On Fri, 17 Mar 1995, Faith Freewoman wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Aug 1956, Kylie Matthews wrote:
>
> > [Women] is derived from the word men because if men were derived from
> > women then the generic would then have to be women and not men.
>
> Well, that's what Webster's tells us, and that's the assumption behind
> people who are purported to be experts in the English language.
>
> But, my response is to go ahead thinking that "men" is derived from women
> and that someone just slipped up years ago;
I am not sure it was a slip up. Remember who was responsible for
writing/editing the dictionaries! They were not female and they were not
people of color... need I say more?
That is why I agree with whoever wrote about the power of Mary Daly's
work (I think it was Brian). Also, Suzette Haden Elgin's work is
interesting especially her "Native Tongue" series of sci fi novels which
recounts the story of future women linguists who set out to develop a
language reflective of the life experiences of women... These are older
books and hard to find, but I really love them.
all we need to do is point
> out the fact often enough, and pretty soon the words will begin to
> reflect the biological facts: everyone starts as a woman, and some just
> evolve differently to provide us starters with mirrors, and themselves
> with the experience of not being the dominant species.
I am not sure that it will do to simply point out the "facts". The ways
that languages change is much more subtle, unconscious, and non-rational
than that. Again, the Native Tongue books are fascinating because they
eventually examine the processes by which this "women's tongue" is
introduced into wider society.
Cheers,
Jayne
