Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF-LIT LOG0205B" ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 14:39:47 +0000 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: sharon Anderson Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@uic.edu In-Reply-To: <3CD75595.F0CA781B@tc.umn.edu> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Are we just slow getting started on this topic? Or is something wrong with my computer? ---s ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 18:09:38 -0500 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: "S. McInneshin" Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I did post some questions. I hope you saw them? Seulky sharon Anderson wrote: > Are we just slow getting started on this topic? Or is something wrong > with my computer? > > ---s ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 17:24:18 -0700 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 02:39 PM 5/8/02 +0000, sharon Anderson wrote: > Are we just slow getting started on this topic? Or is something wrong >with my computer? Actually, there's been a vociferous discussion going on around Native Tongue of the "off topic" list. Lot's of interesting things have been said already. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 20:09:25 -0500 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: "S. McInneshin" Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Oh! Was I supposed to post discussion questions to the off topic list? And how do I get there? (a newbie) Lee Anne Phillips wrote: > At 02:39 PM 5/8/02 +0000, sharon Anderson wrote: > > Are we just slow getting started on this topic? Or is something wrong > >with my computer? > > Actually, there's been a vociferous discussion going on around Native Tongue > of the "off topic" list. Lot's of interesting things have been said already. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 21:28:53 EDT Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Margaret Poore Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I first read Native Tongue soon after it was published, then again after the third book in the trilogy came out. I just finished reading it again for this discussion. It seems dated and awkward to me now, although I remember enjoying it before. I still like the idea of the Barren House (tho' not the name) but then I am probably a closet lesbian separatist. At least it seemed to me that the interactions between women were interesting and probable. The interactions between men and women, and the thoughts that men had about women seem too stereotypical of the patriarchy to be either probable or interesting. It bothered me every time she went inside a male's head. I thought the final resolution was satisfactory in that it neatly tied everything up and the women come out as the "winners" and obviously superior to men, so easily fooled and manipulated.....but satisfactory in the sense of a fantasy sort of ending of a fairy tale or morality play about the evils of the male sex. After spending time in Ursula's fantasy world, SHE's seemed way too crude and silly. I find the idea of being able to construct words to encode meanings wonderfully intriguing and wish we had a way to do it in English. So, no, I don't think reality or our perception of it is completely shaped by our language. I think that some things are easier to express when we have precise vocabulary (which is why science, industry, and institutions develop their "insider" specialized vocabularies). I have thoughts frequently that never make it to the level of language.....for example, I am driving through an intersection and catch a glimpse of a car and for one tenth of a second I "think" we are going to crash into each other. I feel the beginning of the adrenaline rush that signals "fight or flight". In the second tenth of the second I realize that the car is actually parked and I had mispercieved it as moving. So even as the adrenaline was being dumped into the system, it was simultaneously being called back and reabsorbed. I have had two thoughts in those two tenths of a second, "I'm really scared." and "hey, that car isn't moving" but no time to encode the thoughts in language. If it was scary enough I will probably review the event mentally and put language to what happened. If I am distracted or it wasn't scary enough, I won't bother to encode it and might instantly forget it even happened. I think it might be interesting to develop an ending in which the little girls share their women's language with their little brothers and boy-cousins (there's a concept we don't have a word for!). How would these young male "lingoes" be different from their fathers? What would it be like if men and women grew up together sharing the women's language? Had she gone that route I might be much more convinced that language shapes perception/reality..... because of course it does, to some extent..... ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 22:55:42 EDT Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Lou Hoffman Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_179.8035ef9.2a0b3f2e_boundary" --part1_179.8035ef9.2a0b3f2e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/8/02 6:07:32 PM Central Daylight Time, shin0075@TC.UMN.EDU writes: > I did post some questions. I hope you saw them? > I saved the questions but unfortunately I received 8 books I ordered and two requests for first reads, so I'm a little behind. I hope to reread Native Tongue by the end of this weekend. Lou ... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today, it's already tomorrow in Australia. ---- Charles Schultz --part1_179.8035ef9.2a0b3f2e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/8/02 6:07:32 PM Central Daylight Time, shin0075@TC.UMN.EDU writes:


I did post some questions. I hope you saw them?


I saved the questions but unfortunately I received 8 books I ordered and two requests for first reads, so I'm a little behind. I hope to reread Native Tongue by the end of this weekend.

Lou
... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today,  it's already tomorrow in Australia.
