Language desk
< January 27	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 29 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 28[edit]

French translation[edit]

Please translte this more consisely. Google translate doesn't work. "Groupe de métisses tahitiennes ; Le mari de Pomare IV ; Monseigneur Saussen ; S.A. Ariane, fils de Pomaré IV ; S.M. Pomaré IV ; Vue de Papeete ; S.A. Prince Alfred d'Angleterre et 3 métisses tahitiennes, ca. 1875. 12 tirages carte de visite montés sur carton, dont 1 par Courret Hermanos et 1 par Madame S. Hoare."--KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:23, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yann Le Mouel is an auction house. This is a description of a "lot" (collection of items) up for auction. So it's a list of photographs. "Group of Tahitian women of mixed race; the husband of Pomare IV; Monsignor Saussen [typo for Jaussen]; His Highness Ariane, son of Pomare IV [typo for Ari'iaue?]; Her Majesty Pomare IV; View of Papeete; His Highness Prince Alfred of England and three Tahitian woman of mixed race, circa 1875. Twelve carte de visite photographs mounted on cardboard, of which one by Courret Hermanos and one by Madame S. Hoare."--Cam (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

unintended consequences of a "rape" comment[edit]

At a very popular Facebook page for students at my university, someone posted that students were being "raped" by an organic chemistry exam. The chemistry department is known to give difficult exams, so we all knew the intended meaning of that sentence. However, many students (mostly female) considered the post to be inappropriate, in some cases going as far as accusing the poster of promoting rape culture. Others didn't seem to mind, but the post was eventually removed.

I find this case to be very interesting. I have a few friends who are linguistics majors, and from them I've learned that we often go beyond formal dictionary definitions of a word and create new meanings that are understood and accepted by everyone. (case in point: malapropisms, idioms, Urban Dictionary, etc) But that doesn't seem to have applied here. I don't think anyone actually believed that the OP intended to promote rape. Indeed, Wiktionary's entry on rape includes the slang definition, "to dominate in a contest". But even if we all knew the intended meaning, the use of a word associated with sex crimes seems to have struck a nerve.

Does Wikipedia have any articles on situations like this, where the usage of a word can be offensive such that it causes a strong negative reaction, regardless of the intended meaning? Any insights into why people are so sensitive to using the word "rape", compared to similar cases like "I bombed the test" or other phrases that could be construed as offensive? Ragettho (talk) 19:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rape is seen as among the morally worst crimes. It's very repulsive, and it evokes a very strong emotional response (partly because the effects on the victim are mental rather than death in the case of murder). The use of the term "rape" where it is not describing that crime might be seen to trivialising it - and many many people, including rape victims, have tried to get it taken more seriously (for example, marital rape, reporting, and in the way rape victims are treated). I can well imagine why they were offended. As I mention above, and you have, it's not like there aren't obvious alternatives. As to whether we have an article, well, I don't know. I can't quite picture it. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The objection is that it lessens the impact of the word, even when used to mean forced sex. This is also true when the term is applied to consentual sex, such as between an 18 year old high school student and a 15 year old high school student, in the form of the term statutory rape, so some object to that term, too. StuRat (talk) 19:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies about the word "niggardly". BrainyBabe (talk) 12:59, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's also used as a synonym for "screwed", which is what was presumably intended. It does trivialize it, just like calling someone a "Soup Nazi" trivializes what a Nazi actually was. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:03, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those are good examples! Speaking of Nazis, I've heard people use the term "Grammar Nazi" before, but I haven't seen anyone get offended by that. Shouldn't Nazism evoke the same emotional response as rape? Ragettho (talk) 14:16, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I find all such constructions ("grammar Nazi", etc.) deeply offensive, and don't hesitate to say so; at which point I am usually lambasted for being "politically correct". --Orange Mike | Talk 14:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should complain to the Seinfeld show writers, since "Soup Nazi" mainstreamed that construction... AnonMoos (talk) 17:32, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of the Soup Nazi, knowing the Jewishness of some of its cast, I think they were as much making fun of trivializing "Nazi" as they were of exaggerating the "Nazism" of the restaurant owner. It's also a human tendency to try to take control of our revulsion of something by making fun of it. One example I like to use is that after the Challenger explosion, there was all manner of morbid "Christa McAuliffe jokes" circulating. Why her and not the other 6? Because she was the most visible face of the crew, being a civilian, and because her death in particular was perhaps the most heart-rending. Thus, she's the one to make jokes in memory of. In that case, we're sneering at death itself. Nazis make good targets because their symbolism was so starkly "out there". No subtlety at all. But only funny as a defense mechanism in dealing with them. An interviewer once asked William L. Shirer about Hitler seeming a "comical" figure due to the mustache and the over-the-top personality. Shirer's response: "There was nothing funny about Hitler." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:06, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I'll bet Mel Brooks, that well known Jewish comedian, would disagree with him 100% (Springtime for Hitler and all that). -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculing something is one way to take control over the wrenching emotions it can cause. There are a couple of Nazi cameos in Blazing Saddles also. Like when an actor playing Hitler is lunching at the commisary, and his lunch partner asks him when he's to finish filming. The actor says with a good New York twang, "Dey lose me aftuh duh bunkuh scene." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:59, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we quote Brooks on ridicule, in the article on The Producers: I was never crazy about Hitler...If you stand on a soapbox and trade rhetoric with a dictator you never win...That's what they do so well: they seduce people. But if you ridicule them, bring them down with laughter, they can't win. You show how crazy they are. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 18:55, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a sub-type of Godwin's law. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's the one. There are many examples. Like in Field of Dreams where Amy Madigan's character calls another female parent, who's trying to censor something, a "Nazi cow". You can decide which part of that is the greater insult. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:02, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of a study. A friend was teaching a night-school class in co-dependency and she used the word "niggardly" correctly. There was a huge outcry in the classroom. Even when my friend explained the meaning and the derivation of the word, a group marched off to the administrative offices. My friend was required to apologize for making a "racist remark". Weird world, this PC place. Bielle (talk) 19:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC) Sorry. I posted this before I read Brainy Babe's post above. Bielle (talk) 19:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the OP's assertion that "...we all knew the intended meaning of that sentence", that clearly is not true. Using "rape" to mean "to dominate in a contest" is news to me and is probably news to the vast majority of people out there. The use of the term in that context is indeed trivialising it and I too would have probably joined calls for the comment to be removed. Astronaut (talk) 16:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]