TIL that some languages apparently have words inherently differentiating one's status as a citizen or resident of the entity versus a member of a particular ethnic or cultural group? I don't quite grasp the whole thing, although I heard the point being made. What's interesting to me is a) that there is such a thing, which seems very revealing of something about a culture that would need such concepts built into the language, and b) that there seem to be people who think it's inaccurate to interpret the word choice as meaningful. Firstly, since languages have all sorts of concepts built into them, many very specific to their primary culture of use, it seems reasonable that such a thing could exist. Not that I would have thought of it before, since I'm not from a culture where that sort of subtlety functions. Secondly, if that is, indeed, the subtlety of the word choices, where one essentially and inherently includes people, and the other excludes, then I'd kind o...
James nicoll mentioned this recently. And his commentary was along the lines of "she's suggest we trash our healthcare and legal system to shackle ourselves to a failed state that flirts with disaster by choice every few years, because of racism? No."
ReplyDeleteDavid Scotton : we'd take you as humanitarian aid recipients, but I think we'd need a few decades of education, at least, before we'd trust you to vote in our elections. Given how you vote in your own elections.
ReplyDeleteJohn Rowat *I* vote just fine in our elections given the choices available, TYVM. Unfortunately, there are a lot of idiots, even in California. (Especially in California?)
ReplyDelete