LogFAQs > #883373683

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	If appearance has nothing to do with gender identity, isn't it wrong to assume..
SKARDAVNELNATE 07/22/17 1:46:16 AM #40:	Kana posted... Which are not interchangeable, as I already stated. I thought you saying that Japanese honorifics were not comparable on the basis they are specific and not interchangeable. I was thus arguing that they are comparable since English pronouns have specific, non-interchangeable uses as well. Kana posted... It's still a thing, and it's more relevant to a pronoun discussion than honorifics are. Yes, relevant to demonstrating the point I was already making. Masculine and feminine aren't part of self-identifying pronouns any more than one's mood or level of hunger is indicated. The individual already knows these things about them self, and it is unnecessary to convey them unless these aspects are the immediate subject of discussion. If people projected a disembodied voice and it was more difficult to recognize who was speaking we night need this. Generally, people can tell who is speaking to them. He, him, she, her are used by a secondary speaker to describe the recognizable traits of an individual. If one observer visually identifies a specific trait it's likely another observer will agree with the first observer. Thus if one person points and says "look at him". they can both agree that the individual to look at is in that direction and has masculine traits. This helps to identify the person to look at without formally addressing them. If the first observer knows that the individual to look at has been knighted and has the the family name of Kettle yet the other observer does not posses this information then "look at Sir Kettle" would not be as helpful in identifying the individual. Further if Sir Kettle prefers to be called her and the first observer knows this yet the second observer does not then "look at her" would in fact eliminate Sir Kettle as the person to identify. Therefore the traits of a pronoun cannot be defined by the individual. They must be defined by the speaker referencing the individual. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:883373683] in If appeara... [t:75585261]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kana posted...</cite> <quote>Which are not interchangeable, as I already stated.</quote> I thought you saying that Japanese honorifics were not comparable on the basis they are specific and not interchangeable. I was thus arguing that they are comparable since English pronouns have specific, non-interchangeable uses as well. <cite>Kana posted...</cite> <quote>It's still a thing, and it's more relevant to a pronoun discussion than honorifics are.</quote> Yes, relevant to demonstrating the point I was already making. Masculine and feminine aren't part of self-identifying pronouns any more than one's mood or level of hunger is indicated. The individual already knows these things about them self, and it is unnecessary to convey them unless these aspects are the immediate subject of discussion. If people projected a disembodied voice and it was more difficult to recognize who was speaking we night need this. Generally, people can tell who is speaking to them. He, him, she, her are used by a secondary speaker to describe the recognizable traits of an individual. If one observer visually identifies a specific trait it's likely another observer will agree with the first observer. Thus if one person points and says "look at him". they can both agree that the individual to look at is in that direction and has masculine traits. This helps to identify the person to look at without formally addressing them. If the first observer knows that the individual to look at has been knighted and has the the family name of Kettle yet the other observer does not posses this information then "look at Sir Kettle" would not be as helpful in identifying the individual. Further if Sir Kettle prefers to be called her and the first observer knows this yet the second observer does not then "look at her" would in fact eliminate Sir Kettle as the person to identify. Therefore the traits of a pronoun cannot be defined by the individual. They must be defined by the speaker referencing the individual. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1