Jew/Jews

[GeoffP]

I do not care whether or not you use the word in "any kind of group-guilt association context", but I am curious: why do you refuse to capitalize the words, "Muslim" and "Islam"? Said trend has intrigued me.

?? It's not that I refuse to capitalize them. "Muslim" isn't a nationality or people. I capitalize Christian because it's derived from a name. Is there some reason that you think I should? What is it meant to mean if I don't?

 

[Gustav]

Today the plural pronoun is taking hold.

i considered that with a he or she and decided it was too ridiculous to bring up.
in any case your examples deal with gender neutral terms so..........

furthermore

"Each child must wash their face before lunch"

i'd aim for consistency and attempt to render the noun in its plural form if possible

 

[GeoffP]

Now Fraggle's intriguing me.

Let me see...Republican, Democrat, communist (maybe Communist sometimes...should be communist tho), socialist, Nazi, fascist (unless referring to the specific Italian party), Romanov, Russian, Marxist (name), Christian (name), Bhuddist (name)...Confucianist? Jewish (just always seen it that way, really). I usually tend to go for the common usage. islam, muslim, Shi'ite, Sunni, Wahhabi (sects...somehow that's important), Protestant, Catholic, Irish, Norse, Africa, Mexican, latina, Parisian. Seems like they're all just whatever's "common usage". I guess it wasn't that interesting after all.

But I'd like some explanation on the thrust about "refusing" to do so.

 

[Slysoon]

?? It's not that I refuse to capitalize them. "Muslim" isn't a nationality or people. I capitalize Christian because it's derived from a name. Is there some reason that you think I should? What is it meant to mean if I don't?

I have no idea what your intentions are.

However, it seems odd you would capitalize words such as "Jew", "Christian", "Catholic", "Hindu", "Sikh", "Amish", and even the "Orthodox" in "Orthodox Judaism", but not "Muslim". I'm fine with your reasons for doing so, whatever they may be.

Although why you refuse to capitalize "Islam" makes little sense to me. Perhaps you could explain why you do not capitalize "Islam"?

 

[GeoffP]

I have no idea what your intentions are.

However, it seems odd you would capitalize words such as "Jew", "Christian", "Catholic", "Hindu", "Sikh", "Amish", and even the "Orthodox" in "Orthodox Judaism", but not "Muslim". I'm fine with your reasons for doing so, whatever they may be.

I've outlined them above. As a congenital antidisestablishmentarian, I tend to go with common usage. The above are either derived from names, or are separate sects, of course, so it's possible that it's that - but to be honest: common usage. I'm normally quite conventional.

Although why you refuse to capitalize "Islam" makes little sense to me. Perhaps you could explain why you do not capitalize "Islam"?

Possibly I should. Still, it's not derived from a name or a place. It's more like a verb. Perhaps I have an inherent revulsion of capitalizing verbs? Why do you call it a refusal?

 

[Slysoon]

I call it a refusal because that is how it appears to the casual reader. In the context of your posts, refusing to capitalize "Muslim and "Islam" - all the while capitalizing similar words for specific religions or religious followers - gives people certain indications about your intentions. For example, if you are in a debate about Islam and its influence over national politics, your refusal to capitalize the word "Islam" is not rationalized by readers as a decision on the basis of the word "Islam" being "more like a verb", which the author has an "inherent revulsion" of capitalizing.

 

[Gustav]

link

ahh, you are overeager
you miss the point entirely

"correct english usage" is a moving target. the language is not static. it evolves.a relevant example would be the excessive use of majuscules in older forms of english. if you were to be transposed to such a time, i would expect you to be defending that capitalization of say...every third word?

case in point...an attempt to modernize

Capitals should be used sparingly but consistently. When in doubt use lower case letters. Capitals should be used for eg King Henry VIII, the Duke of Newcastle, Sir John Byron, Newstead Priory, the White Hart, Broxtowe Hundred, the Poor Law Board, Anglo-Saxon, Cistercian Ware, Bronze Age, but not for ‘the king’ or for kings, dukes, etc in general. Note also ‘18th century’, ‘north Nottinghamshire’, and east Midlands’. link

i personally know lots of mutts that will capitalize words that reference the cardinal points. heh

now
a movement to eliminate majuscules in its entirety is not exactly illogical when presented in the context of an evolving language along with its apparent trends. it is even more so when it is obvious that punctuation renders it practically redundant. as for names.....my, are we not unique and special! dump em along with all forms of honorifics.

 

[GeoffP]

I call it a refusal because that is how it appears to the casual reader. In the context of your posts, refusing to capitalize "Muslim and "Islam" - all the while capitalizing similar words for specific religions or religious followers - gives people certain indications about your intentions.

Well, I've outlined why I generally don't above. Common usage. Perhaps I'll put a disclaimer at the start of every post. Anyway: now you know, at least.

 

[parmalee]

link

"ahh, you are overeager
you miss the point entirely

"correct english usage" is a moving target. the language is not static. it evolves. ..."

Hmmm. This thread, a good read.

