Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 05-20-2010, 06:09 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by capricorny View Post
A little background info, from www.patheos.com



Here it is:http://original.caw.org/articles/bouquet.html

Just for the record, I don't subscribe to the Ravenhearts' religous ideas, but when someone invents a new word, I think it is good to follow the intentions when using it. Otherwise, we should invent a new one for our intentions, if they deviate.
Language is fluid, if this was the case in language we would still be speaking...well something else. ...man imagine if the english language hadn't adapted at all to the tremendous changes from the times of the roman until now...have you ever tried to listen to welsh...holy craptastically poor language...
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 05-20-2010, 06:20 PM
capricorny capricorny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sub-ultima Thule
Posts: 65
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
Language is fluid, if this was the case in language we would still be speaking...well something else. ...man imagine if the english language hadn't adapted at all to the tremendous changes from the times of the roman until now...have you ever tried to listen to welsh...holy craptastically poor language...
So, then: Because of the fluidity, you just let basic concepts, lik "democracy", "energy", "uniform convergence" (mathematics) etc flow along and mean whatever the speakers feel they should mean at any instant?

Happy communications, then!

Edit, to be more precise:
Language changes, more or less rapidly, but always for a reason. May be "good" or "bad", but it's always there. And it's not always that rapid. In philosophy for instance, it would not make much sense to study Heraclitus, Socrates and Aristotle if there were no connection whatsoever between the way they used the words and what we understand with them today. There is always development, so interpreting over milennia is of course not trivial, but it's not impossible.

And in the actual case, we are barely two decades away. Which still may warrant substantial changes in the meaning of a newly coined word, but not by just invocation of fluidity of languange, you have to say WHY.

Last edited by capricorny; 05-20-2010 at 06:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 05-20-2010, 08:25 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CielDuMatin View Post
Multiamory or polyphilia would be the latin and greek-derived words.

So, mixing and matching, we also have polyamory and multiphilia. Not sure how well that last one would go down, considering the other words that end in -philia.... *grin*
Thanks, but my question was about "mono", not "mutli"/"poly".
Monoamorous is also a hybrid isn't it? What's the equivalent of "mono" in Latin? That's what my question was.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 05-20-2010, 08:32 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,868
Default

mono - single
single in latin is śnus,sólus and śnicus.

Pick one
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 05-20-2010, 09:03 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,369
Default

Hum... Multiamory vs Solamory?
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 05-20-2010, 11:00 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,868
Default

I would pick unicamory...as a unicorn hunter it seems fitting hahaha
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 05-20-2010, 11:31 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,094
Default

So why did "gay" go from meaning,

"having or showing a merry, lively mood"

To: "homosexual"



What about the word "virgin"?

Why did it go from meaning,
"an unmarried girl or woman"

to: "a person who has never had sexual intercourse"


I think that the problem here in this thread is that what WE (you/I) think the words SHOULD be or SHOULD mean-has little bearing on what they DO MEAN to the MAJORITY-because we aren't the majority.

We COULD agree to our own words for this board-but we've already seen enough people pissed off about how "judgmental" we are when we argued against one night stands not being love relationships.........

Told we were being closed-minded, unreasonable, insisting on putting OUR definitions on other people's lives when the board professes to be a place for ALL people to share about their poly-relationships.

There isn't a defition for the board-therefore we can't really hold to any one specified definition to be "agreed upon" in this venue either.

(And GOd knows my personal opinion is stricter than MANY of the opinions I've read on here, but it's not MY place to name another person's relationship)
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 05-20-2010, 11:59 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
So why did "gay" go from meaning,

"having or showing a merry, lively mood"

To: "homosexual"
I think for this specific one, it was when there needed to be a word for gay people to recognise each other, but without saying what they were in a flagrant way since it wasn't accepted. "Gay", having another, positive meaning, was a great euphemism.
It ended up staying because when people define themselves in a specific way, it makes sense to use that same meaning when talking about them.

