What order is the grammatically correct one?

wjserson · Post by **wjserson** » Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:45 pm

I'm presently writing an article about a sociological concept that's happening in Canada as we speak. Many white/caucasian, unilingual, anglophone, male individuals believe that the Canadian Govt is racist and that they, as white anglo unilingual males are discriminated upon.

What's the best way to name these individuals:
1)Caucasian unilingual anglophone males
2)unilingual English-speaking male whites?
3)Males who are unilingually Anglophone and white
4)etc

Any idea how I can come up with one order or series of adjectives that I can use? If it had a nice acronym I could use to represent all these concepts together, that would be handy as well. Thanks for any help in advance.

WJS

Lorikeet · Post by **Lorikeet** » Fri Jan 30, 2004 4:10 pm

wjserson wrote:I'm presently writing an article about a sociological concept that's happening in Canada as we speak. Many white/caucasian, unilingual, anglophone, male individuals believe that the Canadian Govt is racist and that they, as white anglo unilingual males are discriminated upon.

What's the best way to name these individuals:
1)Caucasian unilingual anglophone males
2)unilingual English-speaking male whites?
3)Males who are unilingually Anglophone and white
4)etc

Any idea how I can come up with one order or series of adjectives that I can use? If it had a nice acronym I could use to represent all these concepts together, that would be handy as well. Thanks for any help in advance.

WJS

For me, grammatically correct would be "male Caucasian unilingual anglophones." However, I thought "Caucasian anglophone male unilingual species" would be nice cause it spells Camus

wjserson · Post by **wjserson** » Fri Jan 30, 2004 5:38 pm

Although probably an insult to Albert Camus himself, I like it

The word "species" definitely sets them apart from those who don't share all qualities mentioned above.

Harzer · Post by **Harzer** » Sat Jan 31, 2004 11:43 am

I rather prefer the appellation:

white unilingual male anglophones

but I am not sure why; except that I think you ought to say "unilingually anglophone males", again unsure why.

Or what about: "white male anglophone monoglots"? or "white anglophone male monoglots"?

What happened to the word "monolingual"? Is it no longer PC?

Harzer

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Sat Jan 31, 2004 2:07 pm

My aunt's husband is one of them. Lived and worked as a teacher in Montreal for 30 years and complained he wasn't promoted because he couldn't speak any French. I suggested it was his fault for not staying in the UK so he could speak French like I did.

lolwhites · Post by **lolwhites** » Sat Jan 31, 2004 5:51 pm

Couldn't we take a leaf out of Michael Moore's book and just call them "Stupid White Men"?

LarryLatham · Post by **LarryLatham** » Sat Jan 31, 2004 8:07 pm

We call 'em rednecks down here.

Larry Latham

wjserson · Post by **wjserson** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:57 pm

Well, the thing is, I'm not trying to classify them as idiots, or stupid, or rednecks (they do that themselves), just a group that in most cases tends to have all of the above qualities. In what order do the adjectives appear in grammatical order?

SJ, why didn't your relative learn French while he was in a francophone province? Wouldn't being submerged in French have proved to be much more productive than going back to the UK to learn it?

wjserson

Interesting to see that you all seem to know exactly who I'm talking about.

LarryLatham · Post by **LarryLatham** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 6:25 pm

To try to answer your question, William (without being so flip as I was before), I think the order of adjectives might vary somewhat depending on the user's purpose. The likelihood is that some of the adjectives will, in the user's mind, carry more weight (at the precise moment of use) than others. Those might be emphasized more by placing them closer to the noun. Exact choice of noun form, too, might be largely influenced by the user's mood (whether to call them, caucasians or whites, for example). A user who says: white monolingual male Anglophones, may be wishing to emphasize the language spoken by these people. One who puts it: Anglophone monolingual white males, may be accentuating their sex and their race.

I know there are textbooks which offer lists nominating a "correct" order of adjectives, but I've never seen one with sample words like the ones you've proposed here. This list will be user decided.

Larry Latham

P.S. Yes, I guess we've all met them.

Andrew Patterson · Post by **Andrew Patterson** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:09 pm

The order of adjectives is simply: most abstract adjective first continuing through to least abstract last.

By the way, the word is "monolingual" not "unilingual".

Andrew Patterson.

wjserson · Post by **wjserson** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:25 pm

Thanks for the advice Patterson. That makes it much easier to figure out. But why the objection to the term "unilingual"? Have you never heard it before?

Wjserson

LarryLatham · Post by **LarryLatham** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:46 pm

The order of adjectives is simply: most abstract adjective first continuing through to least abstract last.

This sounds pretty good, but let's put it to the test.

I believe the phrase: "the big red house" is more likely to be used than "the red big house". Now the question is, which adjective is more abstract? That is sometimes a tough question. In this particular case, however, I would argue that "red" may be the more abstract, since color is a more subjective idea than size, which can be objectively measured. But that flies in the face of Mr. Patterson's suggestion, since, if my ideas about "red" being more abstract than "big" are correct, he would have us say, "the red big house". Go figure!

Larry Latham

Andrew Patterson · Post by **Andrew Patterson** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 9:08 pm

1. The word "monolingual" is the more usual term.

2. Big is more subjective than red. True, it's easier to measure absolute size, but if I compare a small red house with a large red pimple the house will be much bigger than the pimple. They will still both be red.

Perhaps I should have mentioned that it is relative relative comparisons that are important.

Andrew Patterson.

wjserson · Post by **wjserson** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:23 pm

1-By the way, the word is "monolingual" not "unilingual".
2-The word "monolingual" is the more usual term.

Sentence 2 doesn't justify the first, Andrew.
Wast his sort of a hyper-correction? Or do you want to re-word what you said?

wjserson

LarryLatham · Post by **LarryLatham** » Tue Feb 03, 2004 1:39 am

...but if I compare a small red house with a large red pimple the house will be much bigger than the pimple. They will still both be red.

I see your point, Andrew, and acknowledge its validity. Even so, I'm not sure that bigness is more abstract than redness. Both are subject to individual interpretation. The larger point is that relative abstraction is often hard to determine. That makes your "rule" (or perhaps you'd prefer 'guideline') somewhat difficult to apply much of the time.

Larry Latham

Teacher Discussion Forums