Long Island Shooters Forum banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Grand Poobah
Joined
·
21,090 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
"For example, in a masculine work domain where women are stereotyped as less competent, 'good' for a woman may mean something objectively less good than 'good' for a man," it said.

Huh? So Good isn't good? What word would be good in place of good?
It's almost like the government doesn't care how they spend the taxpayer's money.

Feds spend $125,000 studying sexist adjectives
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/21/feds-spend-125000-studying-sexist-adjectives/?intcmp=latestnews

By Elizabeth Harrington Published July 21, 2015
Washington Free Beacon


The federal government is spending $125,000 to study adjectives that could be perceived as sexist or racist.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) tasked the University of Kansas with conducting the study last year.
"The proposed research predicts that stereotypes activate different standards of judgments for members of different groups; therefore, evaluations (adjectives) mean different things depending on the person described," according to the grant for the study.
"For example, in a masculine work domain where women are stereotyped as less competent, 'good' for a woman may mean something objectively less good than 'good' for a man," it said.
The project will examine letters of recommendation to see whether letters for women and minorities are "influenced by gender and racial stereotypes" that affect chances of admission into graduate school.
"In everyday life, we often are asked to provide assessments or evaluations of others' abilities," the grant said. "Stereotypes can subtly shape these evaluations and judgments, even among those who view themselves as non-prejudiced."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,162 Posts
I'm just happy (and very surprised) that they are only spending $125,000
That is just to pay off the Union Rep on a construction site so that they can talk with the Union members on what adjectives they use when cat calling.
 

·
Walker1847
Joined
·
12,075 Posts
In 1984 Newspeak = "doubleplusgood"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak

Principles of Newspeak:

To remove synonyms and antonyms

The aim of Newspeak is to remove all shades of meaning from language, leaving simple concepts (pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, goodthink and crimethink) that reinforce the total dominance of the State. Newspeak root words serve as both nouns and verbs, further reducing the total number of words; for example, "think" is both a noun and verb, so the word thought is not required and can be abolished. The party also intends that Newspeak be spoken in staccato rhythms with syllables that are easy to pronounce. This will make speech more automatic and unconscious and reduce the likelihood of thought.

In addition, words with negative meanings are removed as redundant, so "bad" becomes "ungood". Words with comparative and superlative meanings are also simplified, so "better" becomes "gooder", and "best" becomes "goodest". Intensifiers can be added, so "great" becomes "plusgood", and "excellent" and "splendid" becomes "doubleplusgood". This ambiguity between comparative/superlative forms and intensified forms is one of the few examples of ambiguity in Newspeak.

Adjectives are formed by adding the suffix "-ful" to a root word (e.g., "goodthinkful" - orthodox in thought), and adverbs by adding "-wise" ("goodthinkwise" - in an orthodox manner).

This would, of course, not prevent heretical statements such as "Big Brother is ungood," but not only would this statement sound absurd in the ears of the politically orthodox, it would also be impossible to understand exactly what the statement means since all concepts and words that can be used to argue against Big Brother (i.e. liberty, rights, freedom, etc.) would be eradicated from the language.

Some of the constructions in Newspeak, such as "ungood", are characteristic of agglutinative languages, although foreign to English. It is possible that Orwell modeled aspects of Newspeak on Esperanto; for example, "ungood" is constructed similarly to the Esperanto word malbona. Orwell had been exposed to Esperanto in 1927 when living in Paris with his aunt Ellen Kate Limouzin and her husband Eugène Lanti, a prominent Esperantist. Esperanto was the language of the house, and Orwell was disadvantaged by not speaking it, which may account for some antipathy towards the language.

To control thought

According to Orwell, "the purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of IngSoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meaning and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meaning whatever." The idea that language influences worldview is linguistic relativity
.
For example, the word "free" still existed in Newspeak but could only be used in terms of something not being possessed, as in "the dog is free from lice," or "this field is free from weeds." It could not be used in terms of being able to do as one pleases, as in "free choice" or "free will" since these concepts no longer existed. Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum. Any redundancies in the English language were removed.

As Orwell further states (through the character of Syme, who is discussing his work on the latest edition of the Newspeak dictionary), "By 2050-earlier, probably-all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron-they'll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of the Party will change. Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like "freedom is slavery" when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking-not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."

Some examples of Newspeak from the novel include crimethink, doublethink, and Ingsoc. They mean, respectively, "thought-crime", "accepting as correct two mutually contradictory beliefs", and "English socialism"-the official party philosophy. The word Newspeak itself also comes from the language.

Generically, Newspeak has come to mean any attempt to restrict disapproved language by a government or other powerful entity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mad Russian

·
Clinger
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
A good study to have in your back pocket ...just in case there was no real sexism....you can always find some sub-conscience sexism.... I feel empowered know . - Gloria Steinem ( not really but ..I bet she's thinking it)
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top