---- Charles Schultz
--part1_179.8035ef9.2a0b3f2e_boundary-- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 00:39:26 -0400 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: "Janice E. Dawley" Subject: Admin Message: The BDG in Time and Space Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed S. McInneshin wrote: > Oh! Was I supposed to post discussion questions to the off topic list? > And how do I get there? This and a couple of other messages lately prompt me to say that: There are two mailing lists hosted by FSFFU. One is FEMINISTSF, a general discussion of feminism and its intersection with sf, fantasy and utopia. The other (the one I am posting this message to), is FEMINISTSF-LIT, a more strictly on-topic forum that hosts the monthly Book Discussion Group. (See Laura Quilter's page at http://www.feministsf.org/femsf/listserv/ for more details.) Though there is a lot of overlap between the memberships, they do not match one-to-one. If you want to be part of the scheduled discussion, this is your venue. And now, back to *Native Tongue*... ----- Janice E. Dawley.....Burlington, VT http://homepages.together.net/~jdawley/ Listening to: Television -- Television "I've built my white picket fence around the Now, with a commanding view of the Soon-to-Be." -- The Tick ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 10:45:49 -0400 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Rose Reith Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia In-Reply-To: <156.d967677.2a0b2ad5@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" At 9:28 PM -0400 5/8/02, Margaret Poore wrote: >I first read Native Tongue soon after it was published, then again after the >third book in the trilogy came out. I just finished reading it again for this >discussion. It seems dated and awkward to me now, although I remember >enjoying it before. I still like the idea of the Barren House (tho' not the >name) but then I am probably a closet lesbian separatist. At least it seemed >to me that the interactions between women were interesting and probable. The >interactions between men and women, and the thoughts that men had about women >seem too stereotypical of the patriarchy to be either probable or >interesting. It bothered me every time she went inside a male's head. So there are two more books that continue Elgin's story? Could someone please send in the titles? I read this book for the first time because of this discussion list. I really did enjoy it. I will agree that the men's thoughts were rather stereotypically patriarchal, but for me it still worked. I know enough guys who do still think that way (in private, I guess) that it doesn't surprise me when I read stories based on the premise of men's patriarchal attitudes. And if you consider that the novel was written back at the time that authors like Charnas and Russ were first writing stories that were supposed to stress the evils of patriarchy, those perspectives were typical. I too like the idea of Barren House - some place to get out from under the thumbs those ignorant men. As I am writing this though I realize that I need to go back and reread it - There's an awful lot of the situations I am not able to remember clearly enough to mention. I was going to try to talk about how angered I was by Nazareth's father and husband. The conversations between those two men were just so disturbing. I guess that's the point, though - the men were supposed to be almost caricatures of the "patriarchal" man. Was it perceived that way when the novel was first published? My impressions of it remind me of how I felt the first time I read Charnas's _Walk to the End of the World _ , I was so upset and thought the book was so horrible because of the way the women were treated and the men were so bad. But after I reread it several times so that I could include it in a paper I was writing, I realized that she was really making fun of the men. Then the book no longer bothered me and I found it much more amusing, but also sad in a way. I wonder if this is how we are supposed to feel about the men in _Native Tongue_, after all they are the ones who will ultimately end up alone with nothing of value. Also, was anyone else bothered by the way the incident where Nazareth was poisoned was solved by one of the other women confessing to the deed rather than the woman who actually did the deed confessing. At the time I read it it bothered me, and it still bothers me now. And, one last thing I was bothered by - the government men and their willingness to kill babies in their effort to find a way to no longer need the "lingoes" to do the translating work, or to find a way to talk to non-humaoid aliens. Is that explored further in the other books of the trilogy? That was such a horrible part of the story. I know that I certainly agreed with the woman who wanted revenge because her husband donated their baby so that he could have her to himself. (That's actually one of the themes I noted in these kind of feminst, anti-patriarchal novels from the 70s and 80s - men will dispose of their children in whatever way is necessary to get what they want without any feeling of guilt. Children are property. Once the male children grow up they join the men in rights and privileges, but while they are children they are there to be used as the men see fit to use them. The way the story ends with the government having set up a new experiment I suppose sets the stage for sequels from that point of view also. In the sequels is there further explanation of the whole idea of the women's language? Or is that available somewhere else? I seem to recall reading in one of the posts on the other list, FSFFU, that Elgin has a book that explicitly spells out the women's language - is that true? Are any of these still in print? I'll admit that I had trouble finding a copy of _Native Tongue_ to read. Money is tight right now so I didn't try to order it from a book store or on-line. I finally found a worn paperback copy in the library in a nearby city. The cover has a baby in a large glass jar and a reptilian looking alien. It would not have been my first choice in reading material if I hadn't been on a mission to find it. That also reminds me of how paperback covers hardly ever seem to match the real focus of a novel - although maybe the evils of the government men are more central than they appeared to be to me on a first reading??? Rose -- 'As a woman I have no country. As a woman my country is the whole world.' Virginia Woolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 17:57:10 +0000 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: sharon Anderson Subject: Test Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@uic.