[Ads-l] sexist "crazy"

[Amy West]

On 3/26/16 12:00 AM, ADS-L automatic digest system wrote:
> Date:    Fri, 25 Mar 2016 07:15:20 +0000
> From:    "Arnold M. Zwicky"<zwicky at STANFORD.EDU>
> Subject: Re: sexist "crazy"
>
>> >On Mar 24, 2016, at 11:52 PM, Mark Mandel<thnidu at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> >
>> >---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
>> >Sender:       American Dialect Society<ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> >Poster:       Mark Mandel<thnidu at GMAIL.COM>
>> >Subject:      Re: sexist "crazy"
>> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> >Hey, Arnold, a terminological question: what's wrong with "restrictive" and
>> >"nonrestrictive"?
> the terminology is traditional, and it's not evil, but people tend to have trouble using it appropriately. so some people in the syntax business have proposed other terminology.
>
> arnold
Yep. Pullum & Huddleston's _Student's Intro to English Grammar_ (based 
on CGEL) uses the terminology & idea of integrated & non-integrated 
relative clauses, for example, instead of restrictive/non-restrictive. 
(And my Russian ESL student found that way of understanding them helpful.)

---Amy West

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org