The Inuit languages do not actually have any words for snow, because they don't have any words. They are polysynthetic, hyper-agglutinative languages, in which word-expressions are composed on the fly from morphemes. The "words for snow" are simply different ways of combining those morphemes to refer to snow, and there are indeed a great many of them. They are not, however, "words," and there can't be any way of having a fixed number of them, because the language is so open to improvisation.

Sorry, my language nerdity got the better of me. 

Well English works that way too, but German is even worse, combining words until they are almost sentence length in and of themselves, and at that, you have to read to the end to find out what they are doing.  Always hated that German deal of sticking the verbs at the end.

But fine, they have differing combinations that very specifically describe the particular characteristics of the snow itself, and not just 'snow' qua snow.

Believe me, if you hate German, you'd barf just trying to parse a single sentence of Inuktitut. 

But yes, thank you. My inner langnerd has been satisfied.

Thanks I've already had to learn two different languages (three if you want to count engineer speak as a totally different language, which it is).

Well if you are gonna be serious about this you need to stop throwing out every sugestion out of hand. There have been some good ideas thrown out by some of the others. I do not know what you are looking for because everything that would be a good fit is dismissed.

Quote from: tekla on April 04, 2010, 12:08:49 PM


Or, we have 'engineers' - but there are some huge differences between a mechanical engineer, a sound engineer, an electrical engineer and the guy driving the train who is also called an engineer.  Sometimes you need to distinguish, you're not going to get much help from any of the sound engineers I know if you need to move the train. 

There are people who are 'artists' - a very broad definition.  But within that group of people doing arts, there are people who do 'fine arts' but a further breakdown will show that a dancer is not the same as a sculptor.  They do different things, with different tools, for different audiences (though they may overlap, hence the coverage of both as 'artists').

Gender Engineers       Gender Artists

Quote from: cynthialee on April 04, 2010, 01:23:07 PM
Well if you are gonna be serious about this you need to stop throwing out every sugestion out of hand. There have been some good ideas thrown out by some of the others. I do not know what you are looking for because everything that would be a good fit is dismissed.

"Homosexuals" avoided homo-anything when they adopted "gay".  "Negros" avoided negro-anything when they adopted "black", and from there they avoided color when they adopted "African American". 

In each case, the intent was to shed a negative stigma.  And while a portion of the stigma may have survived, much of it was shed by the simple process of choosing and staying with a new term.

Many of the suggestions here include transgender or allude to the term.  For the same reasons other discriminated against minorities have avoided certain terms, we need to do the same.  As I've said before, trans-anything has to be avoided.

If my memory serves me correctly, "halcyon" and "tranquil" are the only terms suggested that avoid the trans thing.

Ataraxia

Ataraxia (ἀταραξία "tranquillity") is a Greek term used by Pyrrho and Epicurus for a lucid state, characterized by freedom from worry or any other preoccupation.

For the Epicureans, ataraxia was synonymous with the only true happiness possible for a person. It signifies the state of robust tranquility that derives from eschewing faith in an afterlife, not fearing the gods because they are distant and unconcerned with us, avoiding politics and vexatious people, surrounding oneself with trustworthy and affectionate friends and, most importantly, being an affectionate, virtuous person, worthy of trust.

I disagree that the word trans can not be anypart of a new term.
And actually go through the posts there were a few more propossed beyond the two you listed....

Quote from: Julie Marie on April 04, 2010, 10:44:11 PM
"Homosexuals" avoided homo-anything when they adopted "gay".  "Negros" avoided negro-anything when they adopted "black", and from there they avoided color when they adopted "African American".

Ofcourse, "African American" is only used in the US really.
I know a brit that got referred to as such during his vacation to the US and got rather irritated, going "I'm not African, and I'm not American! I'm a f-ing BRIT!"
I lol'd.

And like I've said before.
The term-changes are more a US thing.
"Homosexuals" are still "Homosexuals" in Iceland, and they've got more equality here than over there.
So in the end, what will changing titles change that working on changing public opinion won't do better, and quicker?

YAY! Miniar!!! I am sold. Ussaage terms geting changed is senseless if it does no real good, which a new term for our condition would  be. Lets take Iceland as an example there is no need to change terms. Just peoples hearts.

I'm with Miniar on this. Still, I wouldn't mind being called an "ataraxid." That's probably just me, though. 

