Were you surprised by the Zimmerman verdict

[mrs jam]

It is heart-breaking and mind-boggling that such a very unfortunate series of events was set in motion that evening in Sanford. I was torn in my opinion of the verdict. I feel that Zimmerman should have not been following Martin in the first place, but following someone shouldn't result in having your head bashed into the pavement. Both exercised very poor judgment, but Zimmerman was the adult while Martin was only 17. At 17, many of my peers (and possibly myself) were still dispensing shaving cream on golf courses and lighting dog doo doo on porches. I thank my lucky stars that the worst consequence we ever received was the march-of-shame we had to take to our respective parents' homes when we were caught red-handed with t.p. one Halloween.

I deeply question the right to carry firearms. I'm in Texas, and both my husband and I are licensed to carry, but the only time a firearm leaves our home is whenever we take a long road trip. I truly believe that if Zimmerman had not been carrying that night, he probably would never have followed Martin in the first place. I think knowing he had access to a weapon made him feel more secure confronting someone. I'm not saying he was planning on using it; I just think that knowing its there provides a sense of security that can possibly override common sense (as in don't follow a seemingly "threatening" character on a rain evening).

 

[momhappy]

Again, though, I wasn't making any statements/opinions about the case or the outcome. I was simply responding to one, single comment. Based on his cell phone conversation, there appeared to be some sort of aggression on his part as opposed to just out buying candy. My point was that both parties involved appeared to make bad choices at one point or another during the incident. I'm not saying either was right or wrong and I certainly never said that calling someone a "cracker" was a reason to shoot a person. Having said that, it still deserves mention in my opinion.
Anyway, much like the Paula Deen thread a short while back, I don't feel that discussing certain issues pertaining to race on forums like this is productive, so this is where my commentary on the subject ends

 

[Circe]

It is heart-breaking and mind-boggling that such a very unfortunate series of events was set in motion that evening in Sanford. I was torn in my opinion of the verdict. I feel that Zimmerman should have not been following Martin in the first place, but following someone shouldn't result in having your head bashed into the pavement. Both exercised very poor judgment, but Zimmerman was the adult while Martin was only 17. At 17, many of my peers (and possibly myself) were still dispensing shaving cream on golf courses and lighting dog doo doo on porches. I thank my lucky stars that the worst consequence we ever received was the march-of-shame we had to take to our respective parents' homes when we were caught red-handed with t.p. one Halloween.

I deeply question the right to carry firearms. I'm in Texas, and both my husband and I are licensed to carry, but the only time a firearm leaves our home is whenever we take a long road trip. I truly believe that if Zimmerman had not been carrying that night, he probably would never have followed Martin in the first place. I think knowing he had access to a weapon made him feel more secure confronting someone. I'm not saying he was planning on using it; I just think that knowing its there provides a sense of security that can possibly override common sense (as in don't follow a seemingly "threatening" character on a rain evening).

Well said. I have felt more secure carrying in the past (my folks gave me a taser at 14). But in retrospect? That didn't level the playing field. It just exaggerated it in the other direction. Mrs J is right. These things should carry more weight.

 

[peacechick]

I'm sorry for not understanding, but you have to understand that this hijacked, beaten-up, mangled-beyond-repair version of English that you insist on calling English is a form of the language that I have never encountered in 32 years of living in the British Isles. I literally have no idea what most people are talking about on this continent, so I have limited ability to understand, well, anything here.

Let's be fair! Just because American English has developed differently doesn't mean it's mangled. I had also never heard of the term "cracker" until recently, so it was very fascinating to learn about the etymology.

Brits also have their own terms that are virtually gibberish to people overseas. Some examples? "Fit", "toff", "yob", "Chav", "stroppy" etc. I just happen to know a bunch of them as I read the Daily Mail as a guilty pleasure.

So do the Aussies, the Canadians, the Indians, and the ex-Brit colonies. English belongs to all of us, and in the end, we should remember it was a big hodge-lodge to begin with, cobbled together from Old Norse, Anglo-Saxon, Latin, French, German vocabulary.

I am neither American or English but English is my first language and I enjoy it in all its forms.

Excuse me for this detour from the Zimmerman case! If I have anything to add, it's only to say that the problem of crime, safety and race is very complex in the States. I have had friends visiting me in Canada who felt totally safe roaming the city at night and then felt very unsafe after crossing the border to American cities. If people don't feel sale in their own neighborhoods, I think it is very hard to say ban guns or to tell them not to take action to protect their community. This was a great tragedy.