The pesky Internets has ruined it all for me. I favor meticulously hand-printed discourse, and the time it takes to scan and upload such I can ill afford. And besides, my scanner is broken. It takes it to another level--and not just for the graphologists--and I think there is an uncommon beauty in parsimony: given the physical restraints--cramped hand and whatnot (do only left-handers suffer this?)--one is inclined to emphasize inflection in driving the point home. Fonts and colors and shits--and fucking emoticons--lack the personal touch and sometimes confuse the hell out of an autistic retard like myself. But that which pours from the stylus, it's elegance and poignancy is unparalleled. Still though, I suppose one's got to be partial to some ambiguity.

I think I might be responding to that other thread, I just didn't want to revive it.

 

[iceaura]

communist (maybe Communist sometimes...should be communist tho)

In the places where there is a Communist Party - the majority of the planet, IIRC - the word should be capitalized whenever it refers to said Party.

 

[GeoffP]

Agreed. Although apparently I shouldn't be capitalizing Hindu? Unless it's the "ism". Probably.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

?? It's not that I refuse to capitalize them. "Muslim" isn't a nationality or people. I capitalize Christian because it's derived from a name. Is there some reason that you think I should? What is it meant to mean if I don't?

Every language has its orthographic rules. In most (if not all) other European languages you don't capitalize American, Greek, etc., whether it's an adjective denoting the nationality or a noun denoting a citizen of the country. But in English you do.

Similarly, in English you captalize the names of all religions. Not to do so is to identify yourself as a foreign student who hasn't mastered the nuances of our written language yet. But to capitalize some and not others--and as the Head Linguist around here I guarantee this--will be interpreted as an insult to the ones you fail to capitalize.

The origin of the name does not matter. In English you capitalize the names of all religions. Failing to do so is simply incorrect writing and will be corrected by every editor.

Even the Dao, which simply means "(the) way," and Shinto, which simply means "(the) new way," the Japanese phonetic normalization of Mandarin xin dao. Even Jain, which means "conqueror."

I've outlined them above. As a congenital antidisestablishmentarian, I tend to go with common usage. The above are either derived from names, or are separate sects, of course, so it's possible that it's that - but to be honest: common usage. I'm normally quite conventional.

I don't know where you're finding your "common usage." Please review Dictionary.com, which gives citations in all the leading American English dictionaries.

Possibly I should. Still, it's not derived from a name or a place. It's more like a verb.

You're treading on dangerous ground when you attempt to bring a foreign word into English and identify it by the part of speech it played in its original language. How would you deal with Chinese, which has no adjectives or adverbs? Or with other languages that don't even deconstruct into the same paradigm as English?

"To protest" is a verb but we capitalize "Protestant." "Catholic" is an adjective spelled in lower case for its more general meaning, but we capitalize it to mean the religion. Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Episcopal, Congregational... none of those words were originally capitalized. Ditto for Sunni and Shia, although Arabic is a monocase script like Hebrew, with no capitals anyway.

Perhaps I have an inherent revulsion of capitalizing verbs? Why do you call it a refusal?

I think the other members have good reason for calling it that. Nonetheless, even if their reasons could be argued against, this is a good example of what you will face in life if you continue to write the name of the world's second-largest religious community with a lower-case letter. People won't stop to ask you why you do it, they will automatically interpret it as a sign of disrespect. Is that what you want? No one will get your point.

Agreed. Although apparently I shouldn't be capitalizing Hindu? Unless it's the "ism". Probably.

Hind means "river," but as Indian civilization grew and people realized there were other great rivers, it came to mean the river we call the Indus, and then the adjectival form was used to name the people who live there. So even by your iconoclastic rules it's still proper to capitalize "Hindu." For a long time that region was called Hindustan.

 

[GeoffP]

Every language has its orthographic rules. In most (if not all) other European languages you don't capitalize American, Greek, etc., whether it's an adjective denoting the nationality or a noun denoting a citizen of the country. But in English you do.

...well, you also do in German. I would assume the same extends to Danish and Norwegian. Swedish? I don't know about Icelandic: Bokmal vs. old Norse.

Similarly, in English you captalize the names of all religions.

Very well. I will aim to do so. My common usage, of course, comes from the Peteral Manual of Intentionally Insulting English: 3rd edition, not the 2nd.

Not to do so is to identify yourself as a foreign student who hasn't mastered the nuances of our written language yet. But to capitalize some and not others--and as the Head Linguist around here I guarantee this--will be interpreted as an insult to the ones you fail to capitalize.

Mistr Fraggle Rocker,

Please am thanking you for many kind observances. I am foreign student who likes making american aquaintence, for correction in writing, also for pen-pal! Am liking the Unites states very mcuhly! chips and salsa! But is heart burn me giving!

Happy salutations to many writers on this thread! Das vidanya!

Geoff

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

...well, you also do in German.

Nicht wahr. Sprechen Sie englisch? Ich bin amerikaner und ich habe ein deutsche Kraftwagen.

I would assume the same extends to Danish and Norwegian.

Taler de dansk? Snakker du norsk?

