To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 3175
3174  |  3176
Subject: 
Re: Swearing?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate
Followup-To: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 3 Jan 2000 18:02:57 GMT
Viewed: 
42 times
  
Mr L F Braun wrote:

Tony Priestman wrote:

WARNING: this post should not be read by children or those with weak
constitutions, as it contains a word that some people have complained
about.

"leaked 2001 scans?"  :)

But jumping on someone for saying d----- is ludicrous. I gave up having
my English corrected twenty years ago, and I'm not going to put up with
it now.

[dashing out of word is mine, and made only because my newsreader won't allow me
to insert an extra screen of carriage returns.]

I have to agree with Tony on that particular word and its ilk.  However, it's not
a grammatical issue but one of comfort level--is swearing (which I wouldn't
define that as) the same as cursing (which I would define that as)?  Children who
are sheltered from the influence of television and public swearing will still
hear the root of that curse at their churches from their clergy, supposedly the
paragons of morality.  The difference is the context.  When a word is
unacceptable in *any* context of a given meaning, that's when it should be
off-limits even as asterisks.  Comfort level will always vary, however--I still
get essays from college students where they refuse to spell out "God" and will
write "G-d".

You won't hear that word very often at my church, but then my religion
doesn't believe in eternal damnation. On the other hand, there are some
people in my church who are VERY uncomfortable with the word God.

follow ups to lugnet.off-topic.debate.

--
Frank Filz

-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Swearing?
 
(...) I am surprised and intrigued by this notion. Why would this be? -John (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Swearing?
 
(...) "leaked 2001 scans?" :) (...) [dashing out of word is mine, and made only because my newsreader won't allow me to insert an extra screen of carriage returns.] I have to agree with Tony on that particular word and its ilk. However, it's not a (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)

473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR