There are 30 messages totalling 808 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. Preferred Terms (5) 2. naming of RU486 (2) 3. Relics (2) 4. Hallowe'en greetings? (5) 5. offending idioms (5) 6. Boulder Dam 7. Happy Halloween (4) 8. relics (2) 9. Response to Terms (2) 10. Felicitations 11. NEW: POS302-L - Race/Ethnicity Book Review List (fwd) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 02:00:00 LCL From: "M. Lynne Murphy" <104LYN[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]MUSE.ARTS.WITS.AC.ZA> Subject: Re: Preferred Terms i think more than region, age is a factor in preferred term--see papers by geneva smitherman and john baugh in _american speech_ wrt "african american". polls about terms for people of african descent are highly age-differentiated, due, i'm sure, to the fact that older people lived through more positive usages of what are now considered pejorative terms. of course, the opposite can be observed in the reclamation of pejorative terms, such as the word "queer", which is much more enthusiastically embraced by younger people. older people are stereotyped as claiming they can't get over the pejorative use of it--perhaps because when they were subject to taunts of "queer" (as youngsters), there were no positive role models who were openly not heterosexual. of course, anyone whose long-evolved self-concept is very based in "race", "ethnicity", "sexual orientation", etc. will be more resistant to accepting new terms, since this may call into question their self- concept and interaction with the group, or may seem to invalidate experience they've already had. e.g., if some people claim "we're not american indians--that's white people's terminology, based on their own ignorance", then if i've been living my (esp. adult) life thinking of myself as "american indian", i've just been told that my identity (which is nearly all that i am) is, in part, the construction of someone other than myself, and, in particular, someone who i define myself in contrast (and perhaps, polysemously, in opposition) to. i find the issue of prefered terms particularly troubling in dictionaries. while i see the necessity of usage notes for terms that are likely to offend, usage notes stating preference for a term are a bit orwellian, i think, and, more importantly, often inaccurate. (i argue this point in _dictionaries_ 1991.) for example, the random house webster's college dictionary (1991) states in the usage note for _black_ that "by the close of the 1980s, African-American, urged by leaders in the American black community, had begun to supplant _black_ in both print and speech, esp. as a term of self-reference." now, i won't argue that "african(-)american" is now used instead of "black" in some contexts. however, a few other ill-supported assumptions are allowed here. first, the "esp. as self-reference" part. as RHWCD was going to press, the joint center for political and economic studies was publishing the results of a survey showing that only 22-28% of registered voters with predominantly black african ancestry prefered "african american" over "black"--with the young, educated, and northern u.s. respondents preferring it most. however, the "mainstream" media replaced "black" with "african(-)american" at a much faster rate, with _time_, _newsweek_, _the new york times_ and many other newspapers making editorial statements explaining their adoption of the term within 6 months (usu. less) of jesse jackson's speech that introduced people from outside the community to "african(-)american". (remember, it took _the new york times_ nearly 20 years to give in to pressure to use "ms." for women who prefer it.) jackson, in that speech, continues to use "black" after stating a preference for "african american", as do most people i know who identify as "african american". however, it is not at all uncommon in liberal white circles for a (white) person to be corrected by a white person when s/he says "black" (saying "you mean, 'african american'"). whereas "african american" seems to have been adopted as a companion term to "black" in self-reference, it is supplanting "black" in certain white circles. witness _self_ magazine's usage of "african-american hair", as if hair has nationality and "african" or "afro- caribbean" hair is not suited to the same kind of treatment. (i have a lot of hair stories!) the other issue is the orthography in this usage note. this is just based on impression, but i've found that while many "mainstream" media outlets hyphenate "african-american" (and some don't), most of the media owned/edited/aimed at black americans and writing by individual african americans (not subject to the editorial conventions of mainstream media) don't (in my experience) hyphenate. so, is "african-american" really supplanting "black" as a term of self-reference? or is "african american" joining "black" as a term of self-reference, while "african-american" is supplanting "black" in use by some outgroup members? didn't mean to write an entire paper here, but get me started and i have a hard time stopping. references: baugh, john. 1991. the politicization of changing terms of self- reference among american slave descendants. _american speech_ 66:2.133-46. murphy, m. lynne. 1991. defining racial labels: problems and promise in american dictionaries. _dictionaries_ 13:43-64. [no author] 1991. poll says blacks prefer to be called "black". _jet_ 78(11 feb):8. smitherman, geneva. 1991. what is africa to me? language, ideology, and african american. _american speech_ 66:2.115-32. ______________________________________________________________________ M. Lynne Murphy e-mail: 104lyn[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE] Lecturer, Dept. of Linguistics phone: 27(11)716-2340 University of the Witwatersrand fax: 27(11)716-8030 Johannesburg 2050 South Africa "Language without meaning is meaningless." --Roman Jakobson