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Please ignore this test. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 20:58:53 +0000 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: sharon Anderson Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@uic.edu In-Reply-To: <3CD9B032.8ECD1D27@tc.umn.edu> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit On 5/8/02 11:09 PM, "S. McInneshin" wrote: > I did post some questions. I hope you saw them? > > Seulky > > sharon Anderson wrote: > >> Are we just slow getting started on this topic? Or is something wrong >> with my computer? >> >> ---s I apologize. My e-mail was ..... Ahem. I was not getting any e-mail from this list. We fixed the problem tonight (I hope.) I am now getting the discussions and am composing a reply. ---s ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 12:05:58 -0700 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Margaret McBride Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia In-Reply-To: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii At 10:45 AM 5/9/2002 -0400, you wrote: >So there are two more books that continue Elgin's story? Could >someone please send in the titles? Judas Rose and Earthsong. The 2nd one is the linguists attempting to get the language out to non-linguist women (ends up being conveyed through religion, if I remember correctly). I personally found the 3rd one disappointing--she pretty much drops the idea of a women's language. I've read her rationale--something along the lines of the experiment didn't take in the real world so she decided it wouldn't in her SF world either. But I was much more interested in the linguistic concepts than I was the issues in the 3rd book. >And if you consider that the novel >was written back at the time that authors like Charnas and Russ were >first writing stories that were supposed to stress the evils of >patriarchy, those perspectives were typical. She was writing in the time when pretty nasty things were being said and written about why the ERA etc. wasn't needed and why we would never have a woman president, etc. If you took some of the extremes from that time, it wasn't too difficult to imagine something happening to take away the progress that had been achieved for women. Of course, it was overdone for the time but it has elements of satire and dystopia which are usually exaggerated. >I seem to >recall reading in one of the posts on the other list, FSFFU, that >Elgin has a book that explicitly spells out the women's language - is >that true? Are any of these still in print? I have the book which is an English/Laadan dictionary as well as short examples. You'd have to do some searching to find one. I've never tried to actually do the examples but the dictionary is fun to look through. For example, the dictionary in Laadan has a word that means it's supposed to be a holiday but you have to do all the cleaning and cooking so it doesn't feel like one. I think many women would relate to that concept! I thought I had the book at work but it must be at home; sorry I can't give the actual word but I can get it if people have more questions. ************************************ Margaret McBride, University of Oregon ************************************ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 15:05:48 -0500 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Ted M Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.20020510120558.0069d798@oregon.uoregon.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > >I seem to > >recall reading in one of the posts on the other list, FSFFU, that > >Elgin has a book that explicitly spells out the women's language - is > >that true? Are any of these still in print? > > I have the book which is an > English/Laadan dictionary as well as short examples. You'd have to do some > searching to find one. Advanced Book Exchange (abebooks.com) lists two copies of _A First Dictionary and Grammar of Laadan_ available for $40 and $30 respectively: http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/BookSearch?tn=laadan&ph=2 I think I bought my copy new at WisCon about 3 years ago for $12 or so. - Ted ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 19:04:10 EDT Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Rachel Wild Subject: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_fb.2607b186.2a0dabea_boundary" --part1_fb.2607b186.2a0dabea_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All, I have read Native Tongue many times and found it started my interest in linguistics - it's probably been about 3 years since I last read it, so I can just say what has stayed with me the most. The first thing is the concept of Encoding - all languages encode but it takes societal power or a 'sub'-cultural reason to make them develop into usage [maybe sometimes it's just fashion that co-opts words] I was for a time a New Traveller [for those not from the UK this is a culture, mostly joined in adulthood that combines elements of punks, hippies, gypsies, ravers and showpeople etc. into a semi-nomadic way of living]. We used a lot of 'slang' specific to or borrowed for this life - blag, bender, blim , blat, tarp, site, credlocks etc. This used to show up who was part of the group [all cultures do this] but