[Ads-l] newly "offensive" term

[David Wilton]

But the association is not arbitrary. There are millions of Americans whose ancestors were quite literally forcibly migrated to this country in chains. There is nothing arbitrary about it. Applying this rationale to "chain store" would be an arbitrary association.

I do not ascribe racist thinking to Trump and his associates when they use the term. (I don't think he's bright enough to imagine that it might be offensive.) But the request that they stop using the term is a reasonable one.

Whether or not "obscene" is an appropriate descriptor is, as Potter Stewart said, in the eye of the beholder. (It certainly doesn't fit the legal definition of "obscene," but the general sense is a different story and a matter of what one finds offensive and by how much.)


-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Jonathan Lighter
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 4:12 PM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADS-L] newly "offensive" term

The issue is not whether the use of "chain migration" instead of "family reunification" is politically tendentious.  One could argue that both phrases are politically tendentious.

The point of interest is that the sequence of sounds "chain migration" is being described as "obscene" on the basis of arbitrary association.


JL


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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