I can swear fluently in Spanish. I will use that tongue when I really want to get ugly. Otherwise I will use genteel speech in the King's English, or at least the American version of it.
]]>(I except the use of a**, which is nonsense to a UK English speaker
Unless they speak with a Bristol accent.
I was thinking more of the written word.
What to do with a Bristolian? Hm. Lock him up for being a pirate, oo arr.
]]>(I except the use of a**, which is nonsense to a UK English speaker
Unless they speak with a Bristol accent.
]]>It is not a matter of being upset, or the doctor or nurse being hardened.
The fact of the matter is that, say, when a man is discussing something with a female nurse there is a balance between the medical discussion necessity and the everyday politeness to a lady. It is a delicate balance of trying do both simultaneously.
William
]]>If it were me and I had a need to express such things, say to a nurse or a doctor, I think I would probably use more euphemistic terms than those you mention.
That's sad. People are all different in what upsets them. You certainly are entitled personally to feel unhappy when you need to discuss things with their proper names with a doctor or nurse. But, I feel that it indicates that your judgement re gentility is of diminished value.
Nurses and doctors are well hardened concerning body parts and their derangements. Do you think a doctor who closes up deep and bloody wounds, or cuts out bowel cancers, is upset by your need to say fecal matter or stools rather than - oh, sorry, I can't even think of a euphemistic synonym. Perhaps "I went twice yesterday." Where? To the paper-shop?
I am talking about real life, and not what could be said as a matter of course in these posts.
]]>William
]]>We must hope and try to attain a polite environment, which may have to accommodate some rough language as used by the majority of the modern population. There are not always polite synonyms for things which may jar on occasion, and asterisks are a means of avoiding total confrontation with those terms.
It is true that in the first joke I posted, I could have used a different term which would offend no-one. I apologise for that. However, if it became necessary to describe more accurately certain waste, one should not use the c or s word, with or without asterisks, but would you, William, be upset if one was to use in plain speech fecal or excreta . Where do you stop with individual sensitivities.
They say the degree of civilisation goes with distance from, lets say, the sewers. People who have looked after very young children by necessity become desensitised to human waste material, and spend more time nearer the sewers, if you get my drift.
]]>William
]]>Alfred wrote:A noble sentiment, perhaps, but how are such things to be policed (other than by self-censorship)? If I write “I hope these darned socks don’t need darning again soon”, depending on how you read it you might be offended by the adjective.
By using the Sergeant Wilson style approach of asking someone using such language if they could possibly try please in future to contribute more effectively to the genteel enviroment of the forum.
William
I wasn’t asking about the form of words to be used when requesting care in how one expresses oneself, I was alluding to the difficulty of determining whether (for example) the word “darned” is a minced oath or a simple use of the past tense.
]]>William wrote:I consider that we should not be prevented from discussing the mending of socks when that is done in good faith, but mentioning of the mending of socks should not be used as a way to depart from making one's best efforts to participate in the maintaining of a genteel environment.
William
A noble sentiment, perhaps, but how are such things to be policed (other than by self-censorship)? If I write “I hope these darned socks don’t need darning again soon”, depending on how you read it you might be offended by the adjective.
By using the Sergeant Wilson style approach of asking someone using such language if they could possibly try please in future to contribute more effectively to the genteel enviroment of the forum.
William
]]>What on earth are you on about mending socks? The diversion from topic is yours!
Not so, Jack! William was responding to my post where I wrote:
Are we to be debarred from discussing the mending of socks?
That followed on from your observation:
This is no place for serious obscenity, but please live in the modern world. It is not genteel, but we don't have to go towards the use of words like darn, and consarn for damn.
I consider that we should not be prevented from discussing the mending of socks when that is done in good faith, but mentioning of the mending of socks should not be used as a way to depart from making one's best efforts to participate in the maintaining of a genteel environment.
William
A noble sentiment, perhaps, but how are such things to be policed (other than by self-censorship)? If I write “I hope these darned socks don’t need darning again soon”, depending on how you read it you might be offended by the adjective.
]]>More like Ranjit, I think (as an example).
What on earth are you on about mending socks? The diversion from topic is yours!
We don't have to be genteel, just polite. . .
]]>http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo/l … er_019.pdf
What about that name?
William
]]>William
]]>