Kangaroos kick Brit butts

Forgive my spelling as I learnt this one aurally, but Gwercia Mohen!

 

................& no one mention the Cricket 'Ashes'.

 

Actually I'm pretty sure it got mentioned at least once!

 

yep it did get mentioned

hahahahaha we kicked you ass

(twice now! )

 

hang on a minute. Are you now being english as well when it suits you?

 

yep, its the beauty of a united kingdom, take all the good bits leave all the shit bits

bet you couldnt believe your luck when i posted that!

 

Quite: discrimination based on race. Therefore it depends wholly upon how you define "race"

racism
n.

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

 

You're actually relying on an incorrect assumption there. You're assuming that the 'race' used in the context of the entry you've found for racism is the same as the 'race' which is used colloquially with a number of different meanings. There's no reason to assume that racism applies to every possible meaning of the word race.

 

I don't think that the term, sociologically speaking, is loose. I think the dictionary definition is loose and so doesn't accurately represent the specific meaning of it. Like I said, I don't see dictionaries as gospel. And for a term like race, with the ideological connotations that it has, you really need a more in depth analysis than a dictionary can provide....

 

You're both making the same simple mistake - you are imposing a limiting interpretation of the term. But, as we have learnt from the dictionary, just as it is possible to refer to "the female race" it is also possible to refer to racism in the context of nationality. Simply because this is not a widespread use of the term does not make it an inaccurate one.

Of course dictionaries are not Gospel Mr Sal; the generality of proper usages of the term rather prove that language use and connotation can often be extremely broad; why impose your narrow sociological agenda upon it?

 

For the sake of common understanding. You may see it as a mistake, but then it's a matter of opinion. I would see it as a mistake to accept broad overarching terms, when they can lead to confusion. It's not a narrow sociological agenda either, it's a narrowing down of the definition of a particular term. I would find it easier to divide that dictionary definition into the terms race and ethnicity, whilst at the same time recognising the overlap between the two, where the biological and the social space interact. I would also, Mr Show, identify a third division, that of nationality. You point to racism in the context of nationality, which I agree does exist in a limited use, but I would specifically call that xenophobia. Otherwise we run into all sorts of problems, accepting race as almost an (dare I say it) homonomonomonononym....

 

May I ask what dictionary you were using anyway? Doesn't look like OED to me. In fact it doesn't even look like that poor excuse for a dictionary they calle Webster's.

 

Oh Joel!!! Although I like your use of mutation!

 

Utterly irrelevant to the issue at hand. You may seek to use language in any way you wish but why deny the appositeness of commonly accepted usages of everday words? I really fail to understand what point you're attempting to make by arguing with quotations from a dictionary...

 

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2004 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Just looked both terms up in OED and all the senses occurring in the above are, of course, also represented there. What relevance does this have? Not only racist but a snob too? Nice!

 

My point by arguing with quotations from the dictionary is that just because a dictionary says something is so, does not mean that is an authoritative definition. When it comes to ideologically charged terms like race, a simple dictionary definition of a term falls far short of the depth of analysis necessary. By posting a dictionary quotation, it seemed as though you were implying that it a given fact, appologies if you were not. It's not utterly irrelevant, or even simply irrelevant (the word utterly itself being irrelevant there) you just disagree with me. Furthermore, these are not commonly accepted useages of the word, they are disputed uses of the word, otherwise we would not be having a debate over it....

 

Meanings of words would not be listed in the dictionary if they were not commonly accepted usages. Your disputing of the notion that these listed meanings are commonly accepted usages seems to indicate that you misunderstand the nature and function of a dictionary.

dictionary

n., pl. -ies.

1. A reference book containing an alphabetical list of words, with information given for each word, usually including meaning, pronunciation, and etymology.

This conversation is becoming silly.

 

That's a cyclical argument

 

cyclic (noun)-
1) occuring in cycles
2)chem, having a molecular structure containing one or more closed rings of atoms

DERIVATIVES cyclical (Adjective)

 

Indeed poo face....