one year we got fashionable and our slang got exported - however our culture never got more legitimised. Perhaps this would happen to a women's language - the usage might become bent by the prevailing [patriarchal] culture. But equally I do think Encodings birth new ways of thinking - I remember a laadan word for not touching someone out of spite, for not asking someone how they feel on purpose so they don't have the opportunity to speak about it. If I remember these concepts then Elgin's experiment did work, but not to the extent I can use one word for this - I still need to go to the effort of explaining. I don't believe it is possible for adults to speak a newly created language - as is theorised in the book, some women [people] would have had to learn enough to speak it to babies who would have instinctually turned it into a live language. Maybe this was a tall order for even the most dedicated feminist. I know folk can think without language, having known many deaf people with learning difficulties who were separated off from visual language users and so ended up with no language *at all* [a bit like the woman who was experimented on by the govt. men but survived] These folk had no interface with users of visual or spoken languages and were generally very frustrated and angry and disempowered - but of course, thought and communicated The second thing is the particular patriarchy imagined - I found this very believable in terms of the parameters set - the men of the lines [and also men outside the lines, but with less skill] invest huge effort in developing a particular masculinity. They have lessons, sometimes they even breed for it [hulking genes imported as one of the lines was starting to look a little effete] - I got frustrated that open rebellion was shown as so utterly futile but accepted it in the book's framework. I saw men and women developing interactions a lot like African Americans and white Americans in the ante-bellum south of the US - for example, utterly culturally separate with the ones with the upperhand infantalising the others [perhaps this was the model? Racism seems to be absent, 'ethnicity' not a marker of status in the lines or elsewhere.] To me this is epitomised in the martyrdom of Belle Anne, who is the only *workable* victim - defiance would not be believed but Belle Anne would [did this happen during slavery?] Well, I waffle on, but I still think Native tongue is a useful distopia, the things that frustrate me about it don't strike me as off key - rather as narrative devices to show up a particular point. I think this book works best as a polemic, I didn't enjoy the second as I wasn't as interested in it's points and didn't read the third. ByeBye Rachel --part1_fb.2607b186.2a0dabea_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All,

I have read Native Tongue many times and found it started my interest in linguistics - it's probably been about 3 years since I last read it, so I can just say what has stayed with me the most.

The first thing is the concept of Encoding - all languages encode but it takes societal power or a 'sub'-cultural reason to make them develop into usage [maybe sometimes it's just fashion that co-opts words]
I was for a time a New Traveller [for those not from the UK this is a culture, mostly joined in adulthood that combines elements of punks, hippies, gypsies, ravers and showpeople etc. into a semi-nomadic way of living]. We used a lot of 'slang' specific to or borrowed for this life - blag, bender, blim , blat, tarp, site, credlocks etc.
This used to show up who was part of the group [all cultures do this] but one year we got fashionable and our slang got exported - however our culture never got more legitimised. Perhaps this would happen to a women's language - the usage might become bent by the prevailing [patriarchal] culture.
But equally I do think Encodings birth new ways of thinking - I remember a laadan word for not touching someone out of spite, for not asking someone how they feel on purpose so they don't have the opportunity to speak about it. If I remember these concepts then Elgin's experiment did work, but not to the extent I can use one word for this - I still need to go to the effort of explaining.
I don't believe it is possible for adults to speak a newly created language - as is theorised in the book, some women [people] would have had to learn enough to speak it to babies who would have instinctually turned it into a live language. Maybe this was a tall order for even the most dedicated feminist.
I know folk can think without language, having known many deaf people with learning difficulties who were separated off from visual language users and so ended up with no language *at all* [a bit like the woman who was experimented on by the govt. men but survived] These folk had no interface with users of visual or spoken languages and were generally very frustrated and angry and disempowered - but of course, thought and communicated

The second thing is the particular patriarchy imagined - I found this very believable in terms of the parameters set - the men of the lines [and also men outside the lines, but with less skill] invest huge effort in developing a particular masculinity. They have lessons, sometimes they even breed for it [hulking genes imported as one of the lines was starting to look a little effete] - I got frustrated that open rebellion was shown as so utterly futile but accepted it in the book's framework. I saw men and women developing interactions a lot like African Americans and white Americans in the ante-bellum south of the US - for example, utterly culturally separate with the ones with the upperhand infantalising the others [perhaps this was the model? Racism seems to be absent, 'ethnicity' not a marker of status in the lines or elsewhere.] To me this is epitomised in the martyrdom of Belle Anne, who is the only *workable* victim - defiance would not be believed but Belle Anne ! would [did this happen during slavery?]

