According to wikipedia there are many chinese everywhere
I was impressed with this figure: 1,300,000 chinese in peru. I'm not from Perú, but I know they had a president called Alberto Fujimori, so I thought this could explain his last name. So I looked up the name and... is japanese. I'm still confused...
Anyway, that means 3% of Perú's population is actually chinese. Still impressive.
*Loĝas If you don't have your input device set up to type accented Esperanto characters you can type the base character followed by an "x" e.g. logxas, cxu, jxurnalo
"Loĝi" means "to dwell" while "vivi" means "to be alive". In English the word "lives" is used for both meanings but Esperanto makes a distinction.
Why don't you get https://github.com/SamHocevar/wincompose or something similar? It helps you type accented characters like ĝ, ç, é, ö, ñ, and other characters like «, þ, ı, İ, and even some mathematical symbols like ʌ, ≤, ∃. [I tried some others like AllChar, but those don't have as many characters — the Esperanto ĉ, etc. were missing, if I remember correctly].
You can configure one of the seldom used keys as the compose key — many use one of the alt or ctrl keys, but I prefer Caps Lock, as I almost never have to use it (and even if you wanted to, you can hit Ctrl + Alt + Caps Lock, or temporarily disable WinCompose).
I use Linux. However, setting up international keyboards is extremely easy in Linux, so I have that set up. I also use a Chrome extension that will change all instances of cx, gx, sx, etc. and replace it with ĉ, ĝ, ŝ, etc.
Here is the link:
Is there any rhyme or reason for how Esperanto refers to a country, language, and a people from that country? In Chinese there's a consistent logic to how this plays out. But here it seems in Esperanto it isnt logical (why cxinoj and not cxinanoj? If it is kanado and kanadanoj?)
"Person" = singular
"Persons" = the preferred plural in the past, but it's only really used in formal and legal contexts now, and sounds awkward in daily usage
"People" = the most-accepted plural for "person"; people should only use this word if they are unsure about which one to use, because it's correct in all situations.
"I saw three persons with a cool hat" -> "I saw three people with cool hats"
"There are many culturally distinct peoples in Asia" is correct but formal.
Because in the past it was used to refer to people from any east-asian background in a disparaging way.
Because by telling me what I can or can't say based on the color of my skin is inherently racist. According to the advice you're giving me, I could determine anything you say to be racist to my caucasian ethnicity, therefore you are not allowed to say anything because I find it offensive.
To follow the belief that we cannot say certain things to or about other people is deceptive and counter-intuitive to reaching an understanding between humanity. One could say to another "You idiot," and many interpretations could be made. Maybe the other interpreted it as a harsh cold insult when the speaker meant it as a friendly jest. "Words offer a means to meaning." What matters is not what you think the speakers mean, it's what THEY as the users of their voice and their words mean. Otherwise, there is no point in the speaker speaking if no one will understand what he means to communicate.
The problems I see today are people being afraid to say things because they might offend or insult someone. We should not be living in fear of words, we should be more aware of our intentions. I am not a racist. Hatred is baggage and is a waste of our short time and valuable efforts. I choose not to say "❤❤❤❤❤❤" because I don't like to divide people into separate categories. I hate being called a white person. Or an american. Or a man. I prefer to be called my name. But it's not my choice what I will be called.
I wholeheartedly disagree. It does not matter what the speaker means if no listener interprets it in the same way. It matters how the listener understands, otherwise, what is the point in them even talking? If what you are saying is taken as being offensive to all your listeners, but that's not how you meant it, then either reword the statement or stop talking.
Sorry I took that whole response of yours as offensive. All my friends agree that it is offensive. I hope no one ever has something like that said to them, so could you rephrase it as "You're completely right, Uberdonutmonster, we shouldn't be slaves of our words."
Thank you, I appreciate you changing your obviously backwards and insensitive words and vocabulary all because of how it made me feel.
OK, it's obvious at this point that you are just trolling this thread. That's fine, the internet is built for trolls.
However, I hope that in your personal life, when you're being a real person and not an anonymous poster, that you take other people's feelings into account and are actually intelligent enough to adjust your behavior when new information (such as the word you've been using all your life for this or that group is incredibly insensitive) is repeatedly presented to you.
I don't think I have ever seen a point whoosh so far over anyone's head.
Duolingo is a place for learning and not a place to use derogatory terms. If you want to use racially insensitive terms on a forum, you are in the wrong place. Asking about the use of the word was completely understandable. Everyone here (politely) made it clear that the term is widely held as being culturally and racially insensitive. There is no reason to get defensive. It's okay. Now you know! Just move on! :)
Apologies that I can't reply specifically to your profile but, I have to reply.