 

[mrs jam]

Well said. I have felt more secure carrying in the past (my folks gave me a taser at 14). But in retrospect? That didn't level the playing field. It just exaggerated it in the other direction. Mrs J is right. These things should carry more weight.

My parents gave me a Smith & Wesson 'Ladysmith' pistol for Christmas when I was 19. 19!!! I remember opening it up and thinking, "WTF is wrong with these people??" The only things I remember having on my Christmas list that year were a Benneton (sp?) sweater and a custom eyeshadow palette from Estée Lauder. Their line of reasoning was that I was living by myself in an apartment due to dorm overcrowding at my university. To their credit, my dad took me to a gun safety training course, and we made frequent trips to the gun range for the next couple of years. By the way, the gun was given the name 'Ladysmith' because the hammer is flush with the back of the gun, so it won't get caught on anything inside a purse and accidentally fire at your foot. Positively brilliant marketing, right?

While I admit that having a gun in the house does provide me with a sense of comfort (we don't have any kiddos to worry about), it is very unsettling to me to think of how many people - in Houston, at least - are carrying guns out in public places. My sister-in-law used to carry a gun in her diaper bag, and I've seen this woman somehow manage to accidentally impale one of her toes with a salad fork. Life can change in the blink of an eye, and easy access to a gun in public can turn a bad situation into something so much worse.

 

[Laila619]

Well, I've learned something from this. If you want to stalk, harass, then murder people legally, go to Florida.

Here's a lovely piece of an interview with Zimmerman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en&gl=US&client=mv-google&v=eD83PmBeaW4&nomobile=1

Interviewer: "Is there anything you regret...?"
Z: "No sir."
Z: "I feel that it was all God's plan..."
Interviewer: "Is there anything you might do differently, in retrospect ...?"
Z: "No sir."

Unbelievable.

 

[Dancing Fire]

We had a case like that recently in my home state. A black man was thrown out of a party. He came back with a gun and shot into the crowd killing a 12 year old black girl with a bullet to her neck. very little was heard about it after that.

IMO, the media shares a huge percentage of the blame.
They can smell money, and there wasn't much scent here.

If the media detect a case with even a whiff of racial conflict they're all over it like flies on s hit.
The coverage, the headlines fan the fire so they make zillions on advertising.
They know how to print money ... helping America slip deeper into its racial quagmire.

This case was an excellent example.

Liberal media are the main problem they kept on adding fuel to fire.

 

[ksinger]

I'm sorry for not understanding, but you have to understand that this hijacked, beaten-up, mangled-beyond-repair version of English that you insist on calling English is a form of the language that I have never encountered in 32 years of living in the British Isles. I literally have no idea what most people are talking about on this continent, so I have limited ability to understand, well, anything here.

Let's be fair! Just because American English has developed differently doesn't mean it's mangled. I had also never heard of the term "cracker" until recently, so it was very fascinating to learn about the etymology.

Brits also have their own terms that are virtually gibberish to people overseas. Some examples? "Fit", "toff", "yob", "Chav", "stroppy" etc. I just happen to know a bunch of them as I read the Daily Mail as a guilty pleasure.

So do the Aussies, the Canadians, the Indians, and the ex-Brit colonies. English belongs to all of us, and in the end, we should remember it was a big hodge-lodge to begin with, cobbled together from Old Norse, Anglo-Saxon, Latin, French, German vocabulary.

I am neither American or English but English is my first language and I enjoy it in all its forms.

Excuse me for this detour from the Zimmerman case! If I have anything to add, it's only to say that the problem of crime, safety and race is very complex in the States. I have had friends visiting me in Canada who felt totally safe roaming the city at night and then felt very unsafe after crossing the border to American cities. If people don't feel sale in their own neighborhoods, I think it is very hard to say ban guns or to tell them not to take action to protect their community. This was a great tragedy.

I take umbrage at the first comment. (And honestly, how often do I get to use the word "umbrage". It's a good day!) And most heartily agree with the second. English is a living language and constantly changing, even in the British Isles. Does anyone honestly think that Shakespeare would understand a modern Brit? HIS was REAL English. What are YOU guys speaking, because it's incomprehensible and clearly NOT English! Right?

Like all changes, some I like and some I do not, but I adore all the flavors of it. It's completely wonderful that there ARE so many flavors. English is so vital and endlessly expressive. Long live English!

 

[Smith1942]

I'm sorry for not understanding, but you have to understand that this hijacked, beaten-up, mangled-beyond-repair version of English that you insist on calling English is a form of the language that I have never encountered in 32 years of living in the British Isles. I literally have no idea what most people are talking about on this continent, so I have limited ability to understand, well, anything here.

