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