Disputatio:Rassismus

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

De re "Phyletismus" scripta[fontem recensere]

Genus[fontem recensere]

Rafael, Cassell's subicit 'race' esse genus. IacobusAmor 19:14, 2 Maii 2009 (UTC)

In biologia autem genus non potest esse, quia genus multas species includit; et invicem species multas phyles includit. Fons mea est Words (phyle, phyles N F [GXXEK] NeoLatin uncommon race;) et vide radicem nominis phyleticum.--Rafaelgarcia 19:24, 2 Maii 2009 (UTC)
Genus may be the more general term, and would certainly be the more readily intelligible. West Side Story has a song whose lyrics go: "A boy like that who'd kill your brother, / Forget that boy and find another, / One of your own kind, / Stick to your own kind!" The "kinds" in question there are Hispanic and Anglo. I'd think genera would be just right for them. IacobusAmor 19:36, 2 Maii 2009 (UTC)

Copied from 1000 paginae[fontem recensere]

Odium phyleticum, Redmond english-latin glossorium

This is a case for Neolatin, since the ancients clearly did not have that concept (or arguably it was so natural for them that it did not require a special word). We might come up with something like Misophylia, or just go for Rassismus (race, the dictionary says, is derived from Old German reiza "line")?--Ceylon 10:37, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
On the other hand, Odium phyleticum already having been attested, is to be preferred. --Rafaelgarcia 11:45, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
By the way, how can one best render "already having been attested" in latin? Attestor being deponent, "iam attestatum" wouldn't work.--Rafaelgarcia 11:45, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
Attestor is one of the few deponentia whose participle can be used in a passive sense; so attestatum is fine, or otherwise legitur apud ..., exstat in ..., iam invenitur ... etc.
There seems to be a question of principle, however, on what is a valid attestation. I would argue (contrary to current practice on Vicipaedia) that a translation coined by a modern dictionary, but not afterwards attested in Latin writing, should not be considered on a par with a word used in exstant ancient or Neolatin literature, but rather compete on the same level with our own suggestions. (The same question came up on Disputatio:Telavivum re. Egger's Vernicollis.)--Ceylon 12:32, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
Misophylia actually sounds nicer to me and is a single word--a major plus. And I actually found a nonlatin source on the web for it. I also agree that not all attestations are equally valid and that older, ancient ones should be preferred all other things being equal. Nevertheless, it is an awkward thing for us as an encyclopedia to adopt a policy of preferring our translations to preexisting ones. I think we can have exceptions but only in exceptional cases where we first discuss the merits of the alternatives. Personally, I would have no objections to using Misophylia and giving odium phyleticum as a synonym.--Rafaelgarcia 13:40, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
Really though, a large problem relating to titles like 'odium phyleticum' and 'misophylia'--not in themselves, but at least insofar as we're linking it to en:racism et al.--is that racism isn't just about hate for certain races, but can be just as much about preferential treatment for a race as well... or even just racial prejudice in general, where one assumes ideas about a person (which may be positive, negative or neutral--e.g. the sorts of foods they might prefer) just because one knows them to be of a certain race. A more neutrally-formed word like phyletismus (google:phyletismus, from Greek google:φυλετισμός) would probably be better. —Mucius Tever 00:55, 26 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
That's a very good point. Affirmative action and other programs of racial preference belong in the same category as Nazism, black slavery, and the like. Not all racism is motivated by hatred, by often by mistaken ideologies. Racial Hatred (Odium Phyleticum ), of course, is a particularly vicious subcategory of racism.--Rafaelgarcia 01:12, 26 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Distinctio &c.[fontem recensere]

De "discriminare = to divide separate is essence of discrimination." Cassell's nobis dicit discriminate esse 'diiudicare, discernere, distinguere, internoscere' et discrimination esse "distinctio, discrimen'. IacobusAmor 03:52, 22 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

