Things you have recently learnt

rick_chasey

I take a rather post-modern view that every history or memory or whatever is a product of the time in which the history was written or the memory 'remembered' and over time bares less and less relation to actually what happened.

Ultimately history is a collection of unreliable memories in people's heads (which are just bags of hormones and electronic pulses) with only the physical reality of the past to anchor those memories in any sense of what reality really was.

Collectively we cannot 'remember' everything that has ever happened, so it takes the interests of society at that moment of remembering to decide what is remembered and how.

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

I take a rather post-modern view that every history or memory or whatever is a product of the time in which the history was written or the memory 'remembered' and over time bares less and less relation to actually what happened.

Ultimately history is a collection of unreliable memories in people's heads (which are just bags of hormones and electronic pulses) with only the physical reality of the past to anchor those memories in any sense of what reality really was.

Collectively we cannot 'remember' everything that has ever happened, so it takes the interests of society at that moment of remembering to decide what is remembered and how.

Coincidentally, this just popped up on my FB feed... the recollections of someone who was 10 when her village of Espenel was destroyed by the Nazis, in retribution for families covering for sons going to fight for the maquis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHLHMYzxcXw

Pross

rick_chasey said:

I am curious about what the memorials will be like for corona.

We already have the clay mock up for one over here don't we although it was initially planned prior to Covid

https://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57079844


There's also the Covid Memorial Wall on the South Bank.

tailwindhome

Kate Winslet is a very good actor.

pinno

tailwindhome said:

Kate Winslet is a very good actor.

'Actress' ?

rick_chasey

tailwindhome

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

ballysmate

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

Apart from at award ceremonies where there are separate categories.

First.Aspect

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

When do we need to refer to an "actthey"?

elbowloh

First.Aspect said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

When do we need to refer to an "actthey"?

Actx

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

When do we need to refer to an "actthey"?

This is the trouble with English ditching grammatical gender. If everything was more or less randomly assigned as masculine feminine or neuter, people might be less bothered about such things.

briantrumpet

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

When do we need to refer to an "actthey"?

This is the trouble with English ditching grammatical gender. If everything was more or less randomly assigned as masculine feminine or neuter, people might be less bothered about such things.

If you're aware the contortions that they are going through in France to overcome the problems with every single noun and occupation having a gender, you'll know that 'ditching grammatical gender' was a very sensible move.

rjsterry

briantrumpet said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

When do we need to refer to an "actthey"?

This is the trouble with English ditching grammatical gender. If everything was more or less randomly assigned as masculine feminine or neuter, people might be less bothered about such things.

If you're aware the contortions that they are going through in France to overcome the problems with every single noun and occupation having a gender, you'll know that 'ditching grammatical gender' was a very sensible move.

French doesn't have a neuter gender though, which is where they've gone wrong. English used to have 11 definite articles - sē, sēo, þæt, þone, þā, þæs, þǣre, þām, þon, þȳ, and þāra - but no indefinite article.
One theory is that the loss of grammatical gender is the result of the number non-native (Norse, Norman French) speakers having to learn the language.

briantrumpet

rjsterry said:

briantrumpet said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

When do we need to refer to an "actthey"?

This is the trouble with English ditching grammatical gender. If everything was more or less randomly assigned as masculine feminine or neuter, people might be less bothered about such things.

If you're aware the contortions that they are going through in France to overcome the problems with every single noun and occupation having a gender, you'll know that 'ditching grammatical gender' was a very sensible move.

French doesn't have a neuter gender though, which is where they've gone wrong. English used to have 11 definite articles - sē, sēo, þæt, þone, þā, þæs, þǣre, þām, þon, þȳ, and þāra - but no indefinite article.
One theory is that the loss of grammatical gender is the result of the number non-native (Norse, Norman French) speakers having to learn the language.

Ha, yes. It does seem bonkers that they havent got a gender-neutral word for 'it'. But, apart from a few words (e.g. 'faux') where the two genders have a different meaning ('scythe' and 'falsity' in the case of 'faux'), gender serves no real purpose, other than to trip up foreigners.

rick_chasey

German has exactly the same issue.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2020/01/18/the-hopeless-struggle-to-make-german-gender-neutral

kingstongraham

ballysmate said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

Apart from at award ceremonies where there are separate categories.

Acting awards ceremonies are a weird idea anyway, but it's doubly weird they are split by whatever they are split by now - is it sex or declared gender identity?

rick_chasey

kingstongraham said:

ballysmate said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

Apart from at award ceremonies where there are separate categories.

Acting awards ceremonies are a weird idea anyway, but it's doubly weird they are split by whatever they are split by now - is it sex or declared gender identity?

Gender identity for sure.


I have to say the more you dig into the whole gender identity issue the bigger the quagmire seem to be. It's absolute an mess.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

ballysmate said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

Apart from at award ceremonies where there are separate categories.

Acting awards ceremonies are a weird idea anyway, but it's doubly weird they are split by whatever they are split by now - is it sex or declared gender identity?

Gender identity for sure.


I have to say the more you dig into the whole gender identity issue the bigger the quagmire seem to be. It's absolute an mess.

Just imagine how long the oscars would be if you had M, F, L, B, G, T and Q acit, and supporting actit awards?

rick_chasey

Expect the gender argument to flare up in the Olympics. I think there is a former man turned woman competing as a woman in the weightlifting.

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

ballysmate said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

Apart from at award ceremonies where there are separate categories.

Acting awards ceremonies are a weird idea anyway, but it's doubly weird they are split by whatever they are split by now - is it sex or declared gender identity?

Gender identity for sure.


