What do you think of the word ‘ ignore ‘? Can we better replace it with, for example, ‘ rejecting ‘, given the potentially questionable origin?

Reject and ignore have different meanings.You can ignore it without rejecting it. And if you reject something, you don’t ignore it because you reject it.

I don’t see the questionable origin either.Maybe that “negro” sounds negative? I do not think that the Dutch are ever mistaken. You could therefore say that the name Niger is hurtful for many, but it is so called that country.It is named after the Niger River.Where that name is based is unclear because the ancient Romans already knew this river but not its origins. That name is almost 2 millennia old.

From Niger to Negro there is only 1 letter difference.These words are also related to each other. The word “Niger” was the Latin word for “black”. The word Neger was used to describe the dark fellow man, as it did for more peoples.In addition to black and white, we also know the colours yellow, blue and red as a description of certain population groups. And sometimes green when we indicate that someone is jealous.

For instance, we cannot abolish the word “black” simply because it has more meanings than just skin color.Yes, black Piet can be experienced as hurtful, but that is partly because in the old tradition Piet was actually a devil from hell and therefore black of soot. And this devil has been subjected and tamed by Saint Nicholas and is only allowed to feed on naughty children, or something. But well, that’s a discussion we continue to carry out every year between October and early December. 🙂

Words are never hurtful.The only thing that can hurt is how a word is used. There are certain words that are more often used in an offensive way and may be better ignored. But we can also educate people and teach them that they shouldn’t use words to hurt with them…

Ignoring and ignoring are two different words.

Ignoring, ‘ taunting ‘, ‘ treating someone like a Negro ‘ is barely used.

Ignoring, from ‘ negation ‘, ‘ denying ‘, means ‘ pretending someone doesn’t exist ‘.A game that is gladly played by children.

You also speak the two words differently.N茅geren, just like Negro, and Neg茅ren, so focus on first and second syllable.

That N茅geren and Neg茅ren look alike, is the result of a spelling reform

No, that is (sorry, but I just say what I think) totally absurd.

Firstly, I do not see the potentially questionable origins, and secondly, “reject” means something completely different from “ignoring”.

There is no questionable origin.This question is entirely of the mushroom.

The words negeren and NECeren each have a distinct origin.Indeed, the first one, therefore, also with the emphasis on the first e treat as Negro.Ignoring the second means pretending something does not exist “, stems from the Latin negare That means no say or deny.In my opinion, the proposal to replaceNEC,because it contains ‘ negro ‘, is totally nonsensical because I hope that every good-minded man is no longer used in the form of bullying.(*)

The proposal to replace ignore with reject is better to ignore.Rejecting is just one of the many synonyms of ignoring and therefore certainly not always interchangeable.

Whoever wants to clean the language in this way will be on a slippery slope.The next step will probably be that, in order to avoid sexist word use, you should not take anyone any more seriously because you can put the emphasis on both serious and taking,

Ignore and reject are not synonyms.
Being rejected means that you want to belong to a group and you are not allowed to.
Ignoring comes from the Latin negetur.What does deny mean. It rather denies your existence.

No, and even then, you should see everything in the time spirit that prevailed at that time.

No.The context in which both are placed is different.

It is not about specific words.

It’s about syntax + word choice!

The origin of words can often be used to get context out of a disjointed sense!

I don’t think that’s useful or necessary. In no way does the word have any more doubty connotation.

We already have enough to push us to look at such trivial things.

Leave a Reply