My God Daughter

jillio said:
Uhh...she didn't call you a name. She used "audistic" as an adjective. And in a completely correct way according to rules of grammar. You, however, failed to understand the grammatical components of the sentence. The mistake was yours, in reading and grammatical understanding. Flip demonstrated a deaf usage of English superior to that of a hearing person.:lol:
Click to expand...

No, wouldn't it be akin to the word "racist"? If you make a racist comment, it isn't "racistic", it's racist. Shouldn't it follow the same pattern? The discrimination- Audism (racism), the person- audist (racist), the comment- audist (racist).

Linguists??
 
faire_jour said:
No, wouldn't it be akin to the word "racist"? If you make a racist comment, it isn't "racistic", it's racist. Shouldn't it follow the same pattern? The discrimination- Audism (racism), the person- audist (racist), the comment- audist (racist).

Linguists??
Click to expand...

Yes you are correct.
 
Fine, I'll rephrase....what parents believe their child needs.

There is not one way to raise a successful happy deaf child. There are pros and cons to each choice and it should be presented that way.
Click to expand...
true, but the thing is that oral only and mainstreaming is generally portrayed as having absolutly NO downsides. I am SO sick of AG Bell and oral only people portraying Deaf people as complete and total Sign only monolingal militants who don't wear hearing aids/CIs.
I'm ALSO sick of parental choice and yapping about " there's no ONE WAY to raise a dhh kid"
That just seems to be a cop out " Oh our hyperprogramming/therapy as lifestyle is WORKING, so HOW DARE you critcize our choices, and imply that our choice has any downsides!?"
I do think some parents are more open to Sign as an option if their kid doesn't appear to have a flair for oral skills. But a lot of parents just seem to think that oral only will automaticly give ALL the advantages of the hearing world....they say that, and they wonder why their oral mainstreamed dhh kid doesn't have very many close friends or has never had a boyfriend or girlfriend
 
faire_jour said:
No, wouldn't it be akin to the word "racist"? If you make a racist comment, it isn't "racistic", it's racist. Shouldn't it follow the same pattern? The discrimination- Audism (racism), the person- audist (racist), the comment- audist (racist).

Linguists??
Click to expand...

For racism, yes, but for audism, not necessary. Both audist and audistic is used. If audism was included in a dictionary, and it clearly stated there that it's "audist", you would probably be right, but this is not the case.
 
flip said:
For racism, yes, but for audism, not necessary. Both audist and audistic is used. If audism was included in a dictionary, and it clearly stated there that it's "audist", you would probably be right, but this is not the case.
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
faire_jour said:
No, wouldn't it be akin to the word "racist"? If you make a racist comment, it isn't "racistic", it's racist. Shouldn't it follow the same pattern? The discrimination- Audism (racism), the person- audist (racist), the comment- audist (racist).

Linguists??
Click to expand...

Uh, no. When the word is used as an adjecive, it is a qualifier for the action, not the person. You have simply taken what was a comment regarding a statement and turned it into a personal judgement.:giggle: It stems from the defensive perspective with which you approach things.
 
faire_jour said:
Does that mean I will get an apology from Jillio??? :laugh2:
Click to expand...

When I am wrong, you will get an apology. In this case, my assessment of the grammatical structure of the sentence, and the message it gave, is correct. That is your grammar lesson for the day.

Now, this thread is about a child, not an adult's grammatical errors in interpretation. Back to the topic.
 
According to Dictionary.com :


man·u·al·ist
–noun
1. an advocate of manualism.
2. a person who communicates through sign language.

–adjective
3. of or pertaining to manualism.



o·ral·ist
–noun
1. an advocate of oralism.
2. a deaf person who communicates through lipreading and speech.

–adjective
3. of or pertaining to oralism.


There is no "oralistic" or "manualistic." The noun and adjective forms of these words are the same. Why wouldn't they be the same construction for audist as a noun and adjective?
 
Ethnocentrism is ethnocentric.

You are asking valid questions, but this does not make it less striking that FJ states, for some unclear reasons, there is a clear answer to how the adjective of audism is supposed to be spelled, and then everyone ask each other about how it's really spelled.

:)
 
flip said:
Ethnocentrism is ethnocentric.

You are asking valid questions, but this does not make it less striking that FJ states, for some unclear reasons, there is a clear answer to how the adjective of audism is supposed to be spelled, and then everyone ask each other about how it's really spelled.

:)
Click to expand...

The key to me is that I said, legitimately, that I believed you had used the word incorrectly, and then Jillio laughed at me and said that a deaf person had better English skills than I did. I think that it perhaps it is up for debate, (I actually don't think so, but I suppose a point could be made that since it is not in the dictionary there is no definitive answer) but I believe that an apology is owed for attacking understanding of the English language.
 
flip said:
Ethnocentrism is ethnocentric.

You are asking valid questions, but this does not make it less striking that FJ states, for some unclear reasons, there is a clear answer to how the adjective of audism is supposed to be spelled, and then everyone ask each other about how it's really spelled.

:)
Click to expand...

The merry go round has started back up. :dizzy::dizzy: Someone mention nitpicking?
 
faire_jour said:
The key to me is that I said, legitimately, that I believed you had used the word incorrectly, and then Jillio laughed at me and said that a deaf person had better English skills than I did. I think that it perhaps it is up for debate, (I actually don't think so, but I suppose a point could be made that since it is not in the dictionary there is no definitive answer) but I believe that an apology is owed for attacking understanding of the English language.
Click to expand...

WHAT?!?!

You attack my english skills by commenting that "If you are going to call me names, at least get them right", and then ask Jillio for an apology for doing the same in a less offensive manner, to you.

I am deaf mute...
 
Back
Top