Latino vs. Latina

[Dänk 42Ø]

Latino vs. Latina
By Dänk 42Ø
16 May 2013

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was criticized during her
confirmation hearing for having described herself as a "Wise Latina" in
the past. Whether she is wise is a matter of opinion, but she is
definitely of Latin-American heritage.

The problem here is that the term "Latina" is sexist by the standards of
American political correctness. English is one of the few languages that
has no gender inflection. There are no "male" or "female" nouns like in
Spanish or German.

There are still a handful of gender-specific nouns in English: Man and
woman, waiter and waitress, steward and stewardess, murderer and
murderess, comedian and comedienne, actor and actress, author and
authoress etc. The feminine versions of these words have largely been
purged from modern American English, with the masculine version becoming
neuter.

Every enlightened liberal knows that calling Angelina Jolie or Uma
Thurman an "actress" is sexist and forbidden. All Hollywood celebrities
are "actors." There is even a movement to eliminate the "best female
actor" category from the Academy Awards, since men and womyn (and
transgendered she-thangs) are equal and should not be differentiated.

I do not disagree with this trend, but I can't help but notice that
enlightened lily-white liberals are hypocrites for demanding the
neuterization of the American-English language, while happily importing
sexist gendered words from other languages, in this case Spanish.

The wonderful thing about American-English is its ability to absorb new
words from other languages, which is why it has become THE most popular
international language. For example, words like "karma" and "taco" are
co-opted directly from Hindi and Spanish, something which is not
permissible in languages like French.

Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other American-
English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the historical
masculine form for male and female alike. Since she spoke of
"herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to) in American-
English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term "Wise LatinO", not
"LatinA".

Furthermore, if adhering to foreign language grammar conventions is so
important to lily-white liberals, so much so that they are willing to
throw their deliberate neuterization of American-English grammar under
the proverbial bus, then they should go all the way and use foreign
capitalization and punctuation conventions. In Spanish, "latino" and
"latina" (and other ethnic-nationality nouns and adjectives) are always
lower case, unless they begin a sentence. If las reglas del idioma
español are followed correctly, Sra. Sotomayor is a wise "latina." In
American-English, she is always a "Latino" (wise or not).

[R H Draney]

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other American-
English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the historical
masculine form for male and female alike. Since she spoke of
"herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to) in American-
English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term "Wise LatinO", not
"LatinA".

I look forward to hearing what King Elizabeth has to say on the matter....r

[CDB]

Post by R H Draney

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other
American- English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the
historical masculine form for male and female alike. Since she
spoke of "herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to)
in American- English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term
"Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".

I look forward to hearing what King Elizabeth has to say on the matter....r

She went all quiet a while back.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Rex

(My newsclient will post to a maximum of three groups.)

[Whiskers]

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.usage.english.]

Post by CDB

Post by R H Draney

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other American-
English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the historical
masculine form for male and female alike. Since she spoke of "herself"
(a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to) in American- English,
Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term "Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".

I look forward to hearing what King Elizabeth has to say on the matter....r

She went all quiet a while back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Rex
(My newsclient will post to a maximum of three groups.)

My setup blocks incoming articles posted to more than three newsgroups. My
curiosity was piqued enough to drive me to a public usenet archive to find
the original post <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=136888307400>
and the one being replied to
<http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=136888295300> so that I could
follow the exchange.

I've set the Followup-To header to alt.usage.english only; I don't
read the other groups originally posted to, and this one seems to be the
most appropriate for the linguistic aspects of the question.

I'm struck by the usage of "Latin" as an adjective applicable to those
parts of the Americas claimed by explorers from Portugal and Spain, and to
people with ancestral or cultural links to those places. (Apart, it seems,
from those areas later acquired by the USA).

"Latin American, adj. and n.". OED Online. March 2013. Oxford University
Press. 18 May 2013 <http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/241195> defines the
phrase as "Of or pertaining to Latin America or its peoples." with the note
that "Until the early 20th cent. Spanish American was the preferred term."

Why the change?

Spanish and Portuguese are classed as "romance languages", being considered
to have evolved mostly from the Latin of the Roman empire. Both countries
acknowledged papal authority in international politics when they were first
exploring the Americas, and their people were overwhelmingly followers of
the "Roman Catholic" (also sometimes known as "Latin") Church. But the
languages are pretty far removed from classical Latin, and the people are
by no stretch of the imagination identifiable with the Latin-speaking
tribes who founded the Roman empire - particularly not those "Latin
Americans" with slight or absent Iberian ancestry. So why "Latin"?

[John Briggs]

Post by CDB

Post by R H Draney

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other
American- English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the
historical masculine form for male and female alike. Since she
spoke of "herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to)
in American- English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term
"Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".

I look forward to hearing what King Elizabeth has to say on the matter....r

She went all quiet a while back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Rex
(My newsclient will post to a maximum of three groups.)

That play is based on several false premises. Shakespeare's female roles
were played by boys.

