5 ms·

Yes, changing illegal to undocumented is just a language tactic to downplay the issue. I'm not sure it works that way because any negativity the change was lik

by talmand 12y ago

Yes, changing illegal to undocumented is just a language tactic to downplay the issue. I'm not sure it works that way because any negativity the change was likely to alter just gets transferred to the new word.

thaumasiotes 12y ago
Pffft, you probably think of "retarded" as some sort of vicious insult too.
- talmand 12y ago
  I reread my post to try to understand what you mean, but alas, I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
  - thaumasiotes 12y ago
    "Retarded", like "undocumented" of immigrants, originated as a euphemism meant to protect the people so labeled from the hurtful term in ordinary use for them (here, "stupid"). As you point out, it turned out not to be all that protective.
    - talmand 12y ago
      I understand this response, but can't still see how that relates to how you stated your first response.
      - thaumasiotes 12y ago
        My first response is phrased as an argument against your point, using what I thought was a well-known example that strongly supports your point. It's facetious. I've read of a philosopher who made the argument, "the theory of evolution can't be true, because if it were true, that would imply that someone could make a lot of money by replicating images of Elvis Presley." My comment has the same structure, but I'm already aware that the evidence directly contradicts the stated point. So "your theory of terms having negative valence based on their meaning (instead of arbitrarily) is incorrect, as can be seen by how the slow of wit gained new respect from society when the socially-enlightened term 'retarded' replaced the old, denigratory 'stupid'. According to your model, 'retarded' would be an insult because of its negative meaning."
jorgeleo 12y ago
The reason for the word change is because it is conceptually wrong The action of being in the country might be unlawful, but the person himself is not unlawful. The use of "undocumented" instead of any other word not a "tactic to downplay the issue", instead it express the lack of legal residence status is due to not been able to obtain documents to correct its residence status If we transfer the characteristic of the action to be a characteristic of the person then if you have drive above the speed limit, you are an illegal driver; and so on But don't worry, I am pretty sure ICE was waiting for him outside the court
- npizzolato 12y ago
  A person's actions should (and does, in my opinion) define them. Society does this all the time. A person who breaks the law and commits felonies has the title of felon. A person who does charity work has the title of philanthropist. A person who regularly speeds and does not pay attention to the road is a reckless driver. One can do many things and thus have many titles, but I fail to see why a person who immigrates illegally should not have the title of illegal immigrant.
- lsaferite 12y ago
  But the term is "illegal immigrant" and denotes a person that illegally entered or resides in a country. Changing it to "undocumented immigrant" makes it sound like a simple absence of documentation due to a procedural fault, but that's not the issue. Generally they entered illegally and in cases where they stay past a visa, that action is also illegal.
  - mithaler 12y ago
    You can argue that "undocumented immigrant" doesn't capture the actual meaning, but that doesn't make jorgeleo's point any less valid: the action is illegal, not the person.
    - talmand 12y ago
      But the person committed the action, so it doesn't seem unfair for the description to describe both. Much like how we use various descriptions to describe people based on their actions.

by talmand 12y ago

thaumasiotes 12y ago

Pffft, you probably think of "retarded" as some sort of vicious insult too.

talmand 12y ago
I reread my post to try to understand what you mean, but alas, I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
- thaumasiotes 12y ago
  "Retarded", like "undocumented" of immigrants, originated as a euphemism meant to protect the people so labeled from the hurtful term in ordinary use for them (here, "stupid"). As you point out, it turned out not to be all that protective.
  - talmand 12y ago
    I understand this response, but can't still see how that relates to how you stated your first response.
    - thaumasiotes 12y ago
      My first response is phrased as an argument against your point, using what I thought was a well-known example that strongly supports your point. It's facetious. I've read of a philosopher who made the argument, "the theory of evolution can't be true, because if it were true, that would imply that someone could make a lot of money by replicating images of Elvis Presley." My comment has the same structure, but I'm already aware that the evidence directly contradicts the stated point. So "your theory of terms having negative valence based on their meaning (instead of arbitrarily) is incorrect, as can be seen by how the slow of wit gained new respect from society when the socially-enlightened term 'retarded' replaced the old, denigratory 'stupid'. According to your model, 'retarded' would be an insult because of its negative meaning."

jorgeleo 12y ago

The reason for the word change is because it is conceptually wrong The action of being in the country might be unlawful, but the person himself is not unlawful. The use of "undocumented" instead of any other word not a "tactic to downplay the issue", instead it express the lack of legal residence status is due to not been able to obtain documents to correct its residence status If we transfer the characteristic of the action to be a characteristic of the person then if you have drive above the speed limit, you are an illegal driver; and so on But don't worry, I am pretty sure ICE was waiting for him outside the court

npizzolato 12y ago
A person's actions should (and does, in my opinion) define them. Society does this all the time. A person who breaks the law and commits felonies has the title of felon. A person who does charity work has the title of philanthropist. A person who regularly speeds and does not pay attention to the road is a reckless driver. One can do many things and thus have many titles, but I fail to see why a person who immigrates illegally should not have the title of illegal immigrant.
lsaferite 12y ago
But the term is "illegal immigrant" and denotes a person that illegally entered or resides in a country. Changing it to "undocumented immigrant" makes it sound like a simple absence of documentation due to a procedural fault, but that's not the issue. Generally they entered illegally and in cases where they stay past a visa, that action is also illegal.
- mithaler 12y ago
  You can argue that "undocumented immigrant" doesn't capture the actual meaning, but that doesn't make jorgeleo's point any less valid: the action is illegal, not the person.
  - talmand 12y ago
    But the person committed the action, so it doesn't seem unfair for the description to describe both. Much like how we use various descriptions to describe people based on their actions.