5 ms·

Just a periodic reminder that 'Beyond the Pale' is a pro-colonialist phrase that many believe was was part of Britain's Centuries-long campaign to eliminate Iri

by TRDRVR 2y ago

Just a periodic reminder that 'Beyond the Pale' is a pro-colonialist phrase that many believe was was part of Britain's Centuries-long campaign to eliminate Irish culture. https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/12/beyond-the-pale.html https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/12/beyond-the-pale.h...

tgv 2y ago
Is that one of those "it becomes true if you repeat it often enough?" There's at least one other attribution, and it's probably just as made up.
selwoot 2y ago
That's the exact opposite of what the link you included says. From https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/12/beyond-the-pale.html https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/12/beyond-the-pale.h... As for the relationship between the two expressions, the OED has this to say: “The theory that the origin of the phrase [‘beyond the pale’] relates to any of several specific regions, such as the area of Ireland formerly called the Pale … or the Pale of Settlement in Russia … is not supported by the early historical evidence and is likely to be a later rationalization.”
- wrs 2y ago
  Also from the article: a “pale” is a fence. “Beyond the pale” used to require a suffix (e.g., “beyond the pale of reason”) but eventually by itself started to be short for “beyond the pale of acceptable behavior”.
  - TRDRVR 2y ago
    And what were those fences specifically used for pray tell.
    - wrs 2y ago
      Metaphorical boundaries of things like reason and acceptable behavior. “Beyond the pale” means outside the fence. Being “beyond the Pale of Settlement” (that is, outside the ghetto) would be a good thing.
- TRDRVR 2y ago
  You have successfully repeated the opinion of the Oxford English Dictionary after reading an entire article about how the British used Pales to colonize areas and define boundaries, but I'm not sure it's as cut and dry as you want it to be.
  - zug_zug 2y ago
    Dude it was your source. Take the L and don't cite sources you haven't read going forward.
    - TRDRVR 2y ago
      Please don't make personal attacks like that on this forum, it's against the rules. So is claiming someone didn't read a source when you disagree with their interpretation. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - zug_zug 2y ago
        I'm saying you didn't read the source because you cited a source and it clearly contradicted what you said. I don't know why you're still typing, you're not convincing anybody, you're not getting any karma, and nobody is gonna respect you more for refusing to acknowledge how blatantly wrong you are. The best you can do here is admit (to yourself) you screwed up and that you have a lot of trouble admitting when you're wrong, and then working on that character flaw -- your life will go a lot smoother.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
arduanika 2y ago
That claim is not supported in the source you linked. In fact, it's directly contradicted several times. For example, toward the end, it quotes the OED: "The theory that the origin of the phrase [‘beyond the pale’] relates to any of several specific regions, such as the area of Ireland formerly called the Pale … or the Pale of Settlement in Russia … is not supported by the early historical evidence and is likely to be a later rationalization.” Throughout, your source draws a distinction between the histories of the separate phrases "beyond the pale" and "pale of settlement". So I guess your statement might be true in the narrow sense that "many believe" the false etymology, just as you can find many who believe that the earth is flat. But that's not a good reason to go around chiding people for using a common expression.
- TRDRVR 2y ago
  What about the link contradicts the point that it's pro-colonialist? The etymology is in doubt for any particular area, not the concept of what a pale was and how it was used to colonize. That is the point of "many believe." Also keep in mind that the major doubter is the Oxford English Dictionary...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - arduanika 2y ago
    Hmm, so if you're interested in my answer, I guess I would ask you how you want to proceed. Do we want to accept that OED is an trustworthy catalog of etymological facts, or not? If not, why? Do you think the quotes it pulls from the 1700's are fabricated? Do you think it's suppressing an earlier usage of "pale of settlement"? What is your claim, exactly? You're the one whose source was quoting from OED, so you tell me. It'll be easier if we're starting from a shared ground truth.
    - TRDRVR 2y ago
      No I just think all those quotes reference colonization. Many people believe that specifically the Irish Pale popularized the statement, but the OED aren't among them. What are we disagreeing about?
justin_oaks 2y ago
Just a periodic reminder that the origin or words or phrases doesn't have bearing on their meaning today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy
- TRDRVR 2y ago
  Incorrect from a formal logic standpoint. It doesn't necessarily have bearing, but you cannot generalize the way you are doing. Then no word would mean anything.
DiggyJohnson 2y ago
And who cares if it was? I don't see a movement of the Irish to eradicate this phrase.
- TRDRVR 2y ago
  Isn't this a forum for the intellectually curious? I made no call to action. I guess I should have known any time the information is something certain people would consider 'woke' it elicits a strong emotional reaction beyond the information itself. My bad.
  - arduanika 2y ago
    Indeed, we're even curious enough to read your link! And to discover that it says the opposite of what you claimed! What you're seeing is in fact a strong emotional reaction to misinformation. And your implicit call to action was crystal clear. Don't be coy.
CoastalCoder 2y ago
Speaking as an Irishman, please be comforted to know that I truly don't care about the original meaning (whatever it truly was) of the phrase.
- TRDRVR 2y ago
  As someone else who doesn't deal in identity politics, please know I don't care what you think of it and was trying to share information on a forum for the intellectually curious.
  - CoastalCoder 2y ago
    I thought you might be arguing your position because you wanted to stand up for persons like me. It appears I was mistaken, and I apologise.
stanleykm 2y ago
I’m willing to believe that because so much of our language is tainted in that way, however the blog you are referencing here doesn’t support what you are saying. You mention “many people” believe this so surely there are better sources.
clarity20 2y ago
There isn't much to "colonialism". It's just the establishment of colonies. In the many historical cases where the subject peoples were cannibals, I would have supported colonization.
shrimp_emoji 2y ago
It makes sense you tacitly think colonialism is necessarily bad.

