Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mtxinu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!gymble!lll-crg!dual!unisoft!mtxinu!ed
From: ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.nlang
Subject: Re: Re: Non-sexist language (historical)
Message-ID: <418@mtxinu.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 13:52:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: mtxinu.418
Posted: Mon Jun 24 13:52:41 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Jun-85 02:39:44 EDT
References: <379@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA>
Reply-To: ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould)
Organization: mt Xinu, Berkeley, CA
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath net.women:6126 net.nlang:3285

>>> Unfortunately, the problem with dictionaries in general is that they will
>>> list a common usage of the word, even if it is not correct.  
>>> 
>> 	Horsefeathers!  Who determines the standards of correctness?
>> "Correct" is what the "correct" people say, and who is considered
>> "correct" changes.
>
>Standards must be kept up, or the language will be corrupted a million
>different ways.  We need to keep words with distinct meaning distinct.

Please dig back through the annals of net.nlang for discussions of
descriptive (record the actual usage) vs. proscriptive (record the
"correct" usage) dictionaries.  Let's not rehash that one here.
Rather, let's focus on what people really are trying to say.

-- 
Ed Gould		    mt Xinu, 2910 Seventh St., Berkeley, CA  94710  USA
{ucbvax,decvax}!mtxinu!ed   +1 415 644 0146