Special effects? Spreadsheets?

[PeterT]

Originally Posted by AlexBell

For example, in my opinion, the phrase 'some gay young men' in the 21st century means something quite different than when it was written in the 17th or18th centuries. Should I have left it as written by the 19th century author even though it was clearly not what she meant in her time?

Strange; to me the meaning is quite clear; happy young men.

Of course I do know enough to infer meaning from context and era

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by AlexBell

I entirely agree. But I have been the recipient of flak in the past for not duplicating the text even where the meaning of the English words has changed.

For example, in my opinion, the phrase 'some gay young men' in the 21st century means something quite different than when it was written in the 17th or 18th centuries. Should I have left it as written by the 19th century author even though it was clearly not what she meant in her time?

I'm wondering if the flak came from the same folks as would object to statues of Cecil Rhodes and Thomas Jefferson. I suspect not.

BR

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by AlexBell

I entirely agree. But I have been the recipient of flak in the past for not duplicating the text even where the meaning of the English words has changed.

For example, in my opinion, the phrase 'some gay young men' in the 21st century means something quite different than when it was written in the 17th or18th centuries. Should I have left it as written by the 19th century author even though it was clearly not what she meant in her time?

Sounds like the local crew who wanted to remove "Don we now our gay apparel" from Deck the Hall(s). My suggestion was to remove that line and restore the original line which read "Fill the meadcup, drain the barrel" and continue on to replace all the drinking related lines that were removed in the 19th century with the originals.

The reaction to that suggestion would have the hypothetical detached observer think that I was recommending sacrificing new born babies as part of a Nativity scene.

[Notjohn]

> the phrase 'some gay young men' in the 21st century means something quite different than when it was written in the 17th or18th centuries.

One needn't go back that far! Our Hearts Were Young and Gay was published in 1942. It was a number-one best-seller, and supposedly was used as a code book by German cryptographers. Even more astonishing, I played M. Darnet in our high school production despite not knowing a word of French, in a town with a large French-Canadian population. I could hear them groaning when I expostulated to Cornelia and Emily about their state of dress.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Notjohn

> the phrase 'some gay young men' in the 21st century means something quite different than when it was written in the 17th or18th centuries.

One needn't go back that far!

I freely admit that I get seriously annoyed about this stuff. I try not to be insensitive, I do--but I don't think that Film Noir movies should have "dame," "broad," etc., removed from them, either, or the even less-attractive terms used in the book versions of many of those films. ("Twist" and, shall we say, downhill from there?)

For example, JK Rowling's other series, the three books about the PI and his trusty assistant, I forget what they're called, some folks were upset because cigs are referred to as fags therein, but this still seems to be a piece of vernacular that's commonplace in the UK, PC-edness or not. Ditto gay apparel and the like--a perfectly good word, that was more than serviceable, and now it's fallen into disuse and disrepair, due to the appropriation of it by a group of folks in society. I don't care if it's appropriated, but I do care if that means I can't use it in its original meaning.

I realize that language is a living thing. Stuff changes, as they say. For example, the abuse and misuse of "could care less" and (this one makes me insane) "begs the question" clearly have re-entered the common usage meaning either the opposite of their original sense (could care less) or something wholly incorrect (begs the question) and I guess those of us that know better just have to live with it--but when I hear talking heads on the TV abuse begs the question, it makes me want to scream.

I guess it's much of a thing. (sigh).

Hitch

[BetterRed]

The fact that Joanne Rowling appropriates John Kenneth Galbraith's name, TWICE, gets up my nose. The character your looking for is 'Cormoran Strike' written under the Robert Galbraith pseudonym. She could pay homage to the real J.K. Galbraith by setting up a charitable foundation in his name, its not as tho' she's short of quid.

When the talking head doing the language abuse is a so-called journalist I often have to leave the room, flip channels, or turn the bloody thing off.

BTW : not only do Brits use fag to refer to a cigarette, they use faggot to refer to something they eat

BR

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

BTW : not only do Brits use fag to refer to a cigarette, they use faggot to refer to something they eat

BR

And with the Nose to Tail eating trend, they are coming back into popularity. Nothing like a little liver, heart, lung, kidney and any other miscellaneous bits you come across for giving that traditional flavour. The one and only time I saw them being made on a cooking show had me wondering if it was a cooking show or an anatomy lesson. I added them to prairie oysters and haggis as recipes that I am never going to use.

[kso]

Originally Posted by Hitch

... some folks were upset because cigs are referred to as fags therein, but this still seems to be a piece of vernacular that's commonplace in the UK, PC-edness or not. Ditto gay apparel and the like--a perfectly good word, that was more than serviceable, and now it's fallen into disuse and disrepair, due to the appropriation of it by a group of folks in society. I don't care if it's appropriated, but I do care if that means I can't use it in its original meaning...

Ahhh, but you can have fun with, say young parents, when they talk about their three year old darling having had "a complete meltdown". Just ask them have they considered early de-comissioning Or when some bore talks about "networking", ask them how they bridge wireless dead-ends...

klaus

[AlanHK]

Originally Posted by AlexBell

For example, in my opinion, the phrase 'some gay young men' in the 21st century means something quite different than when it was written in the 17th or18th centuries. Should I have left it as written by the 19th century author even though it was clearly not what she meant in her time?

Leave it. If someone is reading text written in the 17th century, they will be aware of how words change. Add a footnote if you really think necessary.

Are they going to rerecord the Flintstones' theme song to avoid offending?
"We'll have a gay old time"
That was only 1960.