Chrystal Castro
Professor Dobson
English 1A 3 Pm
9 December, 2015
Rough Draft 1 Essay 3 The older generation would agree that youth culture is very different especially in its linguistic evolution. Today’s vocabulary has gained and lost several meanings and context of usage for a variety of words. With today’s slang and negative connotations, our society is drowning in sarcasm and rudeness which creates new pejorative meanings for words that meant almost the exact opposite. The popular phrase used by today’s society“That’s so gay”, contradicts the old positive meaning of the word gay; which used to mean happy, cheerful. Gay has shifted from a neutral meaning in to a pejorative insult to negatively replace the word stupid and feminine; …show more content…
We cannot stop linguistic evolution, it will forever be changing and creating both positive and negative connotations. A writer from the Philadelphia Newspaper wrote about the pros and cons of using the phrase “that’s so gay”. He explains how linguistic evolution is ever changing and should be supported no matter the definition outcome: “What kind of society do we live in if we can’t offend a few people now and again? If we put restrictions on words and phrases simply because some people find it offensive, where would we be in terms of art or language?(Blondell) People have different sense of humor; some get offensive, some don’t. You shouldn’t have to limit your language just because a few people find it offensive. You can 't just throw words out there without taking other people 's feeling into consideration, but yet berating someone for using “that’s so gay” and pointing them out as a homophobic is quite irrational. A homophobic is someone who doesn’t accept gays, by using gay to describe someone as stupid, you’re only thinking of how stupid his actions are, not how he’s attracted to guys. Using gay in a pejorative sense is insulting, but not homophobic. In the article “A Queer revolution: Reconceptualizing the Debate Over Linguistic Reclamation,” linguistics scholar Robin Brontsema explains various perspectives and problems related to the reclamation of certain words like “queer”. She uses “queer” as an example to show that language is always changing therefore the meaning of the words can change since they are not fixed in time; “Those who claim that queer has always been, is now, and will always be an insulting, homophobic epithet,
Professor Dobson
English 1A 3 Pm
9 December, 2015
Rough Draft 1 Essay 3 The older generation would agree that youth culture is very different especially in its linguistic evolution. Today’s vocabulary has gained and lost several meanings and context of usage for a variety of words. With today’s slang and negative connotations, our society is drowning in sarcasm and rudeness which creates new pejorative meanings for words that meant almost the exact opposite. The popular phrase used by today’s society“That’s so gay”, contradicts the old positive meaning of the word gay; which used to mean happy, cheerful. Gay has shifted from a neutral meaning in to a pejorative insult to negatively replace the word stupid and feminine; …show more content…
We cannot stop linguistic evolution, it will forever be changing and creating both positive and negative connotations. A writer from the Philadelphia Newspaper wrote about the pros and cons of using the phrase “that’s so gay”. He explains how linguistic evolution is ever changing and should be supported no matter the definition outcome: “What kind of society do we live in if we can’t offend a few people now and again? If we put restrictions on words and phrases simply because some people find it offensive, where would we be in terms of art or language?(Blondell) People have different sense of humor; some get offensive, some don’t. You shouldn’t have to limit your language just because a few people find it offensive. You can 't just throw words out there without taking other people 's feeling into consideration, but yet berating someone for using “that’s so gay” and pointing them out as a homophobic is quite irrational. A homophobic is someone who doesn’t accept gays, by using gay to describe someone as stupid, you’re only thinking of how stupid his actions are, not how he’s attracted to guys. Using gay in a pejorative sense is insulting, but not homophobic. In the article “A Queer revolution: Reconceptualizing the Debate Over Linguistic Reclamation,” linguistics scholar Robin Brontsema explains various perspectives and problems related to the reclamation of certain words like “queer”. She uses “queer” as an example to show that language is always changing therefore the meaning of the words can change since they are not fixed in time; “Those who claim that queer has always been, is now, and will always be an insulting, homophobic epithet,