I have to say the more you dig into the whole gender identity issue the bigger the quagmire seem to be. It's absolute an mess.

Just imagine how long the oscars would be if you had M, F, L, B, G, T and Q acit, and supporting actit awards?

As TWH said, 'actor' is now generally accepted to be non gender specific (similar to lawyer or architect), so inventing unpronounceable words is unnecessary. Separate categories at awards ceremonies are mainly there to string it out and give enough scope to extract money from different sponsors.

Ben6899

The article about German is interesting... and clearly not written by a German.

And why don't we revert to "thespian"?

pinno

elbowloh said:

First.Aspect said:

tailwindhome said:

I would have thought referring to actors of either gender as 'actor' was fairly standard now.

When do we need to refer to an "actthey"?

Actx

Actxy? (for equality purposes).

briantrumpet

Ben6899 said:

The article about German is interesting... and clearly not written by a German.

And why don't we revert to "thespian"?

The French press obviously cover this at regular intervals, but here's a passable US round-up from 2017

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/11/inclusive-writing-france-feminism/545048/

Not surprisingly, the Académie Française (mostly very old white men) are not keen on change. But while they resolutely do their collective Canute impression, everyday (especially conversational) French diverges further and further away from formal French.

It's an interesting observation that the national school system, now somewhat over 100 years old was predicated (largely) on making 'standard' French the national language, and achieved that in two to three generations: until the end of the 19th century, regional dialects, some only vaguely intelligible to others, were the norm. So seismic shifts in language are possible. Though, in the case there, the AF was all in favour of the 'improvement' in French, whereas they are against most newer 'modern' ideas that dilute the 'perfection' of the language of Voltaire etc.

It is the beauty of (especially spoken) language that ultimately no-one can control where it goes, and though it does get 'nudges' from certain quarters, unless a population actually finds those nudges persuasive (consciously or unconsciously), the language will evolve to express what the population is thinking, not what the 'experts' want it to.

Ben6899

briantrumpet said:

It is the beauty of (especially spoken) language that ultimately no-one can control where it goes...

I think this is the crux. I speak German, with slang terms and colloquial vowel sounds... if I'm doing that even as a non-native, then languages will never be standardised!

My point about the gender cases in German was that they're simply not hung up on it and there's no particular way of remembering the cases for each word... native speakers (or those with excellent, fluent German as a second or third language) just know which is which. I'll never be at that level - constantly get the cases wrong, and from there the possessives (mein, dein, sein etc) are out of the window as well!

Pross

rick_chasey said:

Expect the gender argument to flare up in the Olympics. I think there is a former man turned woman competing as a woman in the weightlifting.

Rich over on Pro Race came up with the most sensible solution to this where in sport you have a female category open only to those born female and an open category for everyone else.

veronese68

Ben6899 said:

briantrumpet said:

It is the beauty of (especially spoken) language that ultimately no-one can control where it goes...

I think this is the crux. I speak German, with slang terms and colloquial vowel sounds... if I'm doing that even as a non-native, then languages will never be standardised!

Apparently my Italian is like that, people can tell where I'm from by my accent and I tend to use the Veneto version of some words. But my vocabulary is not as good as my accent and I do get things wrong quite often.

Jezyboy

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Expect the gender argument to flare up in the Olympics. I think there is a former man turned woman competing as a woman in the weightlifting.

Rich over on Pro Race came up with the most sensible solution to this where in sport you have a female category open only to those born female and an open category for everyone else.

I'm not sure this will be seen as an acceptable solution.

There's also a separate question regarding various intersex athletes.

Part of me feels that the noise among the "left" on this issue is a very cleverly orchestrated campaign by the right.

rick_chasey

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Expect the gender argument to flare up in the Olympics. I think there is a former man turned woman competing as a woman in the weightlifting.

Rich over on Pro Race came up with the most sensible solution to this where in sport you have a female category open only to those born female and an open category for everyone else.

So that is logical but really misses why the men go through the transition to women in the first place - they want to be recognised by the world as women, not as former men, if that make sense.

That is what the tension is around.

Ben6899

veronese68 said:

Ben6899 said:

briantrumpet said:

It is the beauty of (especially spoken) language that ultimately no-one can control where it goes...

I think this is the crux. I speak German, with slang terms and colloquial vowel sounds... if I'm doing that even as a non-native, then languages will never be standardised!

Apparently my Italian is like that, people can tell where I'm from by my accent and I tend to use the Veneto version of some words. But my vocabulary is not as good as my accent and I do get things wrong quite often.

I come unstuck all the time! You need to be speaking a language regularly, to keep the vocabulary up to scratch.

briantrumpet

Ben6899 said:

veronese68 said:

Ben6899 said:

briantrumpet said:

It is the beauty of (especially spoken) language that ultimately no-one can control where it goes...

I think this is the crux. I speak German, with slang terms and colloquial vowel sounds... if I'm doing that even as a non-native, then languages will never be standardised!

Apparently my Italian is like that, people can tell where I'm from by my accent and I tend to use the Veneto version of some words. But my vocabulary is not as good as my accent and I do get things wrong quite often.

I come unstuck all the time! You need to be speaking a language regularly, to keep the vocabulary up to scratch.

It's partly why I run a Facebook Page in French, so I get daily conversational-type French, and it forces me to look up words and try to remember idioms, so it isn't a laborious process every time. Book learning only takes you so far. If you know anything about native language acquisition, it makes you realise how much catching up you have to do in a 'foreign' language, and what you take for granted in your own. English is a doddle in some ways, but in others (word order and modal verbs etc) it's a nightmare for non-native speakers... plus the fact that we mumble everything and nearly all non-stressed vowels end up as schwas.