I'm not a troll, though I was being sarcastic on that last reply because I'm mocking that opinion. Yes, peoples feelings should be taken into account but my whole point is that people shouldn't be offended by words they should be offended by meanings.
To try to analogize, (though my friends tell me I am HORRIBLE at analogizing) imagine there is a church that decide to put up a cross just outside their building. To pagan people, the cross is the symbol of death and dying so it frightens them, but the church is just trying promote it's beliefs, should the church have to remove the cross or should the pagans instead investigate or perhaps ignore this instead of getting super sensitive and removing a harmless symbol?
I am not a religious person and even I would say that it is unreasonable to censor a symbol. I am tired of this sensitivity towards words that are not being used for insults. In Law School they can't even say "violate" anymore because of sex abuse victims complaining about it triggering awful memories instead of them conquering their fear.
I think by promoting this censorship you are doing nothing but fearmongering instead of actually helping people. Instead of focusing on words, we should focus on hateful ideas. Instead of teaching people, "Hey you can't say "❤❤❤❤❤❤." Maybe teach them "Hey you shouldn't hate black people."
"If I were a Chinaman..."
As others have explained, the term Chinaman was used as a slur, at least in America, so it carries this negative connotation today. It is not the same as referring to someone from France as a Frenchman, for instance. The historical use of words is very important.
If you want to be respectful of peoples feelings, and also don't wish to appear ignorant or worse, I'd recommend that you stop using the word to refer to Chinese people.
Honestly calling a Chinese man a Chinaman isnt like saying Ching Chong or imitating their eyes. Zhong guo ren actually means chinaman
That's true. Here in China, people who are unfamiliar with English usually tend to use most literal translations. I don't know if this (along with other wordings that had been "Chinglish" in history) is the origin of racist insults.
By the way, only labelling words insultive give them insultive meanings which they originally don't have, as Orwell once mentioned, and banning things only make them more appealing to bystanders and give them strength. In this sense, both attacking and "protecting" Chinese identities provoke nationalist and racist sentiments, either Chinese or anti-Chinese, but both (already!) harmful and dangerous to Chinese and international society.
Chinese people is not an endangered species that needs reserving, nor is any race, nation, or ethnicity.
There are no bad words. There are bad people who use these words.
Black people are not offended when a comedian like Richard Prior or Eddie Murphy say the word "❤❤❤❤❤❤." Why? Because everybody knows they're not racist. Or at least not towards black people. If someone says something to you and are not trying to offend you, then you are choosing to be offended.
I'll try not to use the word as much, but I've said chinaman my whole life and no one has ever told me that it's offensive and I've never used it offensively.
Thank you guys for explaining though, I appreciate the efforts. Sorry if I came off as aggressive.
There's quite a large line that takes a reasonable amount of effort to cross in order to offend someone in terms of nationality or race. People are becoming more open and understanding about races and "not-so-bad/used derogatorily" slurs and how to use them without offending anyone. I have actually never heard anyone say chinaman but I would not think it would be offensive unless the person using the word is TRYING to offend you. I do agree and understand you though. Thanks for shedding light on the subject! :)
I tried to explain that but people wouldn't listen.
I've arrived at a sort of middle-ground now. Yes, the listener's interpretation is very important in communication, however the speaker should be able to express himself clearly also. If people keep tell him that he's using the wrong brush, is he really painting his picture or theirs?
I still stand by my point. Categorizing words as solely bad/derogatory/hateful is asinine and seems to always com with an agenda.
"Words are a means to meaning." They are tools. A hammer can build a house or break it down. You can use it to hammer a nail, but you could also supplant it with an axe or even a shovel in some cases. Don't blame the tool for misuse, blame the user, however you might know what they mean to do ere you assign judgement.
I would be surprised. If he stopped me, I would understand, but if he does no investigation then he is an impatient and inconsiderate cop.
"Excuse me, sir, step away from the vehicle." "What's the problem officer?" "Sir, what are you doing to that vehicle?" "My friend locked his keys in his car and I'm trying to get them out." (if the friend is there, obviously he/she would back me up. If not...) "Where is your friend?" "He/She is (insert place)" "I'm going need to do some investigation, but for now I'm going need to detain you as a possible suspect of Grand Theft Auto."
And if I got arrested for that. I would understand.
However if he just walks up and arrests me without question, thought or second-guessing then he is a dick.
Besides, I would like to ask, what would be your alternative in that situation? How would I get the keys out of that car? I honestly don't think that anyone would judge me for using lockpicks or a coat hanger or whatever.
Normally people say, "Don't say those words," because I could use a different word. If there were no other way to express that idea without that word, then why would we judge someone for using that word?