Swedish?

Talar ni på svenska?

Das vidanya!

You parsed the words wrong. It's do svidanya, but the unaccented O is pronounced like American English U in "up."

 

[GeoffP]

Ach, fery good, Mister Fraggle! Exchange student I am being! Language writing, not so much! but loving American discoooo!!

As for the 'refusal' as an insult: no, simply. Or else why should I capitalize Sufi, Wahhabi, Sunni and Shi'ite? I'm sorry, but it simply ain't so, Joe.

As for the German, I always capitalized the nouns and no one complained. So there.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

pardon
are there any negative connotations with regards to this as a descriptor of the inhabitants of israel (or the diaspora in general)?

would "israeli" be more apt? how about "jewish" rather than "jew"?

Inhabitants of Israel would be Israelis just as inhabitants of America are Americans. The word "Jew" in American culture is often used as a negative/comical stereotype. Don't know about other cultures.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

As for the German, I always capitalized the nouns and no one complained.

All nouns in German are capitalized, but adjectives are not. Der Amerikaner ist hier, "The American is here."

But Ich bin amerikaner, "I am American."

Sprechen Sie englisch? "Do you speak English?" Englisch is treated as an adjective, standing for "(the) English language." Or perhaps an adverb, standing for the prepositional phrase "(in) English."

The pronoun Sie, meaning "you" (formal) is capitalized. But not sie, meaning "she" or "they."

 

[rcscwc]

Every language has its orthographic rules. In most (if not all) other European languages you don't capitalize American, Greek, etc., whether it's an adjective denoting the nationality or a noun denoting a citizen of the country. But in English you do.

Similarly, in English you captalize the names of all religions. Not to do so is to identify yourself as a foreign student who hasn't mastered the nuances of our written language yet. But to capitalize some and not others--and as the Head Linguist around here I guarantee this--will be interpreted as an insult to the ones you fail to capitalize.

The origin of the name does not matter. In English you capitalize the names of all religions. Failing to do so is simply incorrect writing and will be corrected by every editor.

Even the Dao, which simply means "(the) way," and Shinto, which simply means "(the) new way," the Japanese phonetic normalization of Mandarin xin dao. Even Jain, which means "conqueror."I don't know where you're finding your "common usage." Please review Dictionary.com, which gives citations in all the leading American English dictionaries.You're treading on dangerous ground when you attempt to bring a foreign word into English and identify it by the part of speech it played in its original language. How would you deal with Chinese, which has no adjectives or adverbs? Or with other languages that don't even deconstruct into the same paradigm as English?

"To protest" is a verb but we capitalize "Protestant." "Catholic" is an adjective spelled in lower case for its more general meaning, but we capitalize it to mean the religion. Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Episcopal, Congregational... none of those words were originally capitalized. Ditto for Sunni and Shia, although Arabic is a monocase script like Hebrew, with no capitals anyway.I think the other members have good reason for calling it that. Nonetheless, even if their reasons could be argued against, this is a good example of what you will face in life if you continue to write the name of the world's second-largest religious community with a lower-case letter. People won't stop to ask you why you do it, they will automatically interpret it as a sign of disrespect. Is that what you want? No one will get your point.Hind means "river," but as Indian civilization grew and people realized there were other great rivers, it came to mean the river we call the Indus, and then the adjectival form was used to name the people who live there. So even by your iconoclastic rules it's still proper to capitalize "Hindu." For a long time that region was called Hindustan.

Sorry, you are wromg about Hind etc.

Sindhu is a river, a proper name, aka Indus. Perhaps Persians got it slightly wrong and called it Hind, and the land Hindustan.

 

[S.A.M.]

Sorry, you are wromg about Hind etc.

Sindhu is a river, a proper name, aka Indus. Perhaps Persians got it slightly wrong and called it Hind, and the land Hindustan.

You're almost right. I think it was a difference in script or alphabet. According to Veer Savarkar:

"...Not only had these people been known to themselves as 'Sindhus' but we have definite records to show that they were known to their surrounding nations- at any rate to one of them- by that very name, 'Sapta Sindhu'. The letter 's' in Sanskrit is at times changed into h in some of the Prakrit languages, both Indian and non-Indian. For example, the word Sapta has become Hapta not only in Indian Prakrits but also in the European languages too: we have Hapta i.e., week, in India and 'Heptarchy' in Europe, Kesari in Sanskrit becomes Harhvati in Persian and Asuri becomes Ahur. And then we actually find that the Vedic name of our nation Sapta Sindhu had been mentioned as Hapta Hindu in the Avesta by the ancient Persian people."

I can definitely see the sapta to hapta and asur to ahur, but not sure about Sapta Sindhu

edit: More here, Fraggle is right, Sindhu means river.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapta_Sindhu

 

[ThinkingMansCrumpet]

You parsed the words wrong."

Oh dear!...Whoops,.. Fraggle, pardon the vernacular but that is shithouse English.

What's wrong with "You parsed the words wrongly"? Or 'You parsed the words incorrectly'?


Sprung bad by the high school dropout!