We've talked about the word "retard" here before. There was an op ed in today's Tribune calling for the extinction of the word "retard." Unfortunately I couldn't find it online yet. The author, Maria King Carroll, calls for the extinction of the word, as well as the Special Olympics in their Spread the Word to End the Word campaign . There's even a Web site related to this. Of course Obama's recent comment about his bowling being suitable for the Special Olympics didn't help.

I guess I see it as a problem related to the use of the word, rather the word itself. The word surely has some legitimate usages. Perhaps the issue should instead be that the word shouldn't be used to describe people who are intellectually challenged (which is the term Carroll used).

Thoughts?

The title made me think of a whole world populated by white-faced mime artists. I'm still shuddering now.

Seriously though I'd have to say no. In fact NO! Eliminating words doesn't really eliminate prejudices. In the short term it breeds resentment and reinforces prejudices and in the long term wherever there is a concept a way will be found to express it. New offensive words will flow in to fill the void. I do not believe that you can control human thought by controlling human speech and I'm damned glad that I don't believe it. I would absolutely hate to live in a world where you could.

People who want to eliminate words that offend them are aiming at the wrong target. By all means try to educate people out of their prejudices but just trying to prevent them expressing their prejudices is both sinister and futile.

I agree with Bob. If the word could magically be removed from English tomorrow, it wouldn't change anyone's viewpoint.

In somewhat related news, McDonald's campaigned to change the OED's definition of mcjob. Last year the CBC did a story about it and talked to a lexicographer. The only thing I remember is the lexicographer saying "It's not the point of a dictionary to make people feel good about themselves."

This message has been edited. Last edited by: goofy,

Good point, goofy. How true. I just can't understand whole organizations supporting the extinction of a word. That's so wrongheaded.

When doctors disgnosed my brother in the early 50s as brain-damaged, they said he would be "retarded." It was a word we accepted as describing his condition, with no stigma attached. Later, the word "retard" came to be a pejorative used to insult those supposedly diffeent from the namer. We didn't use it.

As the lexicographer pointed out, some words are used to make the speaker feel good about themselves. That is how "mentally-challenged" and "specially-abled" or just "special" are used. And in its way, "Isn't he a 'special' child?" is just as insulting as "retard" since it's only a substitute and synonym for the "bad" word.

Extinction of the word is imposible. Just like the cuss words your parents tell you not to use, "retard" will always be there where the non-thinkers seek ways to shock.

quote:

I just can't understand whole organizations supporting the extinction of a word. That's so wrongheaded.

More than wrongheaded, it seems to me to be ridiculous. Why even bother trying such a thing?

You might be able to expunge the noun from polite conversation through shaming and shunning, but you can't dump the verb. In music, it means to slow down the tempo. In general usage, it means to slow down whatever process is being discussed.

Wordmatic

Speaking of euphemisms, Jon Stewart had a couple of segments on last night's show addressing this issue:

Redefinition Accomplished
and
Obama Rebranding

Wordmatic

reviving a thread

Here's an article in the Chicago Tribune about the "r" word. They've gathered more than 3,000 signatures from students who have pledged not to use it. That's hardly a "natural" evolution of words, is it?

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
They've gathered more than 3,000 signatures from students who have pledged not to use it. That's hardly a "natural" evolution of words, is it?

What's "natural"? I guess people make decisions about what words to use and not use all the time. Signing a pledge to not use a word seems as natural as any other decision.

Based on the photo in Kalleh's link, the "R" word outhg to be "Revealing.

quote:

What's "natural"? I guess people make decisions about what words to use and not use all the time. Signing a pledge to not use a word seems as natural as any other decision.

Do you think so, goofy? How many words do you think have changed because of signing a "pledge?" On the other hand, my Blog on "epicaricacy" is not a natural way to change words either, I know that.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
Do you think so, goofy? How many words do you think have changed because of signing a "pledge?"

Probably none. It doesn't work, but it's natural. It's a decision about how to use language, and people have always been making decisions about how to use their language. The Sanskrit grammarian Pāṇini apparently made some prescriptions on how to use Sanskrit "correctly", and apparently there's an example of usage advice in Sumerian. I guess what I'm trying to say is I don't see the point in making a distinction between natural and artificial ways of language change.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: goofy,

There are cases of pronunciation of words changing based on spelling. For example, purely phonetically, it's hard to imagine a rule where null becomes t, as it did in perfect and often, yet it happened.

