=======================================================================
<p>
L O W L A N D S - L * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
<p>
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands.list@gmail.com
<p>
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.php
<p>
Posting: lowlands-l@listserv.linguistlist.org - lowlands.list@gmail.com
<p>
Commands ("signoff lowlands-l" etc.): listserv@listserv.net
<p>
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
<p>
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
<p>
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
<p>
Administration: lowlands.list@gmail.com or sassisch@yahoo.com
<p>
<p>
You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
text from the same account to listserv@listserv.linguistlist.org or
sign off at http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
<p>
<p>
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West) Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
<p>
=======================================================================
<div style="text-align: center; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">=========================================================================<br>L O W L A N D S - L - 14 May 2008 - Volume 06<br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">-------------------------------------------------------------------------</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Please set the encoding mode to Unicode (UTF-8).</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">If viewing this in a web browser, please click on</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">the html toggle at the bottom of the archived page </span><br style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">and switch your browser's character encoding to Unicode.</span><br>=========================================================================<br></div><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">From: </span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe"><span class="EP8xU" style="color: rgb(121, 6, 25);">Danette & John Howland</span> <span class="lDACoc"><<a href="mailto:dan_how@msn.com">dan_how@msn.com</a>></span></span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Subject: </span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe">LL-L "Semantics" 2008.05.15 (02) [E]<br><br></span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Lowlanders:</span><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="Ih2E3d">
<br>
<br>
Reinhard brings up an interesting point when he writes:<br><br><font style="background-color: rgb(51, 102, 255);">"It seems that the countable noun "man" (as distinct from uncountable and article-less "man" = "mankind") is retreating. <br>
<br>Its
use as "adult male human" seems to be retreating to scientific and
other "serious" areas, styles and registers. In casual speech, "guy"
seems to be the usual word of choice (not counting what seem to be
generational fashion words, currently "dude")."</font><br>
<br>
</div><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">As a
native U.S. English speaker I have some sense of the possible motives
for this. The word "guy" was once a pejorative and sarcastically
described a foppish man, similar to the manner in which "dude" drew
attention to a man's outlandish dress ("duds") and mannerisms. There
seems to be a continuum of acceptance in which a pejorative term meant
to abase someone becomes familiar and takes on a tone of mild sarcasm
and then good-natured humor (as in "You old hoss thief!"). When "guy"
reached this level of informal and common usage we forgot it was ever a
"put down" and applied it indiscriminately to our friends and to any
man (or woman, nowadays) who does not require formal mention. I am less
tolerant about this tendency than anyone I know and am annoyed when a
waiter refers to my party as "you guys" for the third or fourth time.
To me it is still inappropriately informal in that situation.</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"> </span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">"Man" may sound
awkward to many because of associations of "manhood," because it seems
too formal for the context or the code of the speaker, and because it
can sound simplistic or stilted like the wording of a children's story,
e.g. "The man in the yellow hat picked up the monkey."</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"> </span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Just my tuppence worth.</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"> </span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">John Howland</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">----------</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">From: </span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe"><span class="EP8xU" style="color: rgb(121, 6, 25);">Danette & John Howland</span> <span class="lDACoc"><<a href="mailto:dan_how@msn.com">dan_how@msn.com</a>></span></span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Subject: </span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe">LL-L "Semantics" 2008.05.15 (05) [E]<br><br></span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Heather gave the following examples:</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">(Quote) So for
example: " A lady called this morning with tickets for the Summer
Raffle" rather than " A woman called this morning with tickets for the
Summer Raffle"</p><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="Ih2E3d">
<p>But on the other
hand you would use: " A woman was knocked over by a hit and run driver
this morning" rather than "A lady was knocked over by a hit and run
driver this morning"</p>
</div><p style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">I can 'feel' the difference even tho' I can't quite quantify it.(End Quote)</p>
<p style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">I agree with this.