Quote from: tekla on April 04, 2010, 12:08:49 PM
Well that's why humans invent so many different words, some broader, some more narrow.  Depends on who is using them and why.  I suppose a classic example is how the  Eskimo-Aleut languages have several words for 'snow' while the Mayan cultures (where snow was very rare) had only a few.  Even in English someone born, raised and having always lived in Florida might only have one word for snow, while ski bums and bunnies have a handful.

Or, we have 'engineers' - but there are some huge differences between a mechanical engineer, a sound engineer, an electrical engineer and the guy driving the train who is also called an engineer.  Sometimes you need to distinguish, you're not going to get much help from any of the sound engineers I know if you need to move the train. 

There are people who are 'artists' - a very broad definition.  But within that group of people doing arts, there are people who do 'fine arts' but a further breakdown will show that a dancer is not the same as a sculptor.  They do different things, with different tools, for different audiences (though they may overlap, hence the coverage of both as 'artists').

Though it's possible to use such 'labels' to the point of irrelevance, they can also serve a very real purpose too.  So you have to be careful in using language.  And at times understand that it may not even suit your purpose.  The famous art quote - one of them anyway - is that: Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.  That one can never really be used to capture or describe the other.

I think this is precisely the point. Avoiding the perceived ickiness of the word "transsexual" or "transgender"  and any resulting increase in discrimination is of secondary importance, and very unlikely to be effective. However, helping the language evolve is useful because it allows us to more clearly express our ideas; this can eventually have political implications, but mainly it's just convenient. The words we have right now obviously don't work that well. Probably, an improvement in the political climate around gender-variant people of all types will defuse the emotions that the words bring up. So changing the language will probably be the result of political change, not the cause.

I have lots of words and terms for snow, by the way: Powder, depth hoar, surface hoar, corn, neve, firn, sastrugi, wind slab, sun crust, slush, mashed potatoes, blower, etc.

Quote from: Miniar on April 05, 2010, 08:05:03 AMSo in the end, what will changing titles change that working on changing public opinion won't do better, and quicker?

If this country was filled with reasonable, open-minded people, willing to learn, I'd say yeah, let's educate them!

But that's not the case.

Unfortunately, there's a lot of people who think that what was, is and always will be - things don't change.  And when it's something that doesn't directly effect you, you tend to believe gossip because it's easier and, since everyone else believes it, it must be true.  So changing public opinion becomes a lot harder than starting fresh.

Changing public opinion requires education.  Look at all that the gender continuum includes.  It's a very complex and involved subject.  Unless it touches your life, what's the motivation to take the time to learn about it?  So "those people" can have a better life?  That's a tough sell.

Let's say we use the term Berdache.  Few people know it or that it came from Native American tribes and that it, in effect, meant transgender.  And few people know the Berdache were highly revered, so much so that they often were given highly regarded positions within the tribe.  The term once had a very positive image.

So, we start using Berdache to define anyone who is uncomfortable living within the gender binary.  And we put that explanation out there.  Over time we explain it further, add to it and "engineer" it (good word, thanks Kat), so ultimately the term will be seen in a positive and nonthreatening way.  History shows it is more effective and much quicker than trying to redefine something that has negative stigmas attached to it.

Ussing Berdache although I like it would be apropriating a self identification that belongs to some of our trans sisters who are Native American.

Only, it won't be "starting fresh".

We can not "start fresh".

We are known to exist and we are hated. We can't undo that by changing terms.

And changing terms won't educate anyone.

The hard work is hard, yes, but it takes hard work to create real change.

Ussing Berdache although I like it would be apropriating a self identification that belongs to some of our trans sisters who are Native American.

That, and a lot of them find the world offensive, as it's not their description of themselves, but rather some anthropological (from the French I think) label that others (outsiders) stuck on them.

As I understand it, yes, early North American explorers used Berdache but Native Americans prefer Two Spirit.

I once read the Two Spirit were revered in all native tribes except the warring tribes.  Interesting.  We like war over here and look how gender fluidity is seen.

I didn't use Two Spirit in the example because, for this purpose, it's more of a poly spirited thing.

I would rather not be known as two-spirit or poly-spirit for the simple reason that I am not "two", nor "many", I am a singular individual, a single spirit in a single body. There's just a glitch involved there.

Originally members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were called Mormons as a slight against them.  They've since taken the word, adopted it, and turned it into something they own.

Maybe we could do the same?