persona here that you make every effort to speak in the latest, up to date inclusive language, how are those of us who are normal supposed to describe a biologically born woman, who is still acknowledging the reality of their biology, like 99.9% of women out there are currently doing.
Also, do you draw a line at this type of language redefinition, or should it continue until all words have only perceptual meaning rather than concrete? For instance, should cat be defined as
A living being who lives and identifies as a cat though they may have been said to have a different species at birth:
She was the first cat elected to a national office.
mary is a cat who was assigned human at birth.
Language changes. Dictionaries reflect changes in language. I don't see you speaking and writing in Elizabethean English.
O changing dictionaries of language's sway,
How oft thy pages must be rearranged!
For words are fleeting and with them decay,
Adapting as our tongues their forms exchange.
When old-world terms fall from modern day use,
Thou must reflect the speech that we now speak;
Though ancient meanings still may we peruse,
Our present age doth render them quite weak.
To capture each new phrase becomes thy task,
No matter how obscure or quaint its form;
That thou art ever up for any ask,
'Tis cause for us to celebrate in storm.
For when our language changes and shifts its course,
Thou art the one who keeps our words in force.
Come on man, at least make an attempt at intellectually honesty. A dictionary is to reflect the common use of the language, and that definition is not how the vast majority of english speakers use the word woman.
Since you appear to appear to support this change, and I can only assume from your rapidly progressive persona here that you make every effort to speak in the latest, up to date inclusive language, how are those of us who are normal supposed to describe a biologically born woman, who is still acknowledging the reality of their biology, like 99.9% of women out there are currently doing.
Also, do you draw a line at this type of language redefinition, or should it continue until all words have only perceptual meaning rather than concrete? For instance, should cat be defined as
A living being who lives and identifies as a cat though they may have been said to have a different species at birth:
She was the first cat elected to a national office.
mary is a cat who was assigned human at birth.
ƿæt is ǣnigu ðāra fēawu hēahþūgas ðe ic wille forlǣtan mīn līf for, is ðæt ðā Nōrsǣisc gefēran yfelwrehte Englisce mid ætbære Frencisc on. Ðēah ðē, ic nele þafian ðæt ðæt Fēoht on Hæstinges on 1066 gesceapen wǣre; and ðēah, ic cweðe ðæt þū mīn gesprec mid ǣlcum Old Englisce, þæt ealde Englisce.
garrire potes in Anglica vetere, ne Elizabethan Anglica, sed tamen factum est hoc non solum maturationem linguae, sed cupiditates corruptae perversae nationis per malam communicationem consequi.
Szdfan wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 9:16 am
ƿæt is ǣnigu ðāra fēawu hēahþūgas ðe ic wille forlǣtan mīn līf for, is ðæt ðā Nōrsǣisc gefēran yfelwrehte Englisce mid ætbære Frencisc on. Ðēah ðē, ic nele þafian ðæt ðæt Fēoht on Hæstinges on 1066 gesceapen wǣre; and ðēah, ic cweðe ðæt þū mīn gesprec mid ǣlcum Old Englisce, þæt ealde Englisce.
So you admit your position is gibberish. Finally, some intellectual honesty.
Soloist wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 9:20 am
garrire potes in Anglica vetere, ne Elizabethan Anglica, sed tamen factum est hoc non solum maturationem linguae, sed cupiditates corruptae perversae nationis per malam communicationem consequi.
Forsitan garrire in Anglica veteri melius est quam garrire in modernis Anglicis et multum est garrire quod hic agitur. Disceptationes cum Nett fructuosas non invenio.
Reverenter non assentior mutationes eveniunt ex mala et corrupta gente, sed agnitio experientiae et identitatis humanae implicatae. Nonne homines sine discrimine libere sibi vivere possint?
Suspicor eundem diologum dicturum apud te
In utroque enim societatis ratio, quae hanc sententiam promovet, est aliquid, ut existimem, improborum ac bibliae promotionem clare enuntiare, cum societas promovet id quod iniquum est, nostrum locum iudicare inter iustos et malos, quid agimus vel quid. non facerem, si haec ratio a te falsa concludatur, dissentire a te et reverenter te ad scripturam appellem, quam si discrimen tum nobis facere fas sit, quod dictum est, non utar politica voluntate. alios mores mutes sicut et hoc falsum esse credo, dum vivo neque vivo neque vivo puto, alios electos habere, et in via peccatorum non stare extra paenitentiam vocandi
Soloist wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 9:20 am
garrire potes in Anglica vetere, ne Elizabethan Anglica, sed tamen factum est hoc non solum maturationem linguae, sed cupiditates corruptae perversae nationis per malam communicationem consequi.
Forsitan garrire in Anglica veteri melius est quam garrire in modernis Anglicis et multum est garrire quod hic agitur. Disceptationes cum Nett fructuosas non invenio.
Reverenter non assentior mutationes eveniunt ex mala et corrupta gente, sed agnitio experientiae et identitatis humanae implicatae. Nonne homines sine discrimine libere sibi vivere possint?
You don't find them productive, because they don't confirm your biases, and you have no answers to the uncomfortable questions I raise. The ideology that oozes from you is intellectually bankrupt, so you revert to writing in anglo-saxon and latin.
May I suggest you go read the Abolition of Man by CS Lewis, if you give it an honest read you might actually understand why language is important.
I find it absolutely disgusting me that claim to worry a lot about my students’ abilities to think critically and discern between truth and nonsense. In another thread, while openly supporting the destruction of basic language that leads to confusion in loss of objective speech.
I am relieved however that you have shown the real intellectual backing of your ideology by resorting to actual, real gibberish.
GaryK wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 5:57 am
Looks like dictionaries are keeping up with the times...
an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth:
She was the first trans woman elected to a national office.
mary is a woman who was assigned male at birth.
Language changes. Dictionaries reflect changes in language. I don't see you speaking and writing in Elizabethean English.
O changing dictionaries of language's sway,
How oft thy pages must be rearranged!
For words are fleeting and with them decay,
Adapting as our tongues their forms exchange.
When old-world terms fall from modern day use,
Thou must reflect the speech that we now speak;
Though ancient meanings still may we peruse,
Our present age doth render them quite weak.
To capture each new phrase becomes thy task,
No matter how obscure or quaint its form;
That thou art ever up for any ask,
'Tis cause for us to celebrate in storm.
For when our language changes and shifts its course,
Thou art the one who keeps our words in force.
What I would be interested in knowing, is if the definition of the word woman has ever changed in the history of the English language before now. From a quick search, it doesn't appear that it has.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dic ... lish/womanan adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth: