"jew" as adjective and compound nouns vs. adj. + n.?
Joel S. Berson
Berson at ATT.NET
Thu May 16 00:34:36 UTC 2013
A correction, interspersed below.
At 5/14/2013 10:14 PM, Joel S. Berson wrote:
>At 5/14/2013 02:42 PM, Laurence Horn wrote:
>>On May 14, 2013, at 12:33 PM, Joel S. Berson wrote:
>>
>> > Is "Jew butcher" a compound
>>
>>Yes
>> > -- "a butcher of Jews"?? -
>>
>>no
>>
>>There's no reason to assume that the meaning of a compound will be
>>transparent.
>
>I don't make any such assumption. I know the specific meaning of the
>various C1.a and C1.b compounds of "Jew, n." -- or I learn them from
>the OED. The C1.a compounds to me are all adj. + noun -- I could
>replace "Jew" with its corresponding adjective "Jewish" and have a
>two-word thing that was good English -- grammatical and semantically
>the same.
I did not mean to say "semantically the same:, but rather,
"semantically understandable." As Larry pointed out, "Jewish lawyer"
and "Jew lawyer" have distinctly different undertones.
Larry wrote today:
>This is why it makes more sense to distinguish adjectives modifiers
>from nominal modifiers grammatically, whence the diagnostics I
>alluded to below (e.g. "the lawyer looks/seems/sounds Jewish"--OK,
>so adjective; "the lawyer looks/seems/sounds Jew"--not OK, so noun).
Do I understand this to mean that Larry now regards some of the C1
compounds for "Jew, n." as adj. + n. (and others as not)?
Joel
>The C1.b compounds to me are something else -- in all of
>them if I replaced "Jew" with "Jewish" I would get something
>semantically confusing. E.g., "Jewish hatred" -- is that Jews'
>hatred of something, or somebody's hatred of Jews?
>
>And I come back to the OED's "General attrib. OR as ADJ." Emphasis added.
>
>>"Olive oil" is oil of olives, "baby oil" isn't oil of babies, or
>>compare "alligator shoes" vs "horseshoes". A "monkey man" is a man
>>who is (also) a monkey, but a "child psychologist" isn't a
>>psychologist who is also a child. Judith Levi, Pam Downing, and
>>others have provided non-exhaustive classifications of compounds by
>>meaning, with such categories as (from Downing):
>>
>> Whole-part (duck
>>foot) Place (Eastern Oregon meal)
>> Half-half (giraffe-cow)
>>Source (vulture shit)
>> Part-whole (pendulum-clock) Product
>> (honey glands)
>> Composition (stone
>>furniture) User (flea wheelbarrow)
>> Comparison (pumpkin
>>bus) Purpose (hedge hatchet)
>> Time (summer
>>dust) Occupation (coffee man)
>>
>>No reason "Jew lawyer" wouldn't be an example of the monkey-man or,
>>better, nurse-midwife, kind rather than a hedge-clipper
>>kind. Notice that the "hedge-clipper" or "duck slaughterer"
>>relation seems distinct from all of Downing's categories; as noted,
>>the list is non-exhaustive. Is "nurse" an adjective in
>>"nurse-midwife"? Or "child" in the unlikely but possible
>>interpretation of "child psychiatrist"? This is why I think the
>>grammatical criteria for adjectival vs. nominal status are more
>>reliable than meaning-based ones. And I'm a semanticist.
>
>I don't care about such classifications of compounds by meaning
>(especially if they're non-exhaustive!), I only care about each
>individual compound. Given its meaning, does it act like adj. + noun?
>
>Joel
>
>
>>Incidentally, I think that's why it's natural to take "Jew lawyer"
>>to be racist and/or offensive; it plays off the function of nouns as
>>categorizers/pigeon-holers and thus ideally suited for slurs and
>>epithets, as we've discussed in past threads:
>>
>>I'm not a Jew, I'm Jewish.
>>He's not a deserter, he deserted.
>>She lost, but that doesn't make her a loser.
>>Don't call them diabetics, they're persons with diabetes.
>>etc. etc. (discussed by Bolinger in _Language--The Loaded Weapon_
>>and others since, including in our archives)
>>
>>LH
>>
>> > - or an adj. +
>> > noun -- "a Jewish butcher"? (Compare "Jew-drowning" under C2, which
>> > I do see as a compound -- it can't be "Jewish drowning".) Similarly
>> > for "Jew pedlar", and probably others. The OED seems either to
>> > concede or be uncertain -- "C1. General attrib. *or as adj.* That is
>> > a Jew; *Jewish*." (Emphasis added.)
>> >
>> > Is there a case for separation of the C1.a compounds, for all of
>> > which it seems that "Jew" acts like an adjective and could be
>> > replaced by "Jewish", from the C1.b. compounds, where that is not the
>> > case? E.g., a "Jew bill" (in C1.b) is not "a Jewish bill", but
>> > rather "a bill 'Of or relating to Jews.' "
>> >
>> > But if Larry is right, how then would one make the OED more
>> > user-friendly? If sophisticated dictionary users like myself and
>> > George don't think to look for adjectival uses of nouns under (the
>> > late-appearing) "Compounds", -- and especially when a "Quick search"
>> > doesn't turn up any entries with "adj." characterizing them, just
>> > "n." and "v." -- what about the ordinary yahoo?
>> >
>> > Joel
>> >
>> > At 5/14/2013 11:52 AM, Laurence Horn wrote:
>> >> I would defend the label. These are indeed, I would argue, nominal
>> >> compounds rather than adjective + noun phrases. "Jew" in such cases
>> >> doesn't pass the diagnostics for adjective-hood:
>> >>
>> >> That lawyer seems {Jewish/*Jew}.
>> >> Despite Brendan's proselytizing, Moises remained {Jewish/*Jew}.
>> >> It's very kosher/Jewish/*Jew
>> >>
>> >> etc.
>> >>
>> >> LH
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On May 14, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Joel S. Berson wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > George, look way down under "Jew, n." for "Compounds" -- C1 is
>> >> > "General attrib. or as adj." I've missed this disguised and low (on
>> >> > the page) artifice of the OED before, for this and other nouns. I
>> >> > think the heading in such cases should be "n. and adj.".
>> >> >
>> >> > Joel
>> >> >
>> >> > At 5/14/2013 10:37 AM, George Thompson wrote:
>> >> >> Seems strange, but such is the case, if the on-line OED doesn't
>> >> mislead me.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> JEW BEEF. -- The subscribers offer their services
>>to merchants
>> >> >> who are in the habit of trading to the West Indies, that in order to
>> >> >> complete a well assorted cargo for those markets, it will
>>prove to be an
>> >> >> acquisition to apply to them for the above article; they are
>> in 5 or 10
>> >> >> gallon kegs. *** Levy & Lyons, 26, White-hall street. N. B. Regular
>> >> >> certificates will be given.
>> >> >> Mercantile Advertiser, November 1, 1804, p. 2, col. 2
>> >> >>
>> >> >> HDAS and Jonathon Green's dictionary have "jew" as a disparaging
>> >> adjective,
>> >> >> which isn't the case here. Their examples are generally in
>>the form of "a
>> >> >> Jew xyz" which translates into "a Jew who is an xyz" -- a Jew lawyer,
>> >> >> perhaps. Here, it meant "kosher", and the ad was placed by a
>>Jewish firm.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> GAT
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> George A. Thompson
>> >> >> Author of A Documentary History of "The African Theatre", Northwestern
>> >> >> Univ. Pr., 1998, but nothing much since then
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> >> >
>> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> >>
>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l
mailing list