7 ms·
First English dictionary of ancient Greek since Victorian era spares no blushes
- Grustaf 5y agoThis is fantastic news, even if I never had any complaints about Liddell Scott. It’s interesting to note that while they stopped using euphemisms for words like “fuck”, they seemed to have removed references to homosexuality. Different times, different hangups.
- microtherion 5y agoThe "gay" of "gay women" did not mean "homosexual" back then, that meaning is not documented even for men before the 1920s, and for women even later: https://greensdictofslang.com/entry/pgc2e4q https://greensdictofslang.com/entry/pgc2e4q What they meant was probably "promiscuous" or in some other form "leading an immoral lifestyle": https://greensdictofslang.com/entry/bzyd5jq https://greensdictofslang.com/entry/bzyd5jq That might make it a bit more plausible why this epithet was removed.
- vincent-manis 5y agoOr, given that 19th c. “gay” had a multiplicity of meanings, the intended meaning might have been something like “women who wore flashy clothes”.
- cafard 5y agoYou are referring to the bit about "shoes worn by gay women"? I took that to mean "worn by courtesans".
- Grustaf 5y agoI suppose. But they also censored “worn by fops”…
- phaemon 5y agoThey didn't censor it, they fixed it. There is no evidence that this slipper was "worn by fops" other than the faulty Victorian dictionary that they were fixing.
- Grustaf 5y agoWhy would it be “faulty”? The paragraph starts out describing how “antiquated and offensive language” was removed.
- phaemon 5y agoWhy wouldn't it be? Old dictionaries are riddled with errors and mistranslations. βλαύτη is just a slipper. Not a slipper worn by fops. Not a slipper worn by lesbians. Not a slipper worn by aliens. Just a slipper. Why do you keep insisting that the Professors are wrong and that this "worn by fops" translation should be retained? Are you an expert in Ancient Greek translation and you're sure they have it wrong?
- Grustaf 5y agoThe article gives βλαύτη as an example of a word whose definition was updated in order to remove offensive language. They're not saying the old definition was incorrect, there is no indication of that. I'm no expert, but I did study 2 years of full time Greek at uni. I don't specifically about βλαύτη, but I do know that berating effeminate or overly vain men would not be out of character for any Greek author.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- phaemon 5y agoThe article was written by a journalist. The dictionary was written by the Professors. If they say that their definition is better I'm going with that above both a journalist and a second year student unless you provide something a little more compelling evidence-wise.
- JoeyBananas 5y ago> Antiquated and offensive language also gets a makeover. While Liddell and Scott defined βλαύτη (blaute) as “a kind of slipper worn by fops”, in the Cambridge Greek Lexicon it is described as “a kind of simple footwear, slipper”; κροκωτός (krokotos) is no longer defined as “a saffron-coloured robe worn by gay women”, but as a “saffron gown (worn by women)”. Does anyone else see the irony here? The article claims that these scholars are undoing damage done by prudish Victorian translators, but they're really just creating a dictionary that's prudish in a different way.
- Jiocus 5y agoI think what the original dictionary did, was describing an ancient term e.g. κροκωτός (krokotos) with a then contemporary occurence i.e. “a saffron-coloured robe worn by gay women”. The latter which may well have been a misconception or prejudice. “Fop became a pejorative term for a foolish man excessively concerned with his appearance and clothes in 17th century England.”[1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fop
- Grustaf 5y agoThey could replace fop with another word that is not pejorative, but why completely remove it?
- Jiocus 5y agoIt's not the actual problem, it's just irrelevant. The reference doesn't make sense to describe the actual kind of shoe. The original description doesn't provide a real distinction about the sandal in question, if there ever was one. The authors seem to have concluded from the works, that it was merely a sandal and that nothing points one way or another about its nature. Edit, My reading of the original entry was that it doesn't describe what sandal an ancient Greek equivalent of 'fop' used. The entry then, must have described an 18th-19th century contemporary feature.
- Grustaf 5y ago
- OldGoodNewBad 5y agoBut how accurate is it? Is it diverse and raunchy just for the sake of it? I’ll wait for an actual academic review from somebody who has been in the field for at least 40 years.
- sorokod 5y agoThe article mentions James Diggle [1] and Robin Osborne [2] as some of the authors. Have you got any specific concerns regarding these two gentlemen? [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Diggle https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Diggle [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Osborne https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Osborne
- OldGoodNewBad 5y ago>some of I’ll wait for a proper academic book review. Anyway this new book that’s being promoted has a paltry number of entries compared to Liddell. Newer is often not better.
- cafard 5y agoDoesn't it aim to compete with the abridged version? At this point, I'm being asked to subscribe, so I won't
- OldGoodNewBad 5y agoI dunno. Does it? You seem to know…
- CRConrad 5y agoSecond paragraph: > The late scholar John Chadwick first came up with the idea to update HG Liddell and Robert Scott’s 1889 dictionary, the Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, in 1997. An abridged version of a lexicon published in 1843, the Liddell and Scott had never been revised, and is packed with antiquated terms and modestly Victorian translations of the more colourful ancient Greek words. Despite this, it remains the most commonly used reference work for students in English schools and universities.
- NemuriBaku 5y agoReferring to a "need" in a pointedly vague way whose meaning had to be inferred from context used to be a euphemistic way of referring to all kinds of biological imperatives. It is important to remember that this use isn't common everywhere. In particular, "do one's need" is unrelated to "do the needful".
- sorokod 5y agoThe project homepage: https://www.classics.cam.ac.uk/research/projects/glp https://www.classics.cam.ac.uk/research/projects/glp
- jhanschoo 5y ago> This article was amended on 28 May 2021. An earlier version misspelled the Latin βινέω as“βίνέω”. Also, the headline was changed to remove a reference to the dictionary being the “first English dictionary of ancient Greek since the Victorian era”. When the amendment needs an amendment...