Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[UXLZ]

Probably because I was born in 1997 and the only reference I've ever seen to 'blackface' was people getting worked up about it and cartoons for the 70s. I didn't even know it was a thing until a few years ago.

[Flying Dice]

It sure as hell is still relevant. I've lived in places where the only things keeping blackface shows from being a thing are that it's not socially acceptable to be that overtly racist any more in most communities and that television is better entertainment. Reelya's already pinpointed exactly why it's a problem.

That said, anyone conflating "non-black actor using makeup to play a black character" or "stage ninja being sneaky" with blackface is either being pedantic or doesn't know the history of it.

[Helgoland]

Well you could make the same argument that Germans running around telling "Jews in the gas ovens" jokes isn't offensive, since that doesn't happen "anymore" either. But institutional prejudice against blacks in America is still a thing, and it stretches right back to the blackface minstrel days without a break. You can't say the same for witches being burnt at the stake. Or Jews in gas ovens for that matter.

So it's ok to revive racist stuff against black people as long as you're reviving an old racism that became unpopular, because that's not racist anymore because it was replaced by modern racism? Pretty convoluted argument.

- Germany still has a fairly big antisemitism problem, both among immigrants - during the last Gaza war/operation/killing spree/IDF field trip/whathaveyou there were demonstrations where folks shouted "Jew, Jew, you cowardly pig, come out and fight on your own" - and among the 'bio-Germans' (I believe that is the accepted term - correct me if I'm wrong).

- Germany is probably the country where you have the highest probability of hearing such jokes. Practically everyone knows them, and up to a certain age (around twenty, I guess) lots of people tell them and practically everyone laughs. It's a form of coming to terms with our past, I guess - it builds emotional distance between us and our (great-)grandparents' deeds. It only works because it's still offensive though.

[Dutchling]

Ugh, blackface drama. It's not even September yet!

[penguinofhonor]

.

[Arx]

I just wrote my first rigged biology prac. I knew they existed, but had never been subjected to one before.

[Radio Controlled]

Well, no. It's not "This thing signifies one sound and one sound only." It's a "... What? Okay, that's another one for the ' pile," scenario.

What would be the point of that. It is assumed that the language in question has both pronounceable and unpronounceable sounds, and the former outnumber the latter (else what would be the point in a Latin orthography anyway). If there are several unpronounceable sounds, it makes sense to have several symbols for them, because while the human readers can't pronounce them, they can distinguish between them, and therefore read (which is the point of a Latin orthography for Chtulhuese).
There is literally no scenario in which the "another one for the pile" approach makes sense. None. If you're going that way, there's no point to having an orthography, since Rule Zero for any orthographic system is "Thy graphemes shall have phonetic meaning that can be derived from their shape or optionally, position, but it shall be a concrete meaning in the end." If an apostrophe in any position could be any of your, say, three unpronounceable sounds, then there's no point to having an apostrophe. Nothing will do just fine, since the apostrophe does nothing for increasing a reader's comprehension anyway if it has no precise meaning.
On the other hand, if we have several different symbols for Cthulhu noises (' for mandible rattle, " for side-spiracle hiss) then a human reader can distinguish between, say "kth"ha'" 'tree', "kth'ha'" 'forest', "kth"ha"" 'water' and "kth"ha"" 'ocean'. With an apostrophe, those would have been indistinguishable, and you'd get meaningless texts. The meaningless texts would be supposedly written by humans (since they're in Latin). Now you must assume your humans are slightly dumb and can't make up a functional transcription system for Cthulhuese.

I might see a reason. Say that the average human speaker, when confronted with such an ' is supposed to just leave a short gap in the word where normally one of the alien sounds goes (which might not be in the human hearing range). Why? Because to a native listener this does convey information, namely 'here goes a sound the puny human cannot make', which might help him interpret what said puny human is trying to say. Sure, the academics of that world probably have a whole system to represent the various unpronouncable sounds, but to the layman that has no real added value. Seeing a '&' or a '¥' or a '#' (using random symbols here), while each of them indicate the same thing for practical purposes, won't help him speak or understand the language better. Though I don't know the setting or the situation it was used, so this might not be valid.

Say dirtfarmer Bob sees an alien he knows approaching, he might say "hello Ma-(pause)-ry", giving "Ma'ry", even though its real name is 'Ma¥ry', where the '¥' sound is one dirtfarmer Bob can't pronounce.

Another reason might be that these humans simply haven't mapped the various alien sounds yet, and are representing them with ' until they can look into it better.

[Zangi]

Who remembers An American Tail?

Got the nostalgias when I heard Somewhere Out There on the radio.  I'm probably gonna watch it and ruin that nostalgia tonight.

[XXXXYYYY]

I might be a horrible person for doing this, but I tend to use apostrophes for a short pause, typically from a dropped letter, such as from a thick accent. For example, I tend to drop the 'c' in "welcome", replacing with a very short pause, so it sounds like "Wel-ome". The dash signifies a longer pause - closer to the break between two words - so I use an apostrophe, making the end result "wel'ome."