I'm more curious as how it ended up meaning "lame" to some people (like, "that book is so gay" or things like that).

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
What about the word "virgin"?

Why did it go from meaning,
"an unmarried girl or woman"

to: "a person who has never had sexual intercourse"
I'm pretty sure these two were supposed to be the same thing. In other words, if you were unmarried, you had never had sexual intercourse. So it makes a lot of sense, when the two became separate things, that they each had their own word.

But yeah, language evolves, it's useless trying to control it. What matters is using the words in such a way that other people understand you. If you're the only person who understands what you're saying, you fail at communication.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 05-21-2010, 12:29 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,094
Default

[QUOTE=Tonberry;30310]
Quote:
I think for this specific one, it was when there needed to be a word for gay people to recognise each other, but without saying what they were in a flagrant way since it wasn't accepted. "Gay", having another, positive meaning, was a great euphemism.
It ended up staying because when people define themselves in a specific way, it makes sense to use that same meaning when talking about them.
Ton-it seems to me that this would promote the idea that if someone says that they are polyamorous-then they are and trying to rename them for your (general your-not you specifically) own comfort of definition is pointless...

Quote:
I'm more curious as how it ended up meaning "lame" to some people (like, "that book is so gay" or things like that).
Yet another great question. I'd LOVE to hear that one explained in a point-ful manner.What I mean is-someone explain how that was a productive change in the COMMON understanding of the meaning of the word.

Quote:
I'm pretty sure these two were supposed to be the same thing. In other words, if you were unmarried, you had never had sexual intercourse. So it makes a lot of sense, when the two became separate things, that they each had their own word.
Except that they definitely were not the same. Virgin in the time of Rome meant unwed-it did not mean you hadn't had sex.
But virgin now quite definitely means that you haven't had sex and its meaning has nothing to do with if you were or were not married.

Quote:
But yeah, language evolves, it's useless trying to control it. What matters is using the words in such a way that other people understand you. If you're the only person who understands what you're saying, you fail at communication.
I agree, very much so.
Unfortunately this is a HUGE issue in relationships-any type of relationships. We all have such different histories and our life experience impacts what we think a word means. This crops up all of the time in day to day life-but even more so on here where so many of us are from different places too. The words that have common meaning where I live-aren't the same words with that common meaning where RP lives for example. And the words that mean one thing here, mean something totally different there.
So we all have to be VERY certain that we understand and accept that it IS different in different places, in different circumstances and we need to allow people the grace to be real in whatever way is "right" where they are in life-not by trying to make them fit our definition.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 05-21-2010, 02:46 AM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
Except that they definitely were not the same. Virgin in the time of Rome meant unwed-it did not mean you hadn't had sex.
But virgin now quite definitely means that you haven't had sex and its meaning has nothing to do with if you were or were not married.
But in the meantime Christianity happened, where both had to be the same. I really think that's how it happened.

In French, for instance, "fille" used to be used for unmarried women and "femme" for married women. That's how you have the word "vieille fille" (literally "old girl", meaning "old spinster").
But now it has changed into "has had sexual intercourse", basically. Being married or not doesn't really change anything.

I think in cultures that were influenced by Christanity, marriage and sex ended up so tied together that the meaning of words shifted from one to the other to accommodate when the normed stopped being "no sexual intercourse before marriage".

Similarly, "virgin" can also mean "unsoiled", which goes with the belief that sex is wrong and a sin, which there again comes from Judeo-Christian influences (possibly because sex without being married was (ad sometimes still is) considered a sin, possibly because enjoying sex is sometimes - depending on who you're reading - considered a sin as it should only be for procreation).

Nowadays beliefs have changed from then, of course, but the influence on some words I think remains.

I think etymology is fascinating, either way.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
best practices, boundaries, foundations, guidelines, mono, mono/poly, monogamous, monogamy, principles, rules

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:24 PM.