5 ms·

> [horrific racial expletive deleted] Nigga please... The only horrific things about a word coming straight from the latin root for "black" are the linguistic

> [horrific racial expletive deleted] Nigga please... The only horrific things about a word coming straight from the latin root for "black" are the linguistic segregation behind it and the fact that this segregation is now willingly enforced by the minorities themselves.

josu 11y ago
I wonder who censored the word, if it was The author, the original blog or NPR.
- judemelancon 11y ago
  It wasn't NPR, as it was that way in the blog post linked.
  - shawn-furyan 11y ago
    Also, it's a very editorializing expletive deletion. Relatively serious* news organizations like NPR tend to avoid that sort of thing. If it was their edit, one would expect a simple "[expletive deleted]", or a rewording that didn't call attention to itself. *In using the word "serious", I only mean that NPR is among the organizations that are commonly perceived to be among the most serious news organizations. I'm not being ironic. Neither am I making a personal value judgement.
    - josu 11y ago
      Yeah, that makes sense. And also, I should hace checked the link.
rfrey 11y ago
Etymology is irrelevant in emotionally charged discussions. Context matters.
- stefantalpalaru 11y ago
  Etymology is always relevant in the analysis of natural languages. Emotions? Not so much. > Context matters. It does. The context is a relatively progressive media organization that is afraid to write certain words because they might interfere with the nation-wide policy of linking their acceptable usage to the color of the speaker's skin.
  - _delirium 11y ago
    In modern linguistics, etymology is given far less weight than it was in the pre-scientific days of philology. So no, etymology is not "always" relevant; arguments based on etymology are typically given weight only in historical contexts (e.g. tracing language evolution, or lexical borrowings). They give very little insight about present meaning, and especially not about pragmatics.
emodendroket 11y ago
"Shit" and "science" derive from the same proto-Indo-European root. Does it then follow that I can use both words interchangeably?
- stefantalpalaru 11y ago
  When you go as far as Proto-Indo-European roots you're in linguistic fantasy territory, but anyway, I was talking about "a word coming straight from the Latin root". It's a clear evolution from the Latin "niger" to Spanish "negro" and illiterate English colonist "nigger". And it kept its meaning of "black" all this time. Since we're talking etymology in the grayed out bottom of a HN thread, did you know that the word "slave" comes from the Latin "sclavus" that means "Slav" and is therefore offensive to people of Slavic ancestry? Will you stop using it now that you know? I hope not, but it goes to show the absurdity of putting hurt feelings before reason.
  - emodendroket 11y ago
    > Since we're talking etymology in the grayed out bottom of a HN thread, did you know that the word "slave" comes from the Latin "sclavus" that means "Slav" and is therefore offensive to people of Slavic ancestry? Will you stop using it now that you know? I hope not, but it goes to show the absurdity of putting hurt feelings before reason. You're literally arguing against your own reasoning.
    - stefantalpalaru 11y ago
      "Nigger" is not a terrible word because it means "black" as it always did. "Slave" is not a terrible word because it means "a person that is the property of another" now, even though it meant "Slav" at some point in the past. BTW, since "literally" became the synonym of its antonym what's the point in using it any more?
      - emodendroket 11y ago
        No, I mean, you are quite literally, in the traditional sense of that word, arguing that etymology is more important when the modern meaning of the word is offensive, and that the modern meaning of the word is more important when the etymology is offensive. No, that word is not offensive because of the etymology meaning "black;" consider that using the term "black" is not at all offensive.

josu 11y ago

I wonder who censored the word, if it was The author, the original blog or NPR.

judemelancon 11y ago
It wasn't NPR, as it was that way in the blog post linked.
- shawn-furyan 11y ago
  Also, it's a very editorializing expletive deletion. Relatively serious* news organizations like NPR tend to avoid that sort of thing. If it was their edit, one would expect a simple "[expletive deleted]", or a rewording that didn't call attention to itself. *In using the word "serious", I only mean that NPR is among the organizations that are commonly perceived to be among the most serious news organizations. I'm not being ironic. Neither am I making a personal value judgement.
  - josu 11y ago
    Yeah, that makes sense. And also, I should hace checked the link.

rfrey 11y ago

Etymology is irrelevant in emotionally charged discussions. Context matters.

stefantalpalaru 11y ago
Etymology is always relevant in the analysis of natural languages. Emotions? Not so much. > Context matters. It does. The context is a relatively progressive media organization that is afraid to write certain words because they might interfere with the nation-wide policy of linking their acceptable usage to the color of the speaker's skin.
- _delirium 11y ago
  In modern linguistics, etymology is given far less weight than it was in the pre-scientific days of philology. So no, etymology is not "always" relevant; arguments based on etymology are typically given weight only in historical contexts (e.g. tracing language evolution, or lexical borrowings). They give very little insight about present meaning, and especially not about pragmatics.

emodendroket 11y ago

"Shit" and "science" derive from the same proto-Indo-European root. Does it then follow that I can use both words interchangeably?

stefantalpalaru 11y ago
When you go as far as Proto-Indo-European roots you're in linguistic fantasy territory, but anyway, I was talking about "a word coming straight from the Latin root". It's a clear evolution from the Latin "niger" to Spanish "negro" and illiterate English colonist "nigger". And it kept its meaning of "black" all this time. Since we're talking etymology in the grayed out bottom of a HN thread, did you know that the word "slave" comes from the Latin "sclavus" that means "Slav" and is therefore offensive to people of Slavic ancestry? Will you stop using it now that you know? I hope not, but it goes to show the absurdity of putting hurt feelings before reason.
- emodendroket 11y ago
  > Since we're talking etymology in the grayed out bottom of a HN thread, did you know that the word "slave" comes from the Latin "sclavus" that means "Slav" and is therefore offensive to people of Slavic ancestry? Will you stop using it now that you know? I hope not, but it goes to show the absurdity of putting hurt feelings before reason. You're literally arguing against your own reasoning.
  - stefantalpalaru 11y ago
    "Nigger" is not a terrible word because it means "black" as it always did. "Slave" is not a terrible word because it means "a person that is the property of another" now, even though it meant "Slav" at some point in the past. BTW, since "literally" became the synonym of its antonym what's the point in using it any more?
    - emodendroket 11y ago
      No, I mean, you are quite literally, in the traditional sense of that word, arguing that etymology is more important when the modern meaning of the word is offensive, and that the modern meaning of the word is more important when the etymology is offensive. No, that word is not offensive because of the etymology meaning "black;" consider that using the term "black" is not at all offensive.