"Woman" frequently has the feel of journalistic reporting or a
distancing effect from the speaker. But this can also be made fun of
and turned around into something more affectionate. By adding a hint of
self-mockery "woman" becomes a title of endearment.</p>
<p style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">"Gentlemen" is also
used frivolously in a kind of role playing. Think of a group of
military officers during a briefing or a group of men at a 19th century
private club or stuffy board meeting. This playful usage makes it
palatable in cases where it might otherwise be a little embarrassing to
the speaker = too formal for comfort. I am a corrections officer at a
prison and hear the word used almost daily among staff members and even
toward prisoners. The double intention of the term allows it to sound
respectful and at the same time it is playful enough to relieve social
tension.</p>
<p style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Be well.</p>
<p style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">John Howland</p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe">----------<br><br></span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">From: </span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe"><span class="EP8xU" style="color: rgb(91, 16, 148);">Sandy Fleming</span> <span class="lDACoc"><<a href="mailto:sandy@scotstext.org">sandy@scotstext.org</a>></span></span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
Subject: </span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe">LL-L "Semantics" 2008.05.15 (02) [E]<br><br></span><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="Ih2E3d">> From: R. F. Hahn <<a href="mailto:sassisch@yahoo.com">sassisch@yahoo.com</a>><br>
> Subject: Semantics<br>
><br>
> Dear Lowlanders,<br>
><br>
> I find the phenomenon of semantic shift quite fascinating and feel<br>
> that more attention ought to be paid to it in etymological research.<br>
><br>
> I wonder if you agree with me about the following current shift<br>
> development in English and if you can provide more information. In<br>
> particular, I am interested to know whether or not this shift has<br>
> spread from US English to other dialects in the meantime, which would<br>
> not be surprising given the power of the US media.<br>
<br>
</div><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">I would say that the power of the US media to influence other Englishes</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
is mainly on countries where English is a second language, and people</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
are actually trying to improve their English through the media.</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
I don't think many people would say "guy" in the UK. In much of England</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
the equivalent word is "bloke", but then I would never use either of</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
these, because I'm Scottish!</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
I think the problem with the words "man" and "woman" is that they have a</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
distancing effect and people often seem to need more friendly versions</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
of these words. I don't know if that would mean they're receding - they</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
may just be playing their normal role as formal words that tend to have</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
cant versions for everyday speech.</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
"Man" in England is generally "bloke" - "fellow" is a bit old-fashioned</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
perhaps, while "fella" used to be common but I think it sounds too</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
"sixties" now.</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
In the north of England and the south of Scotland "chap" (or "chep" in</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
some regions) is common, as is "fellae" (fellow), while in the north of</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
Scotland we have "chiel".</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
Remember the old forties American films where "dame" seemed to be</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
becoming the word for "woman"? "Guy" does seem to have lasted a lot</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
better in the States!</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
Popular words for women do seem to come and go much more quickly than</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
those for men: "doll", "dame", "chick", "bird" and so on. Could this be</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
because women tend to object to being referred to in such terms more</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
than men do?</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
Do women often have specialised names where their male counterparts</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
don't? What's the male equivalent of "flapper", for example?</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
In Scots there tend to be some gender-free terms popularly applied to</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
people: "sowel" (soul), "body" (person). Paisley people are particularly</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
referred to as "Paisley bodies" (in this case pronounced "buddies"),</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
while Falkirk people are referred to as "Fawkirk bairns" (children).</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
But there's nae folk like Falkland folk: "gentleman" seems to have had a</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
chequered past. In the Middle Ages it meant a nobleman, as opposed to a</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
peasant, and you got fined more if you killed a gentleman than if you</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
killed a peasant!</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
I think the idea eventually got taken more literally as "gentle man" (or</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
the meaning of "gentle" changed: meaning a person of refined manners</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
(and was extended to the term "gentlewoman"). By Victorian times the</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
meaning was becoming rather fragmented - ideally it meant a chap who was</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
tolerant and understanding towards people who were different from</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
himself, or it could mean a chap who was just nice to "ladies" but</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
carried a cane partly for the purpose of thrashing any poor beggar who</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
got in his way or made too much noise, or looked at him!</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
In the sixties a man, if he wanted to be thought of as a gentleman, was</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
still expected to stand up when a woman entered the room, to always let</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
a woman go first (except when ascending a staircase) and to walk on the</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
outside of the pavement and so on. But by the seventies women were</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
decidedly starting to object to this sort of behaviour and for a while</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
it was a minefield if a chap didn't know which side of the fence a woman</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
was on. These days I don't even bother thinking about any of that and</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
just try to be polite to everyone indiscriminately!</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
Now "gentleman" just seems to be a polite way of referring to a man,</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
although my skin crawls when someone (other than my friends) refers to</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
_me_ that way!</span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" color="#888888"><br>
Sandy Fleming<br>
<a href="http://scotstext.org/" target="_blank">http://scotstext.org/</a></font><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe"><br></span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe"><br></span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
•
<p>
==============================END===================================
<p>
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l@listserv.linguistlist.org.
<p>
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
<p>
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
<p>
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l")
<p>
are to be sent to listserv@listserv.linguistlist.org or at
<p>
http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
<p>
*********************************************************************