Culture Rape VS Linguistic Evolution

[Autumnal Light]

This was inspired both by a thread in the M&R Forum and my introductory linguistics course. I have seen culture rape described as a major problem within the neopagan movement (eclectic, in particular). One particular issue is the use of culturally-significant terms taken out of context. For example, I've seen the word "shaman" generate a lot of objection when used out of its original cultural context.

According to a linguistic perspective, however, there doesn't appear to be a problem with the term's use. Although the word's original meaning referred to a spirit worker in Tungus/Siberian culture, the word was borrowed: its pronounciation was changed to suit English phonetics, and the meaning was expanded. Borrowing and semantic change are natural parts of language evolution. So, where does one draw the line between this natural language evolution and culture rape?

It may simply come down to whether the use of the word in such a generalized manner offends the Tungus people. I've heard people say that they find such use offensive, but never that the Tungus people themselves find it offensive.

In addition to the bolded question, what other commonly "raped" terms do you know? Are there any terms that other people view as raped that you don't?  

[TeaDidikai]

mute_coyote

This was inspired both by a thread in the M&R Forum and my introductory linguistics course. I have seen culture rape described as a major problem within the neopagan movement (eclectic, in particular). One particular issue is the use of culturally-significant terms taken out of context. For example, I've seen the word "shaman" generate a lot of objection when used out of its original cultural context.

I'm a bad influence on people.

Quote:

According to a linguistic perspective, however, there doesn't appear to be a problem with the term's use. Although the word's original meaning referred to a spirit worker in Tungus/Siberian culture, the word was borrowed: its pronounciation was changed to suit English phonetics, and the meaning was expanded. Borrowing and semantic change are natural parts of language evolution. So, where does one draw the line between this natural language evolution and culture rape?

When the concept of "expanding" the meaning is used as a lackluster substitution to allow people to use exonyms in place of proper terms within a given tradition and/or when intellectual honesty about what the word means goes out the window to further a shallow understanding of a tradition based on surface similarities while ignoring the deeper meanings that show how different the traditions are.

Quote:

It may simply come down to whether the use of the word in such a generalized manner offends the Tungus people. I've heard people say that they find such use offensive, but never that the Tungus people themselves find it offensive.

I have spoken with some Siberian Exchange students who have stated as much. Myself- I hate having exonyms applied to my traditions.

Quote:

In addition to the bolded question, what other commonly "raped" terms do you know?

G~, Wicca, chi, Karma...  

[TeaDidikai]

... Yule, Litha, Mabon, Samhain etc... Celtic, Norse...  

[Autumnal Light]

TeaDidikai

mute_coyote

This was inspired both by a thread in the M&R Forum and my introductory linguistics course. I have seen culture rape described as a major problem within the neopagan movement (eclectic, in particular). One particular issue is the use of culturally-significant terms taken out of context. For example, I've seen the word "shaman" generate a lot of objection when used out of its original cultural context.

I'm a bad influence on people.

Yes. Always trying to make people think (and sometimes succeeding)!

Quote:

Quote:

According to a linguistic perspective, however, there doesn't appear to be a problem with the term's use. Although the word's original meaning referred to a spirit worker in Tungus/Siberian culture, the word was borrowed: its pronounciation was changed to suit English phonetics, and the meaning was expanded. Borrowing and semantic change are natural parts of language evolution. So, where does one draw the line between this natural language evolution and culture rape?

When the concept of "expanding" the meaning is used as a lackluster substitution to allow people to use exonyms in place of proper terms within a given tradition and/or when intellectual honesty about what the word means goes out the window to further a shallow understanding of a tradition based on surface similarities while ignoring the deeper meanings that show how different the traditions are.

Good answer.

Quote:

Quote:

It may simply come down to whether the use of the word in such a generalized manner offends the Tungus people. I've heard people say that they find such use offensive, but never that the Tungus people themselves find it offensive.

I have spoken with some Siberian Exchange students who have stated as much. Myself- I hate having exonyms applied to my traditions.

Good to know. I'll keep that in mind.

Quote:

Quote:

In addition to the bolded question, what other commonly "raped" terms do you know?

G~, Wicca, chi, Karma...

You know, I only began to understand that those words were being popularly misused after I came here. mrgreen  

[TeaDidikai]

mute_coyote

Yes. Always trying to make people think (and sometimes succeeding)!

Actually- Def and I were having a wonderful conversation on this topic.

I ended up seeing a book at a popular bookstore that actually addressed the very issue I was having. I think I paid $20 just to have it on my shelf. heart

Quote:

Good answer.

I try.

Quote:

Good to know. I'll keep that in mind.