[CDB]

Post by John Briggs

Post by CDB

Post by R H Draney

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other
American- English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the
historical masculine form for male and female alike. Since she
spoke of "herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to)
in American- English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term
"Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".

I look forward to hearing what King Elizabeth has to say on the matter....r

She went all quiet a while back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Rex
(My newsclient will post to a maximum of three groups.)

That play is based on several false premises. Shakespeare's female roles
were played by boys.

Yes, I've heard that. I don't see how you have come to think that the
play is based on some other arrangement.

[John Briggs]

Post by CDB

Post by John Briggs

Post by CDB

Post by R H Draney

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other
American- English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the
historical masculine form for male and female alike. Since she
spoke of "herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to)
in American- English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term
"Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".

I look forward to hearing what King Elizabeth has to say on the matter....r

She went all quiet a while back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Rex
(My newsclient will post to a maximum of three groups.)

That play is based on several false premises. Shakespeare's female roles
were played by boys.

Yes, I've heard that. I don't see how you have come to think that the
play is based on some other arrangement.

Because the protagonist is an adult male.

[CDB]

Post by John Briggs

Post by CDB

Post by R H Draney

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other
American- English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the
historical masculine form for male and female alike. Since she
spoke of "herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to)
in American- English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term
"Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".

I look forward to hearing what King Elizabeth has to say on the matter....r

She went all quiet a while back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Rex
(My newsclient will post to a maximum of three groups.)

That play is based on several false premises. Shakespeare's female roles
were played by boys.

Sorry, didn't mean to click "send".

To continue: are you quarreling with the age of the male character, Ned,
who played female roles, on the grounds that women were played by young
males, not old ones?

There seems to be still a little doubt that all such roles were played
by boys, a little creative space, and I think the point of the Findley
play was not to give an accurate account of the Elizabethan theatre but
to say something about power and about sexual relationships; the story
would have had to be quite different if the female-actors had been
children.

Besides that, I have seen a television version of the play, and I
remember thinking that there was a lot of Findlay in Ned; and he was
about 70 years old, according to Wp, when the play was presented.

[Christian Weisgerber]

English is one of the few languages that has no gender inflection.

Whoa. Have a look here:

http://wals.info/feature/30A

(Never mind that the creators of this database actually assign
English to the three-gender bin.)

[Peter Brooks]

Post by Christian Weisgerber
(Never mind that the creators of this database actually assign
English to the three-gender bin.)

How many of these bins are there and why do people assign languages to
them rather than simply throwing them away?

I suppose that I assign eggshells to the bin, but I've never described
it that way myself. I'd expect that doing it properly would involve
some sort of verbal instruction; 'Now, eggshells, that you've been
emptied, your new, temporary, assignment is to occupy this bin'...
Something like that.

[David Hatunen]

Post by Christian Weisgerber

English is one of the few languages that has no gender inflection.

http://wals.info/feature/30A
(Never mind that the creators of this database actually assign
English to the three-gender bin.)

Masculine, feminine and neuter, of course. While English long ago
dropped most gender inflections, it retains a few.

[Christian Weisgerber]

Post by David Hatunen

Post by Christian Weisgerber
http://wals.info/feature/30A
(Never mind that the creators of this database actually assign
English to the three-gender bin.)

Masculine, feminine and neuter, of course. While English long ago
dropped most gender inflections, it retains a few.

The _only_ remnant of the traditional Indo-European gender system
that remains in English are the three third-person singular pronouns,
and these are assigned based on _semantics_. I can easily tell you
the gender of a noun such as "doctor" in French or German. What's
the gender of "doctor" in English? Not the sex of a person who is
a doctor, but the word _doctor_? The question doesn't even make
sense in English.

You can force a gender interpretation onto English, but it leads
to strange results. _The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language_
concludes that English does have masculine ("brother"), feminine
("sister"), and neuter words, but also others that have two ("doctor")
or three genders ("baby").

Meanwhile, Quirk et al. in _A Comprehensive Grammar of the English
Language_ noticed that not only "he/she/it", but also "who/which"
show agreement with their referent. Going through the possible
combinations, they arrive at rather more than three genders (but
again, these are semantically assigned):

PRONOUN
GENDER CLASS EXAMPLE COREFERENCE

.- (a) male brother who - he
|- (b) female sister who - she
.- personal ----+- (c) dual doctor who - he/she
| .- |- (d) common baby who - he/she/it
animate --| | | which - it
| |- `- (e) collective family which - it
| | who - they
`- non- --+---- (f) higher which - he/it
personal | male bull (who) - he
| animal
|---- (g) higher which - she/it
| female cow (who) - she
| animal
`---- (h) lower ant which - it
animal (he/she)
inanimate ------------------ (i) inanimate box which - it


Just stop it with the penis envy and accept that English doesn't
have grammatical gender. It doesn't diminish the language in any
way.

[Robert Bannister]

Post by Christian Weisgerber

Post by David Hatunen

Post by Christian Weisgerber
http://wals.info/feature/30A
(Never mind that the creators of this database actually assign
English to the three-gender bin.)

