Halmiriliath wrote...
DuffyMJ wrote...
So not only are you wrong, but you are also clinging to the fact that the adjective is a racial slur used by some to ignorantly refer to eastern peoples' as "orientals" (likely by ignorant racists who also had little basic knowledge of geography).
It's also hysterical that you're clinging to the etymology of the word itself to "prove" your point. I hate to break it to you, but the Roman Empire (where Latin was the lingua franca) considered Constantinople the capitol of "the east" as they were ignorant of Han China, Japan, and what you irrationally refer to as "the orient". The Roman/Latin orient was Asia Minor. Period. End of story. Thank you, come again.
This is a subjective argument. The Oxford Dictionary of English defines the 'orient' as:
1. ( the Orient ) (literary) the countries of the East, especially east Asia.
2. [mass noun] the special lustre of a pearl of the finest quality (with reference to fine pearls from the East).
Note, 'especially' denotes its subjectivity.
And just another quick point, Latin was not just the lingua franca of the Roman Empire, but of diplomacy, intellectual and religious works until well into the 'modern' period in Europe, when numerous contacts - and in some cases, colonies - existed in China, Japan and other parts of the Far East.
Sorry for going off topic, but I get pedantic when it comes to history and language.
That's not true at all... Latin continued to be used in the realm of scholarship, but was largely replaced by French as the international language of diplomacy (lingua franca literally means language of the Franks) during the Renaissance. Colonialism was also largely mercantile not just economically, but culturally as well. All legal documents with British colonies in China were generally done in English, French indochina colonies in French, etc... Latin was out of the picture.
I agree about the subjectivity issue, but frankly it's -- at the very least -- an archaic term, and at worst an offensive term to use (whether it's referring to 'near eastern' people or far east asia) and the poster's use of the term and the variance of its meaning was short-sighted. The dude might as well have said "hey why doesn't the game have asians -- you know those types that have the funny eyes, the rest of them don't count!"
Modifié par DuffyMJ, 10 mars 2010 - 08:39 .
Retour en haut
Racism on the part of those who used the terms in slander against east asians in the past are responsible for the term being coined as a way of referring to peoples of that general region, just as is the case in the west indies here in my current hemisphere. I wasn't alive. You weren't alive. Though Natives in North and South America can/do identify themselves as 'Indians' it is still a misuse of the word 'Indian' that simply stuck despite it's wrongful "subjective" use. If that comparison doesn't make the concept clear enough for you, then I really don't know what else to say other than, well, you're overly invested in the issue and can't see the truth. 
