Editor for this issue: Ann Dizdar <dizdar
tam2000.tamu.edu>
About 3 weeks ago, i posted in LINGUIST 6-954 a query regarding the status in current English of a compounding process, involving the use of a `combining form' ending in -o-, which had given us not only such ethnic/geograhical terms as `Anglo-Saxon', `Afro-Asiatic', and `Dano-Norwegian' but `sociopolitical', `socioeconomic', etc. I was prompted in this query by the recent replacement of the label `Afro-American' by the fuller form `African American' and by the appearance in a new edition of a college textbook of the term `European American' to mean what i have long referred to as `Euro-American'. The issue first came to my attention a few years ago through a column in the University of Illinois newspaper, in which an undergraduate woman of African ancestry explicitly rejected the label `Black' on the grounds that it is, technically, inaccurate; the skins of the people in question are merely a darker shade of brown than those of Europeans. Having said this, she then went on to reject the label `Afro-American' because she couldn't find `Afro' on a map. As a linguist, i naturally wondered if she was unaware of the general compounding process involved. Then a few weeks ago at work i found that the authors of the above-mentioned textbook (on sociology, if i remember correctly) had meticulously replaced every instance of the label `White' in the previous edition with the expression `European-American'. I began wondering if i was seeing a trend. First of all, i would like to thank the following respondents: Lynne Cahill <lynnecaMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuecogs.susx.ac.uk> Lee Hartman <ga5123
siucvmb.siu.edu> Larry Horn <lhorn
yalevm.cis.yale.edu> James Kirchner <jpkirchner
aol.com> Kevin Lemoine <lemoine
mail.utexas.edu> The general consensus seems to be that the ascendency of the full expression `African-American' can be dated to a speech by the Rev. Jesse Jackson in the late 80's. To quote Lee Hartman: `I think the entire "phenomenon" can be attributed to a single individual, and with alittle research we could even determine the precise date when he made his announcement. This is a textbook case of "pristine" etymology (where the historical events giving rise to a word are still alive in the memories of living witnesses). `I'm referring to an announcement made by Jackson to the effect that he felt the term "Black" had too many negative connotations, and that he wanted to institute a more dignified term for Americans descended from Africans. `I think Jackson said explicitly that he briefly considered the term "Afro-American", but he rejected it on the grounds that "Afro" was too closely equated with a particular hair-style, and he didn't want a term that would suggest merely "Americans who wear Afro hair-do's".' A second motivating consideration mentioned by some of my respondents was that the reduction of `African' to `Afro-' involved in the formation of the older `Afro-American' might be interpreted as deemphasis and might thus be irritating, if not offensive, to people who regard their African heritage as a matter of pride. This is quite plausible, although it isn't consistent throughout the general speech community: it is not the case that every English speaker, in every circumstance, regards the formation of the -o- combining form from some word for the purpose of coining a compound involves the deemphasis of that word or its referent. For instance, in regarding myself as a `Euro-American' i definitely emphasize the `Euro-' part. And another of my respondents pointed out Progovac' recent rejection of the label `Serbo-Croatian' in favour of `Serbian/Croatian' on the grounds that the older/more traditional/conven- tional label places too *much* emphasis on the Serbian component. On a somewhat parallel note, one of my respondents suggested that the form `Euro-' might be rejected because, at least to an American, its most obvious association is with the expression `Eurotrash', which i have to admit is not part of my experience; i am more accustomed to its usage in Europe, in which it tends to connote `cosmopolitan' or at least `pan- European' as opposed to narrowly nationalistic. On the broader question addressed by my query, there appears to be no evidence that the morphological process of creating combining forms in -o- is itself on the way out in English; only one or two instantiations of it are currently being rejected by some people for sociopolitical reasons. As to the past history of this process in English (it's presumably either borrowed from or heavily encouraged by Greek), i have so far heard very little. Best, Steven - ------------------- Dr. Steven Schaufele 712 West Washington Urbana, IL 61801 217-344-8240 fcosws
prairienet.org **** O syntagmata linguarum liberemini humanarum! *** *** Nihil vestris privari nisi obicibus potestis! ***