Masculine, feminine and neuter, of course. While English long ago
dropped most gender inflections, it retains a few.

The _only_ remnant of the traditional Indo-European gender system
that remains in English are the three third-person singular pronouns,
and these are assigned based on _semantics_. I can easily tell you
the gender of a noun such as "doctor" in French or German. What's
the gender of "doctor" in English? Not the sex of a person who is
a doctor, but the word _doctor_? The question doesn't even make
sense in English.
You can force a gender interpretation onto English, but it leads
to strange results. _The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language_
concludes that English does have masculine ("brother"), feminine
("sister"), and neuter words, but also others that have two ("doctor")
or three genders ("baby").
Meanwhile, Quirk et al. in _A Comprehensive Grammar of the English
Language_ noticed that not only "he/she/it", but also "who/which"
show agreement with their referent. Going through the possible
combinations, they arrive at rather more than three genders (but
PRONOUN
GENDER CLASS EXAMPLE COREFERENCE
.- (a) male brother who - he
|- (b) female sister who - she
.- personal ----+- (c) dual doctor who - he/she
| .- |- (d) common baby who - he/she/it
animate --| | | which - it
| |- `- (e) collective family which - it
| | who - they
`- non- --+---- (f) higher which - he/it
personal | male bull (who) - he
| animal
|---- (g) higher which - she/it
| female cow (who) - she
| animal
`---- (h) lower ant which - it
animal (he/she)
inanimate ------------------ (i) inanimate box which - it
Just stop it with the penis envy and accept that English doesn't
have grammatical gender. It doesn't diminish the language in any
way.

I would note that all of the above can have "that" as a relative, even
though "that" was neuter historically.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Post by Christian Weisgerber

Post by David Hatunen

Post by Christian Weisgerber
http://wals.info/feature/30A
(Never mind that the creators of this database actually assign
English to the three-gender bin.)

Masculine, feminine and neuter, of course. While English long ago
dropped most gender inflections, it retains a few.

The _only_ remnant of the traditional Indo-European gender system
that remains in English are the three third-person singular pronouns,
and these are assigned based on _semantics_. I can easily tell you
the gender of a noun such as "doctor" in French or German. What's
the gender of "doctor" in English? Not the sex of a person who is
a doctor, but the word _doctor_? The question doesn't even make
sense in English.
You can force a gender interpretation onto English, but it leads
to strange results. _The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language_
concludes that English does have masculine ("brother"), feminine
("sister"), and neuter words, but also others that have two ("doctor")
or three genders ("baby").

I don't speak French or German, so I can't speak to them, but do they
really not have words like that? Spanish distinguishes between "el
artista" and "la artista" depending on the sex of the referent, just
like Enlish does with "artist". Similarly "el/la dentista" (dentist)
and "el/la atleta" (athlete), "el/la joven" (youth), "el/la
capitalista" (capitalist). Poking around, I also see "jimagua"
(twin), "compinche" (pal), "cómplice" (accomplice), "esparciata"
(Spartan), "testigo" (witness), "oficinista" (clerk), "modelo"
(fashion model). It appears that "la poetisa" (poetess) is frequently
"la poeta" these days, matching "el poeta".

Clearly, English has gone a *lot* farther in that direction, but it's
not unheard of in languages that have more overt gender agreement.

Then you have to figure out what to do with English speakers who
assign female gender to ships, flags, buildings, cats (for some, even
when known to be male), etc.

[R H Draney]

Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Then you have to figure out what to do with English speakers who
assign female gender to ships, flags, buildings, cats (for some, even
when known to be male), etc.

I don't do it with cats (I either need to be told that a cat is female or
observe a tricolor pelt), but I do tend to assume all spiders are "she"....r

[Christian Weisgerber]

Post by Evan Kirshenbaum

Post by Christian Weisgerber
You can force a gender interpretation onto English, but it leads
to strange results. _The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language_
concludes that English does have masculine ("brother"), feminine
("sister"), and neuter words, but also others that have two ("doctor")
or three genders ("baby").

I don't speak French or German, so I can't speak to them, but do they
really not have words like that? Spanish distinguishes between "el
artista" and "la artista" depending on the sex of the referent, just
like Enlish does with "artist". [...]

I don't think German has any. There are homonyms that have different
gender, and unsurprisingly there are nouns of "variable gender"
where the speaker community can't quite agree. Going through a
list of the latter in the Duden Grammar, I see that...
* They don't refer to people.
* They look like regional differences to me, i.e., I have a strong
preference for one of the alternatives.
* Some are jargon vs. common language. ("Filter", "Virus")
* A few may show signs of a semantic split. ("Teil")
* Hey, there's two that do refer to people, but the choice is between
neuter and masculine and contrary to ("Mannequin") or independent
of the person's sex ("Mündel").
* One only appears in a single fixed phrase. ("Hehl")
* Unsurprisingly, quite a few are loanwords.
* Some I don't know at all.