I think it is a love of exonyms and a disdain for research that has sparked the popularity of Culture Rape in the information age.

Quote:

You know, I only began to understand that those words were being popularly misused after I came here. mrgreen

Nuri and Deo and folks having to encourage accuracy and all that...  

[Autumnal Light]

TeaDidikai

mute_coyote

Yes. Always trying to make people think (and sometimes succeeding)!

Actually- Def and I were having a wonderful conversation on this topic.

I ended up seeing a book at a popular bookstore that actually addressed the very issue I was having. I think I paid $20 just to have it on my shelf. heart

What was the book?

Quote:

Quote:

Good to know. I'll keep that in mind.

I think it is a love of exonyms and a disdain for research that has sparked the popularity of Culture Rape in the information age.

It might also have to do with shortened attention spans that comes with having a plethora of distractions at one's fingertips. Youtube is the most hazardous one I've come across. You watch one short video and then you see a link to another and another (ad infinitum).

Quote:

Quote:

You know, I only began to understand that those words were being popularly misused after I came here. mrgreen

Nuri and Deo and folks having to encourage accuracy and all that...

And to think that once upon a time I could only blink in confusion at the phrase "fertility cult." rofl  

[TeaDidikai]

mute_coyote

What was the book?

Shoot. I'll have to find it and send you the title. Don't let me forget!

Quote:

It might also have to do with shortened attention spans that comes with having a plethora of distractions at one's fingertips.

I want to agree- but I don't think there is enough evidence. I know people who for whatever reasons have short attention spans- but still focus and manage to learn from quality sources and perpetuate accurate understandings.

Quote:

And to think that once upon a time I could only blink in confusion at the phrase "fertility cult." rofl

How people change.

Actually- the thing I am most proud of is how M&R taught me about logical fallacies.  

[Deoridhe]

mute_coyote

It may simply come down to whether the use of the word in such a generalized manner offends the Tungus people. I've heard people say that they find such use offensive, but never that the Tungus people themselves find it offensive.

Shaman was actually picked up by anthropologists due to issues with the previous two terms they had used for similar socio-religious functionaries. Both Witch Doctor and Medicine Man were rejected in part due to a desire within anthropology to give up it's othering of roles which actually exist in contemporary cultures, and an attempt to be less ******** racist, but their selecting of shaman didn't show a huge awareness of the structural issues and it's gone, in US culture at least, the way of the previous two terms.

When I can, I use the word for the role within a culture, but when comparing I tend to default to shaman and specify it's in the anthropological sense. It's not a final and good solution, though; just a stopgag.

So, where does one draw the line between this natural language evolution and culture rape?

I'd say along the power differential.

When the phenomena is outsiders with political, economic, and military power telling other people what their lives are really like and using their cultures as "spice" or entertainment (also known as colonializing, being a bigot, and buying into a minor fraction of the world being both the norm and omnicogniscent), it's culture rape. WASPs are really good at this; it's trained into us.  

[Ulfrikr inn Hrafn]

mute_coyote

This was inspired both by a thread in the M&R Forum and my introductory linguistics course. I have seen culture rape described as a major problem within the neopagan movement (eclectic, in particular). One particular issue is the use of culturally-significant terms taken out of context. For example, I've seen the word "shaman" generate a lot of objection when used out of its original cultural context.

According to a linguistic perspective, however, there doesn't appear to be a problem with the term's use. Although the word's original meaning referred to a spirit worker in Tungus/Siberian culture, the word was borrowed: its pronounciation was changed to suit English phonetics, and the meaning was expanded. Borrowing and semantic change are natural parts of language evolution. So, where does one draw the line between this natural language evolution and culture rape?

It may simply come down to whether the use of the word in such a generalized manner offends the Tungus people. I've heard people say that they find such use offensive, but never that the Tungus people themselves find it offensive.

In addition to the bolded question, what other commonly "raped" terms do you know? Are there any terms that other people view as raped that you don't?

Heilsan Mute_Coyote ok Allir,

Indeed, borrowing and semantic change are natural parts of language evolution, but one needs to understand that for the most part, typical borrowings tend to maintain the concept of the original, culturally defined word. Borrowing tends to take place for one of two reasons, the first being that the word describes something that is difficult to describe in the borrowing culture, and the second, is where the word is borrowed specifically to create a sense of other, and exclusivity within a culture. One can use England as a good example. When the Normans took over, their language became the language of the Court, whilst in the countryside, Saxon still was the most common language. As people wanted to be upwardly mobile, Norman words, and then patterns of speech filtered into the common language, creating a hybrid language.

