글: 96
언어: English
orthohawk (프로필 보기) 2015년 8월 10일 오전 2:43:49
Tempodivalse:It's not a question of frequency. There is no need to use words like "fag" etc. unless the terms themselves are being discussed. Use of pronouns is not so easy to avoid.But there's a big difference between this and my pronoun use that was ignored: one can very easily speak to others without saying things like the above.I don't see how frequency is relevant vis a vis offensiveness.
Tempodivalse:You can continue to (incorrectly) use thee and ci, or refuse to acknowledge a person's preferred pronoun, - but be aware that this will cause you to be perceived, in most circles, as small-minded. This may or may not be important to you, but it shouldn't come as a surprise.I just do not understand why someone would choose to be so emotionally volatile as to allow his feelings to have that kind of control over him, when the alternative makes life so much more pleasant.
Tempodivalse (프로필 보기) 2015년 8월 10일 오전 3:15:52
I just do not understand why someone would choose to be so emotionally volatile as to allow his feelings to have that kind of control over him, when the alternative makes life so much more pleasant.I didn't see you adopt this attitude when you complained about perceived offensive anti-religious content on Lernu.
In the case of "ci", it is rather trifling. But I think you underestimate how sensitive certain issues are for certain people. For example, for a transgender person in a largely hostile environment (i.e., most of the world), willfully using the wrong pronoun can be a big deal.
Being "macho" about it doesn't really address the underlying problems, and doesn't mitigate consequences, which can be quite negative.
orthohawk (프로필 보기) 2015년 8월 10일 오전 3:32:00
Tempodivalse:Whatever, dude.I just do not understand why someone would choose to be so emotionally volatile as to allow his feelings to have that kind of control over him, when the alternative makes life so much more pleasant.I didn't see you adopt this attitude when you complained about perceived offensive anti-religious content on Lernu. In the case of "ci", it is rather trifling.
sudanglo (프로필 보기) 2015년 8월 10일 오후 3:49:02
However I have come across it in two published translations from French (one a translation of Camus, the other a Maigret).
It came across as very unnatural and I thought a failure of imagination on the part of the translator, who should have used a different device for conveying the familiarity of 'tu'.
DuckFiasco (프로필 보기) 2015년 8월 10일 오후 4:06:32
If someone wants me to call them "sxli" or "ri" or "hihihi" then I'll do my best to accommodate them.
In my view, it's very hard to know how to make people happy. If someone is telling you right there "use X pronoun with me please" then that's a clear way to do something that may bring a little peace to someone else.
Why be critical of that?
tommjames (프로필 보기) 2015년 8월 10일 오후 4:59:41
Also a lot of speakers have never even heard of 'ci', so it's potentially confusing. I find it inconsiderate to deliberately use uncommon words and expect people to know what you're talking about.
If someone uses it out of some sense of religious obligation (I have no idea how that comes about, but I accept people's right to practice whatever doctrines they subscribe to) then I wouldn't be particularly offended by it, but I'd find it no less annoying or inconsiderate.
orthohawk (프로필 보기) 2015년 8월 10일 오후 6:31:54
ravana:In slavic languages ti ( ci ) is used among friends or family members . Nothing connected with god .The problem isn't with "ci" in and of itself, rather the inherent untruthfulness of using a plural pronoun to refer to one person. In Hawai'ian, for example, 'oe is singular and is used with one person, 'olua with 2 people, and 'oukou with more than 2. It is grammatically incorrect (in addition to untruthful) to speak to a single person using the latter two pronouns in that language.
Tempodivalse (프로필 보기) 2015년 8월 10일 오후 6:56:37
The problem isn't with "ci" in and of itself, rather the inherent untruthfulness of using a plural pronoun to refer to one person.Vi can be both a singular or plural pronoun. There is nothing grammatically incorrect with using vi in the singular - Esperanto isn't Hawaiian.