Now, French, on the other hand, does have nouns whose gender varies
with the sex of the referent, e.g. "un(e) élève" (student, pupil),
mostly ending on silent -e. Also, many more that are distinguished
in writing by adding an -e to the feminine after a vowel are
homophonous in the spoken language, e.g., "un(e) ami(e)".

(And, similar to the situation in German, there are of course various
nouns where people can't quite agree on the gender. Or ones that
change gender between singular and plural, etc.)

Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Then you have to figure out what to do with English speakers who
assign female gender to ships, flags, buildings, cats (for some, even
when known to be male), etc.

Personification. Done.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Latino vs. Latina
By Dänk 42Ø
16 May 2013
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was criticized during her
confirmation hearing for having described herself as a "Wise Latina" in
the past. Whether she is wise is a matter of opinion, but she is
definitely of Latin-American heritage.
The problem here is that the term "Latina" is sexist by the standards of
American political correctness. English is one of the few languages that
has no gender inflection. There are no "male" or "female" nouns like in
Spanish or German.

"Masculine" and "feminine," surely, rather than "male and "female."

Post by Dänk 42Ø
There are still a handful of gender-specific nouns in English: Man and
woman, waiter and waitress, steward and stewardess, murderer and
murderess, comedian and comedienne, actor and actress, author and
authoress etc. The feminine versions of these words have largely been
purged from modern American English, with the masculine version becoming
neuter.

<snip>

For a long time "man" was considered "generic" (or perhaps "common"
gender rather than "neuter"), but nowadays many women object to that
usage, with the result that even hymns and Bible translations have often
been revised to accommodate their concerns. (I've sometimes wondered
what German "feminists" do, when even "Mensch" [= human being of either
gender] is still grammatically masculine: "der Mensch.")

I have never heard the term "steward" applied to a female, What were
"stewards" and "stewardesses" on aircraft are now "flight attendants."
Similarly, "waiters" and "waitresses" are now "servers" or,
collectively, "waitstaff"; I've seen the words "waitron" and
"waitperson," but I don't know whether anyone uses them.

Perce

[Leslie Danks]

Post by Percival P. Cassidy

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Latino vs. Latina
By Dänk 42Ø
16 May 2013
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was criticized during her
confirmation hearing for having described herself as a "Wise Latina" in
the past. Whether she is wise is a matter of opinion, but she is
definitely of Latin-American heritage.
The problem here is that the term "Latina" is sexist by the standards of
American political correctness. English is one of the few languages that
has no gender inflection. There are no "male" or "female" nouns like in
Spanish or German.

"Masculine" and "feminine," surely, rather than "male and "female."

Post by Dänk 42Ø
There are still a handful of gender-specific nouns in English: Man and
woman, waiter and waitress, steward and stewardess, murderer and
murderess, comedian and comedienne, actor and actress, author and
authoress etc. The feminine versions of these words have largely been
purged from modern American English, with the masculine version becoming
neuter.

<snip>
For a long time "man" was considered "generic" (or perhaps "common"
gender rather than "neuter"), but nowadays many women object to that
usage, with the result that even hymns and Bible translations have often
been revised to accommodate their concerns. (I've sometimes wondered
what German "feminists" do, when even "Mensch" [= human being of either
gender] is still grammatically masculine: "der Mensch.")

Austrians talk about "Menscha" meaning several female humans, but I don't
know if it has a plural.

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
I have never heard the term "steward" applied to a female, What were
"stewards" and "stewardesses" on aircraft are now "flight attendants."
Similarly, "waiters" and "waitresses" are now "servers" or,
collectively, "waitstaff"; I've seen the words "waitron" and
"waitperson," but I don't know whether anyone uses them.

[Christian Weisgerber]

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
I have never heard the term "steward" applied to a female,

I imagine a football steward (UK) who is a woman is still called a
steward.

[David Hatunen]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:36:10 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
For a long time "man" was considered "generic" (or perhaps "common"
gender rather than "neuter"), but nowadays many women object to that
usage, with the result that even hymns and Bible translations have often
been revised to accommodate their concerns. (I've sometimes wondered
what German "feminists" do, when even "Mensch" [= human being of either
gender] is still grammatically masculine: "der Mensch.")

And, as Mark Twain pointed out, "maedchen" is neuter. Ho hum.

[Ian Jackson]

Post by David Hatunen
On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:36:10 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
For a long time "man" was considered "generic" (or perhaps "common"
gender rather than "neuter"), but nowadays many women object to that
usage, with the result that even hymns and Bible translations have often
been revised to accommodate their concerns. (I've sometimes wondered
what German "feminists" do, when even "Mensch" [= human being of either
gender] is still grammatically masculine: "der Mensch.")

And, as Mark Twain pointed out, "maedchen" is neuter. Ho hum.

In Dutch, all diminutives are neuter (even when they refer to people). I
presume the same applies in German.

[Robert Bannister]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by David Hatunen
On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:36:10 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
For a long time "man" was considered "generic" (or perhaps "common"
gender rather than "neuter"), but nowadays many women object to that
usage, with the result that even hymns and Bible translations have often
been revised to accommodate their concerns. (I've sometimes wondered
what German "feminists" do, when even "Mensch" [= human being of either
gender] is still grammatically masculine: "der Mensch.")