These processes are exacerbated in modern society by the speed of communication. Indeed, the term Shaman was borrowed to replace other tems, but was borrowed wholesale to describe a whole sphere of techniques and abilities which had not had a common descriptor for hundreds of years. The practices and techniques of the Tungus Shaman was something that our own ancestors had left behind for the most part through the process of Christianisation, and hence, the demand for a whole-sale word which didn't sound as odd as Witch-Doctor, or Medicine-Man was high on the agenda. Naturally, there wasn't any interest in finding a term within our own ancestry, as after all, we never had anyone whom did such things... *cough bullshit cough*

So, Shaman was pinched, and twisted to the needs of those whom took it. And as time has progressed, it has become more, and more, and more twisted, to the point where it no longer signifies anything remotely like the Tungus Shaman from which it was originally derived. Now, I can confirm that the Tungus find the taking of the term Shaman to be highly offensive, as I have interacted with a Tungus Shaman on a Scholarly E-List which deals with such subject matters in the Germanic Traditions, the person concerned is a guest upon the List, and it is very interesting to read, and participate in the discussions which ensue.

I draw the line at the level of people taking a word, which has a specific meaning within a particular culture, whom then twist and change that word to the point where it is completely unrecognisable from the original originator word, especially where those whom use the word, seem to wish to insist that they are using the word in the correct manner, and anyone whom things otherwise is wrong.

Ver thu heil  

[TeaDidikai]

Ulfrikr inn Hrafn

I draw the line at the level of people taking a word, which has a specific meaning within a particular culture, whom then twist and change that word to the point where it is completely unrecognisable from the original originator word

Does this not hinge on the scholarship of the general population for justification then?

If we spoke to a handful of people about the most general aspects of three different otherworld traditions- they may well conclude that "Shaman" is the correct term for the Rroma, Gael and Norse other world traditions.  

[TheDisreputableDog]

This is actually a problem that arises in studies of sexuality as well when people don't want to admit that a particular term is tied to a particular historical and locational context and try to use it to generalize to other historical and locational contexts. For example, there are several societies in which segments of the society engage in homosexual behavior, but there's really no way to equate it to today's idea of sexuality and being gay--and some people fall into that trap.  

[TeaDidikai]

TheDisreputableDog

For example, there are several societies in which segments of the society engage in homosexual behavior, but there's really no way to equate it to today's idea of sexuality and being gay--and some people fall into that trap.

For example the Greeks with pederasty and the Victorians with their sexual experimentation in boarding school (as opposed to say- clearly homosexual relationships also expressed in that era)?  

[TheDisreputableDog]

TeaDidikai

TheDisreputableDog

For example, there are several societies in which segments of the society engage in homosexual behavior, but there's really no way to equate it to today's idea of sexuality and being gay--and some people fall into that trap.

For example the Greeks with pederasty and the Victorians with their sexual experimentation in boarding school (as opposed to say- clearly homosexual relationships also expressed in that era)?

Right.  

[TeaDidikai]

TheDisreputableDog

TeaDidikai

TheDisreputableDog

For example, there are several societies in which segments of the society engage in homosexual behavior, but there's really no way to equate it to today's idea of sexuality and being gay--and some people fall into that trap.

For example the Greeks with pederasty and the Victorians with their sexual experimentation in boarding school (as opposed to say- clearly homosexual relationships also expressed in that era)?

Right.

Don't let me put words in your mouth DD- but just so I'm clear:
In addition to regional constructs, we'd also need to watch temporal constructs in order to communicate accurately?  

[TheDisreputableDog]

TeaDidikai

TheDisreputableDog

TeaDidikai

TheDisreputableDog

For example, there are several societies in which segments of the society engage in homosexual behavior, but there's really no way to equate it to today's idea of sexuality and being gay--and some people fall into that trap.

For example the Greeks with pederasty and the Victorians with their sexual experimentation in boarding school (as opposed to say- clearly homosexual relationships also expressed in that era)?

Right.

Don't let me put words in your mouth DD- but just so I'm clear:
In addition to regional constructs, we'd also need to watch temporal constructs in order to communicate accurately?

Right. There are usually elements you can find in commonality throughout all human societies, but using labels to describe those or the more unique ones that have heavy connotation within one's own society and time period can result in huge misconceptions about what is actually going on in other places.

This is especially risky when different circles intersect--for example an academic circle with a "lay" circle, where everyone in one's academic circle may understand what one means by using a particular phrase, but the "lay" circle has an entirely different conception of the same word and somehow the distinct definition was lost along the way.

And unfortunately, the societies with the most history of colonial, imperial, and anthropological bias in other areas are also the the most published in sociology. BUT even in saying this, I am inevitably seeing the world through my own cultural, regional, educational, and temporal lenses.

In trying to be general I may have ended up merely confusing.