True; however, the English word discrimination now means "treating different groups unequally". Possibly this current meaning of "discrimination" became prominent after Cassell's was compiled. At any rate, I don't see anything of that kind visible among the senses of distinctio, discrimen in Lewis & Short.
Incidentally, currently we are using "discrimen" to mean a turning-point or crisis as in Discrimen Tertii Saeculi: Lewis & Short does support that. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:56, 22 Augusti 2009 (UTC)
In my vocabulary, discriminate means 'make a distinction (between/among)'. A tiny little semantic offshoot, the one you're citing (a late-twentieth-century innovation?), is 'make a distinction (against)'. IacobusAmor 12:44, 22 Augusti 2009 (UTC)
Distinguere, Discernere, Dignosnere, and Discriminare according to L&S are very close synonyms meaning to separate and set apart. I'll have to think about this further.
Discrimen and crisis are likewise very close synonyms emphasizing different kinds of crisis: a discrimen is an event that serves as a dividing line between before and after 911 is a discrimen, or a depression or a war can be a discrimen; a crisis (originally meaning a medical crisis) is a single event or climax with uncertain outcome calling for a decision; e.g. a fever reaches a crisis, a person reaches a crisis in his life, etc, the decision to run for president was a crisis for Obama and the decision to invade Iraq was a crisis for Bush.---Rafaelgarcia 14:48, 22 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

Contra "phyletismum"[fontem recensere]

"Phyletismus", "tromocratia" (pro terrorismo), "homophylophilia" (pro homosexualitate), &c. . . . Equidem demiror, unde et cur haec verba arcana, acutula, litteratula in paediam nostram deprompta sint, quamquam omnes fere aliae Vicipaediae vocabulis a nostra lingua oriundis utuntur. Est velut nomina Latinae originis odiosa sint, nomina autem graecissantia decorosa. ¶ Quod ad "phyletismum" attinet, ne Graeci quidem hodierni hóc utuntur vocabulo, sed ipsum "ratsismum" sibi adoptarunt. Unde igitur hoc vocabulum mutuati sumus? Ego "phyletismo" adversor; et puto veram quaestionem ad scribendi modum pertinere: utrum rassismus an razismus an ra[?]ismus scribi debeat. Utique hanc vocabuli speciem praefero "phyletismo", qui mihi quoque, quamquam Graece calleo, obscuritate quádam involutam esse videtur. Neander 03:30, 9 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Leviter corrigo: Graeci hodierni rarius verbo "phyletismo" utuntur, sed id verbum sicut synonymum "ratsismi" nativum pro certo accipiunt. De re graviori (i.e. quomodo oportet paginam nostram rubricare) haud pronuntio. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:54, 9 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
Confer en:Phyletism. IacobusAmor 14:20, 9 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

De nova re "Rassismus" scripta[fontem recensere]

"Phyletismus", "tromocratia" (pro terrorismo), "homophylophilia" (pro homosexualitate), &c. . . . Equidem demiror, unde et cur haec verba arcana, acutula, litteratula in paediam nostram deprompta sint, quamquam omnes fere aliae Vicipaediae vocabulis a nostra lingua oriundis utuntur. Est velut nomina Latinae originis odiosa sint, nomina autem graecissantia decorosa. ¶ Quod ad "phyletismum" attinet, ne Graeci quidem hodierni hóc utuntur vocabulo, sed ipsum "ratsismum" sibi adoptarunt. Unde igitur hoc vocabulum mutuati sumus? Ego "phyletismo" adversor; et puto veram quaestionem ad scribendi modum pertinere: utrum rassismus an razismus an ra[?]ismus scribi debeat. Utique hanc vocabuli speciem praefero "phyletismo", qui mihi quoque, quamquam Graece calleo, obscuritate quádam involutam esse videtur. Neander 03:27, 9 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

De ratione scribendi oportet utamur forma rassismus quae in dictionnariis latinitatis recentioris (Licoppe etc....) attestatur necnon in scriptionibus. Verbum originem trahit a lingua portugalensi et venit e verbo radix hac de causa aliquis dixit verbum radicismus (amor nimius sui originis) etiam adhiberi posse. Phyletismus nusquam inveni!!! Vale.--Bruxellensis 10:23, 9 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

REDIRECT[fontem recensere]

"nonne melius in redirectionem convertere?"

Melius, si rassismus lemma revera erit. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:17, 13 Decembris 2015 (UTC)
Hodie certe melius, quod "rassismus" nomen paginae revera hodie est. An erit, alii decernent! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:21, 13 Decembris 2015 (UTC)
Sine dubio melius. Paginam quidem "phyletismi" heri delevi, quia plus sex menses in statu "non stipulae" fuerat, nec melior facta erat. Neander (disputatio) 17:51, 13 Decembris 2015 (UTC)