And, as Mark Twain pointed out, "maedchen" is neuter. Ho hum.

In Dutch, all diminutives are neuter (even when they refer to people). I
presume the same applies in German.

Same in Macedonian, but not Russian.

[David Hatunen]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 23:02:39 +0100, Ian Jackson

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by David Hatunen
On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:36:10 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
For a long time "man" was considered "generic" (or perhaps "common"
gender rather than "neuter"), but nowadays many women object to that
usage, with the result that even hymns and Bible translations have often
been revised to accommodate their concerns. (I've sometimes wondered
what German "feminists" do, when even "Mensch" [= human being of either
gender] is still grammatically masculine: "der Mensch.")

And, as Mark Twain pointed out, "maedchen" is neuter. Ho hum.

In Dutch, all diminutives are neuter (even when they refer to people). I
presume the same applies in German.

Certainly for all diminutives formed by the suffices "-lein" and
"-chen".

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
I have never heard the term "steward" applied to a female, What were
"stewards" and "stewardesses" on aircraft are now "flight
attendants."

That's because the word got that specific meaning at a point when
(essentially) only women had the job. I don't recall ever hearing a
man called a "steward" in that sense.

Poking around Google, I see a number of references to women as wine
stewards and as stewards of this and that.

[Robert Bannister]

Post by Evan Kirshenbaum

Post by Percival P. Cassidy
I have never heard the term "steward" applied to a female, What were
"stewards" and "stewardesses" on aircraft are now "flight
attendants."

That's because the word got that specific meaning at a point when
(essentially) only women had the job. I don't recall ever hearing a
man called a "steward" in that sense.

I know a bloke who is a right bar steward.

[Espanuelo]

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Latino vs. Latina
By Dänk 42Ø
16 May 2013
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was criticized during her
confirmation hearing for having described herself as a "Wise Latina" in
the past. Whether she is wise is a matter of opinion, but she is
definitely of Latin-American heritage.
The problem here is that the term "Latina" is sexist by the standards of
American political correctness. English is one of the few languages that
has no gender inflection. There are no "male" or "female" nouns like in
Spanish or German.
There are still a handful of gender-specific nouns in English: Man and
woman, waiter and waitress, steward and stewardess, murderer and
murderess, comedian and comedienne, actor and actress, author and
authoress etc. The feminine versions of these words have largely been
purged from modern American English, with the masculine version becoming
neuter.
Every enlightened liberal knows that calling Angelina Jolie or Uma
Thurman an "actress" is sexist and forbidden. All Hollywood celebrities
are "actors." There is even a movement to eliminate the "best female
actor" category from the Academy Awards, since men and womyn (and
transgendered she-thangs) are equal and should not be differentiated.
I do not disagree with this trend, but I can't help but notice that
enlightened lily-white liberals are hypocrites for demanding the
neuterization of the American-English language, while happily importing
sexist gendered words from other languages, in this case Spanish.
The wonderful thing about American-English is its ability to absorb new
words from other languages, which is why it has become THE most popular
international language. For example, words like "karma" and "taco" are
co-opted directly from Hindi and Spanish, something which is not
permissible in languages like French.
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other American-
English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the historical
masculine form for male and female alike. Since she spoke of
"herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to) in American-
English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term "Wise LatinO", not
"LatinA".
Furthermore, if adhering to foreign language grammar conventions is so
important to lily-white liberals, so much so that they are willing to
throw their deliberate neuterization of American-English grammar under
the proverbial bus, then they should go all the way and use foreign
capitalization and punctuation conventions. In Spanish, "latino" and
"latina" (and other ethnic-nationality nouns and adjectives) are always
lower case, unless they begin a sentence. If las reglas del idioma
español are followed correctly, Sra. Sotomayor is a wise "latina." In
American-English, she is always a "Latino" (wise or not).

Question resolved: is called Hispanic.

Latino or Latina is called Hispanic.

[Dänk 42Ø]