It's called spelling pronunciation, when the spelling of a word influences the pronunciation. The h in habit, hectic, history, horror, human was not pronounced at first, since the words were borrowed from French. But increased literacy influenced the pronunciation, and /h/ was added.

But not in all English dialects. One still finds those who drop the "H." In US English, "herb" is "erb" for most of us.

The Romans had trouble with their aitches, too. Cf. arena for harena 'sand; arena; place of battle'.

I have a friend who still doesn't pronounce the h in human. Drives me crazy. (I know, Geoff, it's a short ride.)

Short ride for me? Yeah...

Hey, Tinman, PM me, will you? I can't find your email address.

quote:

Originally posted by Geoff:
Short ride for me? Yeah...

I just beat you to the punch.

quote:

Hey, Tinman, PM me, will you? I can't find your email address.

Good. I bet Asa Lovejoy has it.

quote:

Probably none. It doesn't work, but it's natural. It's a decision about how to use language, and people have always been making decisions about how to use their language.

I suppose it's something like the institute they have in France for monitoring their language.

quote:

I have a friend who still doesn't pronounce the h in human.

My husband doesn't pronounce the h in human or many words beginning with h. It's odd because we both were raised in the midwest.

quote:

Good. I bet Asa Lovejoy has it.

"Fear of a word (name) increases fear of the thing itself." ~ Albus Dumbledore

quote:

Originally posted by wordmatic:
You might be able to expunge the noun from polite conversation through shaming and shunning, but you can't dump the verb. In music, it means to slow down the tempo. In general usage, it means to slow down whatever process is being discussed.

Wordmatic

For the reason Wordmatic pointed out, this is a wrong-headed usage. In every other instance that which is retarded can be sped up; not so with humans.

quote:

In every other instance that which is retarded can be sped up; not so with humans.

Perhaps you should examine the excellent work that has been done to enable those with learning disabilities to keep up with their peers before making such all-inclusive, even dunderheaded, statements.

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:

quote:

In every other instance that which is retarded can be sped up; not so with humans.

Perhaps you should examine the excellent work that has been done to enable those with learning disabilities to keep up with their peers before making such all-inclusive, even dunderheaded, statements.

MY Post may have been incomplete but not dunderheaded. In every other use of the word, a mechanism or thing can be sped up and slowed at will by an outside force; not so humans. My enterprise is the world's largest non-sheltered employer of the challenged and I've worked alongside them for 23 years. In most cases they achieve a much higher % of their potential than ordinary folks, earn the same salaries and fringes and are not treated as "different" by anyone. We do not employ the profoundly retarded, about whom your remarks doubtless apply. My argument was against the peculiar use of this particular word for humans; another word should be invented or invoked to cover such situations in humans.

quote:

Originally posted by zmježd:
The Romans had trouble with their aitches, too. Cf. arena for harena 'sand; arena; place of battle'.

I know this has been carried over to Spanish; the other Romance languages as well?

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:

quote:

In every other instance that which is retarded can be sped up; not so with humans.

Perhaps you should examine the excellent work that has been done to enable those with learning disabilities to keep up with their peers before making such all-inclusive, even dunderheaded, statements.

According to recent research and understanding of Attention Deficit Disorder, many of us who are so afflicted can be sped up through appropriate psychotherapeutic drugs and/or coaching. In my own case I was once a Mensa member, yet I can't understand higher mathematics. Stupid? No. Retarded? Yes. Thus, Jazz, you're half right in my own case.

I know this has been carried over to Spanish; the other Romance languages as well?

Dropping aitches in languages is pretty common because the sound of an aitch is not much and its absence even less. Aitch dropping in Latin was viewed as a vulgarism, and because of that, some tended to overcompensate and add aitch where they did not exist, which was the case in harena s'and'. In Spanish, French, and Italian, written aitches don't usually have an associated sound. The origin of many aitches in Castillian Spanish is from an original Latin f: thus hijo < filius, higo < ficus, etc. There are two kinds of h- in French, muet 'silent' and aspire 'aspirated'. In spite of their names, neither is pronounced, but one partakes in liaison and the other does not. For example, in les haches the s in the definite article is not pronounced, but in les heures it would be. In both words the h- has no pronunciation.