[Graknorke]

It's definitely a more valid use of apostrophes than using them for plural's.

[BlackFlyme]

Can't understand my coworker's favoured radio station.

Today's topic is customer call waiting appreciation. They took a break, and filled the time with their favourite waiting jingles.

"Your call is important to us." *Shitty flute solo*

[Frumple]

This. I think people underestimate how ingrained it is in US culture - in the early 20th century there were tons of minstrel show themed toys/knickknacks and racist caricature characters were everywhere.

No joke, I actually saw someone using a blackface mask in a high school play (rendition of the King and I) just a couple weeks ago, as part of the uncle tom's cabin play-within-play. It... it was a thing.

Honestly, about a quarter of that play in general was just kinda' screwed up. I think I had forgotten the thing was partially built off offensive caricatures.

Who remembers An American Tail?

Fievel goes west, Z. He goes west.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[Avis-Mergulus]

Well, no. It's not "This thing signifies one sound and one sound only." It's a "... What? Okay, that's another one for the ' pile," scenario.

What would be the point of that. It is assumed that the language in question has both pronounceable and unpronounceable sounds, and the former outnumber the latter (else what would be the point in a Latin orthography anyway). If there are several unpronounceable sounds, it makes sense to have several symbols for them, because while the human readers can't pronounce them, they can distinguish between them, and therefore read (which is the point of a Latin orthography for Chtulhuese).
There is literally no scenario in which the "another one for the pile" approach makes sense. None. If you're going that way, there's no point to having an orthography, since Rule Zero for any orthographic system is "Thy graphemes shall have phonetic meaning that can be derived from their shape or optionally, position, but it shall be a concrete meaning in the end." If an apostrophe in any position could be any of your, say, three unpronounceable sounds, then there's no point to having an apostrophe. Nothing will do just fine, since the apostrophe does nothing for increasing a reader's comprehension anyway if it has no precise meaning.
On the other hand, if we have several different symbols for Cthulhu noises (' for mandible rattle, " for side-spiracle hiss) then a human reader can distinguish between, say "kth"ha'" 'tree', "kth'ha'" 'forest', "kth"ha"" 'water' and "kth"ha"" 'ocean'. With an apostrophe, those would have been indistinguishable, and you'd get meaningless texts. The meaningless texts would be supposedly written by humans (since they're in Latin). Now you must assume your humans are slightly dumb and can't make up a functional transcription system for Cthulhuese.

I might see a reason. Say that the average human speaker, when confronted with such an ' is supposed to just leave a short gap in the word where normally one of the alien sounds goes (which might not be in the human hearing range). Why? Because to a native listener this does convey information, namely 'here goes a sound the puny human cannot make', which might help him interpret what said puny human is trying to say. Sure, the academics of that world probably have a whole system to represent the various unpronouncable sounds, but to the layman that has no real added value. Seeing a '&' or a '¥' or a '#' (using random symbols here), while each of them indicate the same thing for practical purposes, won't help him speak or understand the language better. Though I don't know the setting or the situation it was used, so this might not be valid.

Say dirtfarmer Bob sees an alien he knows approaching, he might say "hello Ma-(pause)-ry", giving "Ma'ry", even though its real name is 'Ma¥ry', where the '¥' sound is one dirtfarmer Bob can't pronounce.

Another reason might be that these humans simply haven't mapped the various alien sounds yet, and are representing them with ' until they can look into it better.

Yes, but if you're gonna pronounce them, then having at least an approximation for alien sounds is better, no? When you try to pronounce something foreign, you try to approximate since presumably, native speakers need to understand you. I mean, if you have no spiracles, you can just tap your sides with your arms and hiss, but just making a pause there isn't really the best idea. Why would he address her as ma-pause-ry if that adds nothing for both of them - for him it'd be easier without a pause, and she presumably knows that he has no spiracles and can't pronounce it, so why not just drop it altogether?
I must also reiterate that creatures that share most of their phonetic inventory with humans but have additional sounds that humans can't even begin to approximate are pretty improbable in the first place.
The last argument holds some weight, but then there are races that were supposedly familiar to mankind for a long time. For those, the "not mapped yet" hypothesis makes no sense. Besides, really, the more such unpronounceable sounds your aliens have, the less point there is for a human to speak their language instead of just writing on a markerboard or something, because with the number of unpronounceable and unadapted fragments increasing, his comprehensibility to them would decrease.
Sorry, I'm just feeling argumentative today.

[Reelya]

Uncle Tom's Cabin is pretty interesting. It uses minstrel show characters to try and subvert racist views of slavery, but racists missed the point and minstrel show versions of Uncle Tom were really popular.

It didn't start as a minstrel show. It was an anti-slavery novel at first, then adapted to stage. The southerners even wrote in a happy pro-slavery ending. It was these perverted versions which became remembered and where the insult of being an "uncle tom" came from.

It's like the NAZIs rewriting Diary of Anne Frank as a musical and having her happy to dance off to the camps.