Post by Espanuelo

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Latino vs. Latina
By Dänk 42Ø
16 May 2013
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was criticized during her
confirmation hearing for having described herself as a "Wise Latina" in
the past. Whether she is wise is a matter of opinion, but she is
definitely of Latin-American heritage.
The problem here is that the term "Latina" is sexist by the standards
of American political correctness. English is one of the few languages
that has no gender inflection. There are no "male" or "female" nouns
like in Spanish or German.
There are still a handful of gender-specific nouns in English: Man and
woman, waiter and waitress, steward and stewardess, murderer and
murderess, comedian and comedienne, actor and actress, author and
authoress etc. The feminine versions of these words have largely been
purged from modern American English, with the masculine version
becoming neuter.
Every enlightened liberal knows that calling Angelina Jolie or Uma
Thurman an "actress" is sexist and forbidden. All Hollywood
celebrities are "actors." There is even a movement to eliminate the
"best female actor" category from the Academy Awards, since men and
womyn (and transgendered she-thangs) are equal and should not be
differentiated.
I do not disagree with this trend, but I can't help but notice that
enlightened lily-white liberals are hypocrites for demanding the
neuterization of the American-English language, while happily importing
sexist gendered words from other languages, in this case Spanish.
The wonderful thing about American-English is its ability to absorb new
words from other languages, which is why it has become THE most popular
international language. For example, words like "karma" and "taco" are
co-opted directly from Hindi and Spanish, something which is not
permissible in languages like French.
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other American-
English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the historical
masculine form for male and female alike. Since she spoke of "herself"
(a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to) in American- English,
Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term "Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".
Furthermore, if adhering to foreign language grammar conventions is so
important to lily-white liberals, so much so that they are willing to
throw their deliberate neuterization of American-English grammar under
the proverbial bus, then they should go all the way and use foreign
capitalization and punctuation conventions. In Spanish, "latino" and
"latina" (and other ethnic-nationality nouns and adjectives) are always
lower case, unless they begin a sentence. If las reglas del idioma
español are followed correctly, Sra. Sotomayor is a wise "latina." In
American-English, she is always a "Latino" (wise or not).

Question resolved: is called Hispanic.
Latino or Latina is called Hispanic.

"Hispanic" could be used, but I don't like the term because it implies
the person is from Spain. And though the preferred term for the region
south of the U.S. border is "Latin-America," calling its residents
"Latins" doesn't sound right -- implying that they are Romans.

What bothers me is that the use of these terms lumps people from diverse
ethnicities and nationalities into a single group, with their only common
trait being that they speak Spanish. Americans, Canadians, British, and
many Indians speak English, but they are not all lumped together as
"Anglo."

Nobody would refer to an African-American as an "Anglo," even though he
speaks English. A person of African descent from Cuba could be called
"Hispanic," though. This doesn't make sense.

[Cheryl]

Post by Dänk 42Ø
"Hispanic" could be used, but I don't like the term because it implies
the person is from Spain. And though the preferred term for the region
south of the U.S. border is "Latin-America," calling its residents
"Latins" doesn't sound right -- implying that they are Romans.
What bothers me is that the use of these terms lumps people from diverse
ethnicities and nationalities into a single group, with their only common
trait being that they speak Spanish. Americans, Canadians, British, and
many Indians speak English, but they are not all lumped together as
"Anglo."
Nobody would refer to an African-American as an "Anglo," even though he
speaks English. A person of African descent from Cuba could be called
"Hispanic," though. This doesn't make sense.

People passionate about classifying other people are going to find out
sooner or later that a great number of them, like the Cuban with African
ancestors or the native English speaker with, oh, almost any kind of
ancestors, fit into more than one category. Simple clear classifications
that 'make sense' probably don't exist.

If the person in question wants to call herself a Latina, it doesn't
bother me. The usage is clear enough even if it isn't strictly logical.

[David Hatunen]

Post by Dänk 42Ø

Post by Espanuelo

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Furthermore, if adhering to foreign language grammar conventions is so
important to lily-white liberals, so much so that they are willing to
throw their deliberate neuterization of American-English grammar under
the proverbial bus, then they should go all the way and use foreign
capitalization and punctuation conventions. In Spanish, "latino" and
"latina" (and other ethnic-nationality nouns and adjectives) are always
lower case, unless they begin a sentence. If las reglas del idioma
español are followed correctly, Sra. Sotomayor is a wise "latina." In
American-English, she is always a "Latino" (wise or not).

Question resolved: is called Hispanic.
Latino or Latina is called Hispanic.

"Hispanic" could be used, but I don't like the term because it implies
the person is from Spain.

And ti wouldn't include Brazilians.

Post by Dänk 42Ø
And though the preferred term for the region
south of the U.S. border is "Latin-America," calling its residents
"Latins" doesn't sound right -- implying that they are Romans.
What bothers me is that the use of these terms lumps people from diverse
ethnicities and nationalities into a single group, with their only common
trait being that they speak Spanish. Americans, Canadians, British, and
many Indians speak English, but they are not all lumped together as
"Anglo."

Yes, they are. At least where the distinction is needed, as in, say,
Quebec.

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Nobody would refer to an African-American as an "Anglo," even though he
speaks English.

They might in Canada to distinguish an A-A from the Quebecois. I don't
suppose he would be an "African-American", though, would he?

If a Black man born and raised in Canadian moves to the US would he
become an "African-American"?

Post by Dänk 42Ø
A person of African descent from Cuba could be called
"Hispanic," though. This doesn't make sense.

Or from Puerto Rico.

One of the complaints in Latin/Hispanic communties is that the second
generation of immigrants tends to speak almost accentless English and
is losing the ability to speak Spanish. Are these descendants "Latino"
or "Hispanic"?

