<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=546212120-22022005></SPAN>T<SPAN
class=546212120-22022005>hank you for the information,
Thapelo,</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=546212120-22022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=546212120-22022005>I have to get
the book. Are you not doing research in Bamberg/Germany? Maybe we could
meet</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=546212120-22022005>in the near
future there.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=546212120-22022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=546212120-22022005>Fritz</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=546212120-22022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=546212120-22022005></SPAN><SPAN
class=546212120-22022005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=3> </FONT></SPAN><BR><BR></DIV></FONT></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>In Literary Theory Terry Eagleton uses a Marxist
theoretical approach to argue that the role of literature is to challenge the
status quo and bring about social change. Part of his argument is that no
piece of literature can claim to be functionally impartial,
unbiased, or neutral. Literature either challenges the status quo or endorses
it. He argues that those who talk of "art for art's sake" and the so-called
political indifferent writings are inadvertently perpetuating the status
quo since they are not challenging it - sort of Bushism - 'either you are
with us or against us' kind of approach - no middle
ground!! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>So I simply seized on this general argument to
question whether the role of a lexicographer could also be seen in the same
way in dealing with offensive and derogatory entries. Is the act
of merely explaining what racists mean by using racist language giving
them scope and a platform on which they could perceive their
racist language as acceptable and normal [because they
appear in a dictionary - obviously a wrong conclusion, but the one that
is common in settling arguments on whether words belong to a specific
language]. Are words like "kaffir" in South Africa and "nigger" in the States
OK in a dictionary as long as they are marked, offensive, or their entry in
dictionaries may reinforce hatred and encourage divisions? <SPAN
class=546212120-22022005><FONT face=Arial> </FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=546212120-22022005></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN class=546212120-22022005> </SPAN>Hanks
takes a position that is common amongst corpora-dependent lexicographers - if
it's very rare or doesn't exist in broad-based corpora like the BNC one
would be inclined not to include it as a di! ctionary entry.
Obviously corpus supported arguments lean on the quality of the
corpora itself - badly constructed corpora yield bad word statistics.
This leads us to a different question which I will only raise and not
discuss: What are good corpora for lexicography? I leave this question, though
interesting, since it may lead us into a rather long maze - serving only as an
interesting distraction.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>The argument for leaving out a word just because it
is offensive to the tribes of Scotland, England and Wales, doesn't seem very
convincing, especially when the word is in common use. Leaving it out
suggests that it does not exist or it is rare. But what about dictionaries for
schools? Parents may strongly disapprove of certain kinds of words (swear
words, curses, insults, scatological terms and others) that children may
be exposed to in dictionaries. Fritz, I agree with you that the
boundaries are fuzzy and it decisions may end up varying from publisher to
publisher and from one culture to another.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>Fritz Goerling <Fritz_Goerling@sil.org></I></B>
wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005></SPAN>W<SPAN class=890371717-22022005><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=3>ayne and
Thapelo,</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=890371717-22022005><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=3>Where do we draw the line? If we have a
politically correct dictionary, </FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>certain entries will be marked sexist, racist, or
homophobic or not even</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>be mentioned. Of course, there are dictionaries of
certain subcultures,</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>slang or argot
dictionaries.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>But if we want to produce a GENERAL dictionary for
the whole population</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>of an ethnic group, where do we draw the line about
what to include and/</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>or what to mark as slang etc.? The "positive social
role" you are talking </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>about, Wayne, cannot consist of
expunging </SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff><SPAN class=890371717-22022005>unwanted words and
expressions</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>("unwanted" by dictionary-makers who have a certain
political or whatever </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff><SPAN class=890371717-22022005>agenda; impartiality does not
really exist in these matters, as far I am</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>concerned).</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>Certain great books (the Bible) or authors
(Shakespeare) have enriched </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>the vocabulary of English enormously. Can biassed
dictionary-makers </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>expurgate </SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT size=+0><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN class=890371717-22022005>the English language
because such and such expressions are </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>from the </SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT size=+0><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN class=890371717-22022005>Bible or from a
"white dead male" (Shakespeare)? A certain </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff><SPAN class=890371717-22022005>Thomas <I>Bowdler</I>, an
editor in Victorian times tried to rewrite Shakespeare,
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>removing all profanity so as not to offend the
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>sensibilities of the audiences
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>of his day (hence the term "to bowdlerize"). It did
not work.</DIV></SPAN></FONT></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>Thapelo, can you tell me more about Terry
Eagleton's position in the</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>chapter of "Literary
Theory"?</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005>Fritz Goerling</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=890371717-22022005>
<P>></P></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=890371717-22022005></SPAN><BR> </DIV></FONT></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thapelo,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>My own thought is that a thorough dictionary
can, and perhaps should, include all derogatory information, but I think
lexicographers can have a positive social role and clearly mark such
lexical entries as rascist.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Wayne</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>-----<BR>Wayne Leman<BR>Cheyenne website: <A
href="http://www.geocities.com/cheyenne_language">http://www.geocities.com/cheyenne_language</A></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>How would such derogatory information be represented in
dictionaries? "Its all Greek to me", may not be as offensive as "work
like a Black" and I would think that "work like a slave" would also be
less offensive. And does a lexicographer have a responsibility in
challenging steretypes through dictionary entries? Or his role should be
better seen as that of a scientist from without looking in as it were,
merely describing the uses of language that he sees. But does
impartiality really exist in these matters or one is either
challenging the status quo or endorsing it (a Terry Eagleton position in
the later chapter of Literary Theory )? Put differently, are
certain entries like 'work like Black' racist when used by racist
communities and also racist when entered and discussed by
lexicographers? In this case the lexicographer guilty of participating
in the development and sustainance of racist views. On the other hand,
would it be accurate to leave ! ! them out from a dictionary?<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| --></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#00007f><STRONG>Thapelo Otlogetswe <BR></STRONG></FONT><FONT
color=#00007f>Information Technology Research Institute</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#00007f>University of Brighton </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#00007f>Lewes Road, Brighton <BR>BN2 4GJ,
<STRONG>England</STRONG> <BR></FONT><FONT color=#444f75>Tel: (+44) 1273 642912
(office) <BR><FONT
color=#00007f> </FONT>(+44) 1273 642908
(fax) <BR></FONT><FONT
color=#ff0000>http://www.itri.brighton.ac.uk/~Thapelo.Otlogetswe/</FONT></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<BR><A
href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/security/*http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail/static/protection.html">Yahoo!
Mail</A> - You care about security. So do we.
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<br>
<tt><hr width="500">
<b>Yahoo! Groups Links</b><br>
<ul>
<li>To visit your group on the web, go to:<br><a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/</a><br>
<li>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<br><a href="mailto:lexicographylist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe">lexicographylist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br>
<li>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.
</ul>
</tt>
</br>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
</BODY></HTML>