Is ‘special’ a Hindi word?

Who decides which words are not a part of a language?

Do the real users care?

Is ‘special‘ a Hindi word? I think it is.

And ‘computerized’ is not a Hindi word?

Dairy, Diary, Hotel, Trust, Fund, Contact, Wait, Time – are these words officially a part of Hindi yet?

This is ‘Radha Dairy’ in Vrindavan, UP.

I guess what matters is there is easy ‘communication’…

 

But, definitely it’s the ability to evolve that makes a language ‘special’…

Why does Gender Sensitivity in Legal Language matter.

At first there were objections to a man in a live in relationship being expected to provide palimony to a partner. One objection was that this would amount to permitting him polygamy. That the man would be giving from the legal wife’s share to the live-in partner.

Now both, the man and his partners are required to be unmarried.

(3) they must be otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage including being unmarried,

[Click to read more]

I think that sounds fair.

So,

The Supreme Court today ruled that if a man has a live-in relationship with a woman only for sexual reasons, it cannot amount to a relationship that entitles either partner to the benefits of marriage.

Sounds fair too.

Then what is the objection? The objection is to the use of the words, ‘keep‘ and ‘one night stand’.

The court said, “If a man has a keep whom he maintains financially, and uses mainly for sexual purpose and as a servant, it would not be a relationship in the nature of marriage.”

“The words used in the judgment are derogatory. Words like ‘keep’ and ‘one night stand’ are not legal language. The Court has to be gender sensitive. It is like setting the clock back after the Supreme Court passed the historic judgement in the Visakha case,” ASG Jaising had stated.

Advocate Mridula Kadam said, “…Such words are used by uneducated people…”

I agree.

Advocate Kranti Sathe said: “… I would certainly feel offended if words like ‘keep’ were used by any judge hearing my case.” [Link]

I would too.

“I am concerned about the image of the Supreme Court of India, which is known for its sensitivity to women as you can see in its Vishaka (sexual harassment of women in workplace) judgment. I am a member of the international body ‘Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women’, which fights to get rid of discriminating language and stereotypes against women. I fear the remarks in the judgment may put the clock back as it is not in a legal language befitting the Supreme Court,” she said in favour of expunging the remarks in the judgment. [Link]

I was not surprised to read comments disagreeing with ASG Jaising. Some of the objections implied that ‘such women’ deserved such names. Words and language have the power to change mindsets. Legal language is not street language.  We do not use the street words used for describing incest in legal language do we?

Here is one of the many reactions, and exactly why legal language needs to objective, accurate and free of any judgment.

“The society defines cetain relationship with certain names which get to be accepted language of daily use . Some names get derrogated over the perid of time because of the kind of relationship or the effects f relationship on the society. Over a period of time such as this kalyoug some of such relationships are getting glorified but they donot have the guts to be called by old name… In indian socity husband and the wife a couple legal one is respected and cherished and it should not be equated to the status of live in , mutawa, keep,slave ,temporary relationship. Democracy and freedom does not mean that we can do anything . We may change the previous norms of society by discussion and law but not accept them after it is done for the convenience and pleasure of few.” [From here]

Related Posts: Every blogger should mind their language.

Every blogger should mind their language?

Sexist or Bad Grammar?

Every blogger should mind their language.

Do you find the sentence grammatically incorrect? :(  I might change it to, “Everybody should mind their language.”

Sounds better but still incorrect because in the English language the masculine is usually used for general cases.

If we say, “Every blogger should mind HIS language.“, that would be factually incorrect, because 50.9% of bloggers are women.

I generally try to change it to something like, “All bloggers should mind their language.” But when in a hurry, I feel I would rather be grammatically incorrect than be sexist. :lol:

This table explains it better,

Pronoun Agreement

When using indefinite pronouns (e.g. someone, anyone, nobody etc.), the antecedent verb should be singular.

1. “Every blogger should mind their language.

OR

Everybody should mind their language.”


INCORRECT but is being increasingly used to avoid the mistakes below.
2. Every blogger should mind HIS language.


Correct, but sexist.
3. Every blogger should mind HER language.


Technically correct only if all bloggers are female.

(Grammatically incorrect)

Or change the sentence.

4. All bloggers should mind their language.


Correct but the basic problem is not solved.

I prefer the first one :) Languages must evolve and change if they are to survive, and I feel English is good at evolving. If thou can become you, why can’t his or her in such sentences become their?

:roll:

I find it simpler to use ‘their’ in place of ‘his’ or ‘her’, and for now given a choice between being sexist or using bad grammar – I choose bad grammar.

And there is every chance that this is how our grand children are going to speak. :)

[Check this blog post on 20th June 2050. :lol: ]