My ancestors went through the immigrant assimilation process: all my
grandparents came from Finland. My grandparents spoke rather bad
English, but my mother and father, and my aunts and uncles, were
bilingually fluent. I can barely speak any Finnish save for a few
tourist words. Can I call myself a "Finnish-American"?

Perhaps the real answer is to stop treating all Latin-Americans as a
single bloc, something they tend to resent anyway, and be more
specific. Call them "Mexican" or "Mexican-American", "Nicaraguan",
etc.

So what do you suggest?

(Some twenty -odd years ago a member of the San Francisco Fire
Department attempted to take advantage of a provision favoring Latinos
for promotion. He was refused because he was of Portuguese descent.)

[Dänk 42Ø]

Post by David Hatunen

Post by Dänk 42Ø

Post by Espanuelo

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Furthermore, if adhering to foreign language grammar conventions is
so important to lily-white liberals, so much so that they are willing
to throw their deliberate neuterization of American-English grammar
under the proverbial bus, then they should go all the way and use
foreign capitalization and punctuation conventions. In Spanish,
"latino" and "latina" (and other ethnic-nationality nouns and
adjectives) are always lower case, unless they begin a sentence. If
las reglas del idioma español are followed correctly, Sra. Sotomayor
is a wise "latina." In American-English, she is always a "Latino"
(wise or not).

Question resolved: is called Hispanic.
Latino or Latina is called Hispanic.

"Hispanic" could be used, but I don't like the term because it implies
the person is from Spain.

And ti wouldn't include Brazilians.

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

"Today, organizations in the United States use the term as a broad catch
all to refer to persons with a historical and cultural relationship
either with Spain and Portugal or only with Spain, regardless of race."

Post by David Hatunen

Post by Dänk 42Ø
What bothers me is that the use of these terms lumps people from diverse
ethnicities and nationalities into a single group, with their only
common trait being that they speak Spanish. Americans, Canadians,
British, and many Indians speak English, but they are not all lumped
together as "Anglo."

Yes, they are. At least where the distinction is needed, as in, say,
Quebec.

I used to work with a guy from Brazil. He was of French-Italian descent,
with blonde hair and blue eyes, but was technically "Hispanic" by the
U.S. federal definition. Had his ancestors emigrated to Quebec and he
had grown up speaking French instead of Portuguese, he would just be
"white."

Even if I don't agree with it, I can understand creating "privileged"
categories for descendants of groups victimized by U.S. policies in the
past. However, I don't recall Brazilians or other South Americans ever
being enslaved in the USA. I also do not see much difference between
French-Italians in Brazil who speak Portuguese and French-Italians in
Quebec who speak French.

As for Spanish-speaking "Latinos," I am offended by the suggestion that
they are persecuted in the present or past, given how willing they are to
risk their lives escaping their homelands for a better life in the USA.
African slaves had no choice to come here, but the Mexicans risking their
lives crossing deadly deserts and rivers to come here DO have a choice.

Post by David Hatunen
One of the complaints in Latin/Hispanic communties is that the second
generation of immigrants tends to speak almost accentless English and is
losing the ability to speak Spanish. Are these descendants "Latino" or
"Hispanic"?
My ancestors went through the immigrant assimilation process: all my
grandparents came from Finland. My grandparents spoke rather bad
English, but my mother and father, and my aunts and uncles, were
bilingually fluent. I can barely speak any Finnish save for a few
tourist words. Can I call myself a "Finnish-American"?

I'm an American mutt, with ancestors from several European countries,
including England, Wales, Ireland, Denmark, and Germany. I consider
myself to be an American above all else. If my ethnicity controlled my
identity, I would be at war with myself!

Post by David Hatunen
(Some twenty -odd years ago a member of the San Francisco Fire
Department attempted to take advantage of a provision favoring Latinos
for promotion. He was refused because he was of Portuguese descent.)

Interesting. I'd like to know how the case turned out. I remember a
somewhat similar case of a white man from South Africa (?) who emigrated
to the USA, became a U.S. citizen and later enrolled in college. The
application form demanded he report his "race," so he checked "African-
American." He was technically from Africa, he was a naturalized American
citizen, but he was told he was not allowed to describe himself as an
"African-American."

When I was in high school I was friends with a lily-white guy. After
graduating he applied to a university, listing his "race" as "Native
American." Unbeknown to me, he was 1/8th Cherokee, and though I had
always seen him as the epitome of middle-class whiteness, he was actually
an oppressed minority and deserving of affirmative action. I can't blame
him for taking advantage of such a ridiculous legal loophole.