Well, I waffle on, but I still think Native tongue is a useful distopia, the things that frustrate me about it don't strike me as off key - rather as narrative devices to show up a particular point. I think this book works best as a polemic, I didn't enjoy the second as I wasn't as interested in it's points and didn't read the third.
ByeBye
Rachel --part1_fb.2607b186.2a0dabea_boundary-- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 23:07:20 -0700 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia , FEMINISTSF-LIT@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <20020510200236.90498203E6@kempe.infinitejest.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 03:05 PM 5/10/02 -0500, Ted M wrote: > > >I seem to > > >recall reading in one of the posts on the other list, FSFFU, that > > >Elgin has a book that explicitly spells out the women's language - is > > >that true? Are any of these still in print? > > > > I have the book which is an > > English/Laadan dictionary as well as short examples. You'd have to do some > > searching to find one. > >Advanced Book Exchange (abebooks.com) lists two copies of _A First Dictionary >and Grammar of Laadan_ available for $40 and $30 respectively: > > http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/BookSearch?tn=laadan&ph=2 > >I think I bought my copy new at WisCon about 3 years ago for $12 or so. The practice tape and the book are both still available through Ms. Elgin herself, although my original post on this was on the off topic list. Ted's $12 figure for the book sounds about right. The tape is about the same. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 23:41:55 -0700 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 07:04 PM 5/10/02 -0400, Rachel Wild wrote: >Hello All, > >I have read Native Tongue many times and found it started my interest in >linguistics - it's probably been about 3 years since I last read it, so I >can just say what has stayed with me the most. > >The first thing is the concept of Encoding - all languages encode but it >takes societal power or a 'sub'-cultural reason to make them develop into >usage [maybe sometimes it's just fashion that co-opts words] Lexical Encoding is kind of the Whorfian Hypothesis in reverse, if words shape thought then thought should shape words as well. In standard women's studies courses this is often done be "re-structuring" or "re-encoding" words of everyday discourse in such a way that the speaker, or listener, is forced to re-examine their meaning. Mary Daly is perhaps among the most well-known, with her Wickedary being a compendium of New Words, which she defines as "words Heard in a new semantic context and arising from qualitatively Other experience; words of Gynocentric communication -- many of which are not "new" in the old sense (materially) but New in a New sense, having different meanings because they are Heard and Spoken in New ways. http://www.wickedary.com/ >I don't believe it is possible for adults to speak a newly created language - The Houses of the Linguists are presumably highly skilled at adult acquisition of language. And while the possibility of a new speaker of any language having her mental map changed in any way by the acquisition of a new vocabulary may seem remote, this actually happens all the time, I think. Or perhaps it's vice versa, as described by the New Traveller patois. New mental maps demand new words just as much as new words alter old mental maps. When the new words alter the old view of reality abruptly, we often term the experience "Enlightenment" or even "Conversion." >The second thing is the particular patriarchy imagined - I found this very >believable in terms of the parameters set - the men of the lines [and also >men outside the lines, but with less skill] invest huge effort in >developing a particular masculinity. They have lessons, sometimes they >even breed for it [hulking genes imported as one of the lines was starting >to look a little effete] - We see limited examples of these sorts of structures all over. The Roman Catholic Church, a patriarchy if ever there was one, became alarmed at the independence of the various Sisterhoods and took drastic steps to bring them under control of the male hierarchy. The Mormons did almost precisely the same thing to the Relief Society, the women's arm of that church which was originally highly independent and progressive. They soon put a stop to *that* sort of thing. >I got frustrated that open rebellion was shown as so utterly futile but >accepted it in the book's framework. I saw men and women developing >interactions a lot like African Americans and white Americans in the >ante-bellum south of the US - for example, utterly culturally separate >with the ones with the upperhand infantalising the others [perhaps this >was the model? Racism seems to be absent, 'ethnicity' not a marker of >status in the lines or elsewhere.] To me this is epitomised in the >martyrdom of Belle Anne, who is the only *workable* victim - defiance >would not be believed but Belle Anne ! would [did this happen during slavery?] I think her analysis of rebellion has merit. The weapons of the modern nation state so vastly overwhelm whatever power may remain in the population that "coups," where governments fall, are usually only orchestrated by a traitorous military who turn on the people who supposedly direct them. >Well, I waffle on, but I still think Native tongue is a useful distopia, >the things that frustrate me about it don't strike me as off key - rather >as narrative devices to show up a particular point. I think this book >works best as a polemic, I didn't enjoy the second as I wasn't as >interested in it's points and didn't read the third. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 10:52:08 -0500 Reply-To: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia Sender: friendly STRICTLY ON TOPIC discussion of Feminist SF/Fantasy and Utopia From: Robin Reid Subject: Re: BDG Native Tongue Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020510231033.02a210c0@www.leeanne.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed I've been too swamped to comment on all the great postings about NATIVE TONGUE, but I'll note I first read it when it first came out, it got me very interested in linguistics, language and power, language and gender issues, and although in some ways it may reflect an earlier period, I still see ways in which it connects today. In fact I've used it in courses I teach (composition, mostly, on the theme of language and power). I'll be using it this fall in an honors English 101 class, along with Robin Lakoff's THE LANGUAGE WAR, and a collection of more academic essays on language issues. THought people might be interested to see her web site (where you can get the Laadan materials): http://www.sfwa.org/members/elgin/ Robin At 11:41 PM 05/10/2002 -0700, you wrote: >At 07:04 PM 5/10/02 -0400, Rachel Wild wrote: >>Hello All, >> >>I have read Native Tongue many times and found it started my interest in >>linguistics - it's probably been about 3 years since I last read it, so I >>can just say what has stayed with me the most. >> >>The first thing is the concept of Encoding - all languages encode but it >>takes societal power or a 'sub'-cultural reason to make them develop into >>usage [maybe sometimes it's just fashion that co-opts words] > >Lexical Encoding is kind of the Whorfian Hypothesis in reverse, >if words shape thought then thought should shape words as well. >In standard women's studies courses this is often done be >"re-structuring" or "re-encoding" words of everyday discourse >in such a way that the speaker, or listener, is forced to re-examine >their meaning. Mary Daly is perhaps among the most well-known, >with her Wickedary being a compendium of New Words, which >she defines as "words Heard in a new semantic context and >arising from qualitatively Other experience; words of >Gynocentric communication -- many of which are not "new" >in the old sense (materially) but New in a New sense, having >different meanings because they are Heard and Spoken in >New ways. > >http://www.wickedary.com/ > >>I don't believe it is possible for adults to speak a newly created language - > >The Houses of the Linguists are presumably highly skilled at >adult acquisition of language. And while the possibility of a >new speaker of any language having her mental map changed >in any way by the acquisition of a new vocabulary may seem >remote, this actually happens all the time, I think. Or perhaps >it's vice versa, as described by the New Traveller patois. > >New mental maps demand new words just as much as new >words alter old mental maps. When the new words alter the >old view of reality abruptly, we often term the experience >"Enlightenment" or even "Conversion." > >>The second thing is the particular patriarchy imagined - I found this very >>believable in terms of the parameters set - the men of the lines [and also >>men outside the lines, but with less skill] invest huge effort in >>developing a particular masculinity. They have lessons, sometimes they >>even breed for it [hulking genes imported as one of the lines was starting >>to look a little effete] - > >We see limited examples of these sorts of structures all over. >The Roman Catholic Church, a patriarchy if ever there was >one, became alarmed at the independence of the various >Sisterhoods and took drastic steps to bring them under >control of the male hierarchy. The Mormons did almost >precisely the same thing to the Relief Society, the >women's arm of that church which was originally highly >independent and progressive. They soon put a stop >to *that* sort of thing. > >>I got frustrated that open rebellion was shown as so utterly futile but >>accepted it in the book's framework. I saw men and women developing >>interactions a lot like African Americans and white Americans in the >>ante-bellum south of the US - for example, utterly culturally separate >>with the ones with the upperhand infantalising the others [perhaps this >>was the model? Racism seems to be absent, 'ethnicity' not a marker of >>status in the lines or elsewhere.] To me this is epitomised in the >>martyrdom of Belle Anne, who is the only *workable* victim - defiance >>would not be believed but Belle Anne ! would [did this happen during >>slavery?] > >I think her analysis of rebellion has merit. The weapons >of the modern nation state so vastly overwhelm whatever >power may remain in the population that "coups," where >governments fall, are usually only orchestrated by a >traitorous military who turn on the people who supposedly >direct them. > >>Well, I waffle on, but I still think Native tongue is a useful distopia, >>the things that frustrate me about it don't strike me as off key - rather >>as narrative devices to show up a particular point. I think this book >>works best as a polemic, I didn't enjoy the second as I wasn't as >>interested in it's points and didn't read the third.