Both in the US mainstream media, and both highlighted on Language Log, a blog where some rather illustrious linguists hang out.
1) The use of 'bushman' as a derogatory term, like 'savage', by Mark Helprin in the Wall Street Journal:
Our politics and policies have somehow been parceled out to opportunists like Michael Moore--purveyor of conspiracy theories and hatreds, whose presentation, unclean in every respect, is honored nonetheless by the controlling rump of Democrats--and to Bushmen like "Kip" Hawley of Homeland Security, father of the proposal to allow carry-on ice-picks, bows and arrows, and knives with blades up to five-inches long.
Quoted and discussed by Mark Libermann, who notes en passant* that 'bushman' in its literal sense has been seen as derogatory, but is prefered by bushmen to the term 'san'. (Because 'san' is a derogatory word used by the neighbouring Khoi people for Bushmen. He doesn't mention the use of 'Khoisan' to refer to both together, but I would imagine that's worse.)
I like his concluding paragraphs:
But Helprin isn't using Bushmen literally. Instead, he seems to be using it to mean something like "uncivilized people who thinks that the way to solve problems is to give everybody more weapons". This is ungenerous, not to say offensive, given that the culture of the Bushmen/San/Khoe/Basarwa seems to be rather on the gentle side.
A traditional solution to this problem is to use the word Neandert(h)al. This has the advantage of referring to no living people (unless you're one of those who believes that modern Europeans are part Neandertal), but it has the disadvantage of being founded on an unjustified prejudice against people with brow ridges and weak chins.
A more rational solution would be use the name of the American political group now most associated with interest in weapons, namely Republicans. To provide anatomical balance with his prior use of the phrase "rump of Democrats", perhaps Helprin should have written "brain-dead Republicans". Indeed, to increase the degree of anatomical and neurological parallelism, he might have contrasted the "numb rump of Democrats" who honor Michael Moore with the "brain-dead Republicans" who want to see hijackers and airline passengers fighting it out with bayonets and crossbows. Of course, I suggest this purely as an matter of abstract rhetorical balance, not to express any political opinion or any derogation of Mr. Hawley.
2) Geoff Nunberg finds statistical evidence that the word 'refugee' is being used disproportionately to describe poor, black people affected by Hurricane Katrina:
In Nexis wire service articles mentioning Katrina over the past week, articles containing evacuee outnumber those containing refugee by 56% to 44% (n=1522). But in contexts in which the words appear within 10 words of poor or black, refugee is favored by 68% to 32% (n=85). And in contexts in which the words appear within ten words of Astrodome, refugee is favored by 63% to 37% (n=461).
Those disparities likely reflect the image of refugees as poor, bedraggled, and abandoned, which would make the word seem apt to describe the people getting off the buses at the Astrodome. That stereotype may be unfair and invidious in its own right, as George Rupp, the CEO of the Interntional Rescue Committee, was saying this morning on WNYC's Bryan Lehrer Show, where I was also a guest. But the way the press is using the word refugee now hardly does much to dispel the stereotype. And while there may be polemical reasons for advocates of the displaced to use the term, the way Woodie Guthrie did in his song "Dust Bowl Refugee," that's hardly what the media are getting at when they use it, or what President Bush was thinking of when he objected to the use of the term the other day.
It's strange for me to find myself agreeing with the-liar-and-war-criminal-in-the-White-House about anything of substance politically. Still, it's impressive how insensitively he managed to put it:
President Bush, who has spent days trying to deflect criticism that he responded sluggishly to the disaster, weighed in on Tuesday. "The people we're talking about are not refugees," he said. "They are Americans and they need the help and love and compassion of our fellow citizens." (from the Washington Post)
One final point. I don't mean to seem as though I only criticise people from the US, despite this post and
my previous post here. This just seems to be a suitable forum when I have something to say about North American life. On my own blog I lay into East Asian politicians, and in my personal life I complain about the people around me...
* I was going to write 'in passing', but then I remembered on whose blog I'm writing. I'll try to work 'checkmate', 'stalemate' and, especially, 'zugzwang' into future posts.