[Espanuelo]

Post by Dänk 42Ø

Post by Espanuelo

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Latino vs. Latina
By Dänk 42Ø
16 May 2013
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was criticized during her
confirmation hearing for having described herself as a "Wise Latina" in
the past. Whether she is wise is a matter of opinion, but she is
definitely of Latin-American heritage.
The problem here is that the term "Latina" is sexist by the standards
of American political correctness. English is one of the few languages
that has no gender inflection. There are no "male" or "female" nouns
like in Spanish or German.
There are still a handful of gender-specific nouns in English: Man and
woman, waiter and waitress, steward and stewardess, murderer and
murderess, comedian and comedienne, actor and actress, author and
authoress etc. The feminine versions of these words have largely been
purged from modern American English, with the masculine version
becoming neuter.
Every enlightened liberal knows that calling Angelina Jolie or Uma
Thurman an "actress" is sexist and forbidden. All Hollywood
celebrities are "actors." There is even a movement to eliminate the
"best female actor" category from the Academy Awards, since men and
womyn (and transgendered she-thangs) are equal and should not be
differentiated.
I do not disagree with this trend, but I can't help but notice that
enlightened lily-white liberals are hypocrites for demanding the
neuterization of the American-English language, while happily importing
sexist gendered words from other languages, in this case Spanish.
The wonderful thing about American-English is its ability to absorb new
words from other languages, which is why it has become THE most popular
international language. For example, words like "karma" and "taco" are
co-opted directly from Hindi and Spanish, something which is not
permissible in languages like French.
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other American-
English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the historical
masculine form for male and female alike. Since she spoke of "herself"
(a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to) in American- English,
Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term "Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".
Furthermore, if adhering to foreign language grammar conventions is so
important to lily-white liberals, so much so that they are willing to
throw their deliberate neuterization of American-English grammar under
the proverbial bus, then they should go all the way and use foreign
capitalization and punctuation conventions. In Spanish, "latino" and
"latina" (and other ethnic-nationality nouns and adjectives) are always
lower case, unless they begin a sentence. If las reglas del idioma
español are followed correctly, Sra. Sotomayor is a wise "latina." In
American-English, she is always a "Latino" (wise or not).

Question resolved: is called Hispanic.
Latino or Latina is called Hispanic.

"Hispanic" could be used, but I don't like the term because it implies
the person is from Spain. And though the preferred term for the region
south of the U.S. border is "Latin-America," calling its residents
"Latins" doesn't sound right -- implying that they are Romans.

the termination -ic gives to the adjective or noun a meaning of
assimilation or semblance.

"Hispanic", because he o she speaks Castilian language (as known as
Spanish).

When the Hispanic do not speak Castilian he will leave to be Hispanic.

Post by Dänk 42Ø
What bothers me is that the use of these terms lumps people from diverse
ethnicities and nationalities into a single group, with their only common
trait being that they speak Spanish. Americans, Canadians, British, and
many Indians speak English, but they are not all lumped together as
"Anglo."

Germanic.

Then this Indian is Germanic if he do not know his Native language.

Post by Dänk 42Ø
Nobody would refer to an African-American as an "Anglo," even though he
speaks English. A person of African descent from Cuba could be called
"Hispanic," though. This doesn't make sense.

A Negro from Cuba is Hispanic if he speaks Castilian and he do not
speak a Bantu language.

Hispanic, Germanic, Lusitanic or Portugalic or Portic, Francic,......

[David Hatunen]

Post by Dänk 42Ø
The wonderful thing about American-English is its ability to absorb new
words from other languages, which is why it has become THE most popular
international language. For example, words like "karma" and "taco" are
co-opted directly from Hindi and Spanish, something which is not
permissible in languages like French.
Thus, it is illogical to absorb a foreign word like "Latino" while
keeping a gender distinction that does not exist in other American-
English words. The modern grammar rule is to use the historical
masculine form for male and female alike. Since she spoke of
"herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I refer to) in American-
English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the term "Wise LatinO", not
"LatinA".
Furthermore, if adhering to foreign language grammar conventions is so
important to lily-white liberals, so much so that they are willing to
throw their deliberate neuterization of American-English grammar under
the proverbial bus, then they should go all the way and use foreign
capitalization and punctuation conventions. In Spanish, "latino" and
"latina" (and other ethnic-nationality nouns and adjectives) are always
lower case, unless they begin a sentence. If las reglas del idioma
español are followed correctly, Sra. Sotomayor is a wise "latina." In
American-English, she is always a "Latino" (wise or not).

Words haven't been completely adopted into English until they've lost
any foreign grammar aspects. "Latino" is still a foeign word; the
correct English word should be simply "Latin". I suspect that calling
a Spanish-speaking female a "Latino: would be a bit offensive.

Or, for Sotomayer, simply "Puerto Rican".

Nevertheless, "Latino" and "Latina" can be handy usages, especially in
a town like Tucson where Spanglish is common.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Post by David Hatunen
Words haven't been completely adopted into English until they've lost
any foreign grammar aspects.

So "axis" won't be completely adopted into English until its plural is
"axises" rather than "axes"?

[Alberto Izquierdo]

Post by David Hatunen
I suspect that calling
a Spanish-speaking female a "Latino: would be a bit offensive.

Se consideraria sexista (sic) usar una palabra de genero masculino
para referirse a una mujer.

[Lewis]

Since she spoke of "herself" (a rare exception to the neuter rule I
refer to) in American- English, Sonia Sotomayor should have used the
term "Wise LatinO", not "LatinA".

This is one of the dumbest things I've read all week.