News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on First English dictionary of ancient Greek since Victorian era spares no blushes. Parent comment

Re:First English dictionary of ancient Greek since Victorian... by SideburnsOfDoom on Friday May 28, 2021 @03:04AM (#27312524)
> Similarly, I think gay women in this context means "overly" promiscuous

No, it does not. "gay" did not mainly mean homosexual until mid 20th century. That dictionary entry was written in 1889; well before that.

Before that the primary meaning was "happy, cheerful, bright"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:First English dictionary of ancient Greek since Victorian... by ramblerman on Friday May 28, 2021 @03:27AM (#27312636)
From your own wikipedia link:

> By the late 17th century, it had acquired the specific meaning of "addicted to pleasures and dissipations",[12] an extension of its primary meaning of "carefree" implying "uninhibited by moral constraints". A gay woman *was a prostitute*,

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:First English dictionary of ancient Greek since Victorian... by SideburnsOfDoom on Friday May 28, 2021 @03:51AM (#27312771)
I take your point, but I think it a big stretch that in 1889, an academic would use late 17th century slang, not a common word with a simple primary meaning of "bright, happy".

So then the word "gay" has up to three possible meaning to the modern reader, in order of appearance in English: 1) "bright and happy", 2) "promiscuous and slutty", 3) "homosexual".

The last meaning definitely wasn't relevant to ancient Greeks, and I'm not sure about the second.

So removing this confusing Victorian moralising is still not an exercise in prudery at all? As it removes confusion, it is done for clarity, and if it removes moralising it is the opposite of prudery. Grandparent post from JoeyBananas is not correct on that.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:First English dictionary of ancient Greek since Victorian... by jhanschoo on Friday May 28, 2021 @06:16AM (#27313628)
https://lsj.gr/wiki/%CE%BA%CF%81%CE%BF%CE%BA%CF%89%CF%84%CF%...

It clearly was written having a sexual connotation in the context of the related definition (worn at Dionysian festivals). But note that the editors may infer that this is simply an incorrect definition considering evidence, and opted to remove that part rather than redefine it.

Since you're the only person in the written conversation who has been arguing that it probably meant "happy" in the entry, I won't bother replying to the other comments of yours expressing the same argument.

[ Parent | on HN ]