by TRDRVR 2y ago

tgv 2y ago

Is that one of those "it becomes true if you repeat it often enough?" There's at least one other attribution, and it's probably just as made up.

selwoot 2y ago

That's the exact opposite of what the link you included says. From https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/12/beyond-the-pale.html https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/12/beyond-the-pale.h... As for the relationship between the two expressions, the OED has this to say: “The theory that the origin of the phrase [‘beyond the pale’] relates to any of several specific regions, such as the area of Ireland formerly called the Pale … or the Pale of Settlement in Russia … is not supported by the early historical evidence and is likely to be a later rationalization.”

wrs 2y ago
Also from the article: a “pale” is a fence. “Beyond the pale” used to require a suffix (e.g., “beyond the pale of reason”) but eventually by itself started to be short for “beyond the pale of acceptable behavior”.
- TRDRVR 2y ago
  And what were those fences specifically used for pray tell.
  - wrs 2y ago
    Metaphorical boundaries of things like reason and acceptable behavior. “Beyond the pale” means outside the fence. Being “beyond the Pale of Settlement” (that is, outside the ghetto) would be a good thing.
TRDRVR 2y ago
You have successfully repeated the opinion of the Oxford English Dictionary after reading an entire article about how the British used Pales to colonize areas and define boundaries, but I'm not sure it's as cut and dry as you want it to be.
- zug_zug 2y ago
  Dude it was your source. Take the L and don't cite sources you haven't read going forward.
  - TRDRVR 2y ago
    Please don't make personal attacks like that on this forum, it's against the rules. So is claiming someone didn't read a source when you disagree with their interpretation. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - zug_zug 2y ago
      I'm saying you didn't read the source because you cited a source and it clearly contradicted what you said. I don't know why you're still typing, you're not convincing anybody, you're not getting any karma, and nobody is gonna respect you more for refusing to acknowledge how blatantly wrong you are. The best you can do here is admit (to yourself) you screwed up and that you have a lot of trouble admitting when you're wrong, and then working on that character flaw -- your life will go a lot smoother.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

arduanika 2y ago

That claim is not supported in the source you linked. In fact, it's directly contradicted several times. For example, toward the end, it quotes the OED: "The theory that the origin of the phrase [‘beyond the pale’] relates to any of several specific regions, such as the area of Ireland formerly called the Pale … or the Pale of Settlement in Russia … is not supported by the early historical evidence and is likely to be a later rationalization.” Throughout, your source draws a distinction between the histories of the separate phrases "beyond the pale" and "pale of settlement". So I guess your statement might be true in the narrow sense that "many believe" the false etymology, just as you can find many who believe that the earth is flat. But that's not a good reason to go around chiding people for using a common expression.

TRDRVR 2y ago
What about the link contradicts the point that it's pro-colonialist? The etymology is in doubt for any particular area, not the concept of what a pale was and how it was used to colonize. That is the point of "many believe." Also keep in mind that the major doubter is the Oxford English Dictionary...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- arduanika 2y ago
  Hmm, so if you're interested in my answer, I guess I would ask you how you want to proceed. Do we want to accept that OED is an trustworthy catalog of etymological facts, or not? If not, why? Do you think the quotes it pulls from the 1700's are fabricated? Do you think it's suppressing an earlier usage of "pale of settlement"? What is your claim, exactly? You're the one whose source was quoting from OED, so you tell me. It'll be easier if we're starting from a shared ground truth.
  - TRDRVR 2y ago
    No I just think all those quotes reference colonization. Many people believe that specifically the Irish Pale popularized the statement, but the OED aren't among them. What are we disagreeing about?

justin_oaks 2y ago

Just a periodic reminder that the origin or words or phrases doesn't have bearing on their meaning today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy

TRDRVR 2y ago
Incorrect from a formal logic standpoint. It doesn't necessarily have bearing, but you cannot generalize the way you are doing. Then no word would mean anything.

DiggyJohnson 2y ago

And who cares if it was? I don't see a movement of the Irish to eradicate this phrase.

TRDRVR 2y ago
Isn't this a forum for the intellectually curious? I made no call to action. I guess I should have known any time the information is something certain people would consider 'woke' it elicits a strong emotional reaction beyond the information itself. My bad.
- arduanika 2y ago
  Indeed, we're even curious enough to read your link! And to discover that it says the opposite of what you claimed! What you're seeing is in fact a strong emotional reaction to misinformation. And your implicit call to action was crystal clear. Don't be coy.

CoastalCoder 2y ago

Speaking as an Irishman, please be comforted to know that I truly don't care about the original meaning (whatever it truly was) of the phrase.

TRDRVR 2y ago
As someone else who doesn't deal in identity politics, please know I don't care what you think of it and was trying to share information on a forum for the intellectually curious.
- CoastalCoder 2y ago
  I thought you might be arguing your position because you wanted to stand up for persons like me. It appears I was mistaken, and I apologise.

stanleykm 2y ago

I’m willing to believe that because so much of our language is tainted in that way, however the blog you are referencing here doesn’t support what you are saying. You mention “many people” believe this so surely there are better sources.

clarity20 2y ago

There isn't much to "colonialism". It's just the establishment of colonies. In the many historical cases where the subject peoples were cannibals, I would have supported colonization.

shrimp_emoji 2y ago

It makes sense you tacitly think colonialism is necessarily bad.