Let's be fair! Just because American English has developed differently doesn't mean it's mangled. I had also never heard of the term "cracker" until recently, so it was very fascinating to learn about the etymology.

Brits also have their own terms that are virtually gibberish to people overseas. Some examples? "Fit", "toff", "yob", "Chav", "stroppy" etc. I just happen to know a bunch of them as I read the Daily Mail as a guilty pleasure.

So do the Aussies, the Canadians, the Indians, and the ex-Brit colonies. English belongs to all of us, and in the end, we should remember it was a big hodge-lodge to begin with, cobbled together from Old Norse, Anglo-Saxon, Latin, French, German vocabulary.

I am neither American or English but English is my first language and I enjoy it in all its forms.

Excuse me for this detour from the Zimmerman case! If I have anything to add, it's only to say that the problem of crime, safety and race is very complex in the States. I have had friends visiting me in Canada who felt totally safe roaming the city at night and then felt very unsafe after crossing the border to American cities. If people don't feel sale in their own neighborhoods, I think it is very hard to say ban guns or to tell them not to take action to protect their community. This was a great tragedy.

I take umbrage at the first comment. (And honestly, how often do I get to use the word "umbrage". It's a good day!) And most heartily agree with the second. English is a living language and constantly changing, even in the British Isles. Does anyone honestly think that Shakespeare would understand a modern Brit? HIS was REAL English. What are YOU guys speaking, because it's incomprehensible and clearly NOT English! Right?

Like all changes, some I like and some I do not, but I adore all the flavors of it. It's completely wonderful that there ARE so many flavors. English is so vital and endlessly expressive. Long live English!

English is the language of England. The dialect version of English spoken in America doesn't exist in England, so over here the language should be called American, in my view.

This isn't the thread to go into details, but seriously, the differences between the two are vast and startling. They share a small core vocabulary and some of the simpler tenses, and that's where the similarities end.

Americans are very proud to be American and got rid of as much British influence as possible, so it seems a little strange that they are happy to call their language English - I would've thought they'd have switched to calling it American a long time ago, maybe at the time of the Revolution.

 

[dragonfly411]

As somebody who has in all seriousness been called a "cracker" (in NYC as Jew, where for a variety of reasons, not so much - we've never really been the folks to hold the whips - AND where I've actually been personally attacked for racial reasons ... it's still really not a reason to shoot a person.

It wasn't a reason for Bernie Goetz thirty years ago. (He did, and I think it set this city back twenty years.) It wasn't a reason for my dad ( robbed violently three times, carrying the last two). It shouldn't have been a reason for a man who randomly and against the advice of the legal officers who spoke to him chose to stalk a kid.

I sort of feel like there's a faintly disingenuous air in play when we attempt to equate "cracker" with any racial epithet used against black folk. Or, for that matter, any other currently mistreated minority group. Being called a cracker didn't make me feel nearly as threatened as the time I was, say, called a cunt. Or a kike. Some words pass into the majority usage, usually when they're so inane as to be amusing, others don't. NONE of them act as an excuse for violence. Shooting an unarmed kid, though? I dunno.

I feel like whatever maneuvers we engage in, that should actually carry some consequences, regardless of race or class. Just because ... consequences matter. At the end of the day, they're the only things that matter. And yet, our laws currently involve workarounds.

Much more than this particular ruling, that concerns me. THAT is what we should be working on in order to rectify these circumstances, I think.

You know, I have an interesting take on the whole Cracker thing. I know that some mean it to be insulting, but knowing where the true history of cracker comes from in my state, I find it hard to be considered as an insult to myself. Florida Crackers were actually farmers, and were the first people to raise cattle in Florida. There is an entire breed of Cracker horse. Crackers have a very distinct historical influence on my state. Now whether it was developed as a degrading statement elsewhere, I don't know, but here, they are a historical figure, and they are quickly dying.

 

[Smith1942]

Well, I've learned something from this. If you want to stalk, harass, then murder people legally, go to Florida.

Here's a lovely piece of an interview with Zimmerman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en&gl=US&client=mv-google&v=eD83PmBeaW4&nomobile=1

Interviewer: "Is there anything you regret...?"
Z: "No sir."
Z: "I feel that it was all God's plan..."
Interviewer: "Is there anything you might do differently, in retrospect ...?"
Z: "No sir."

Unbelievable.

I know, it's absolutely awful. So terrible that someone is dead. But I do think that mistakes were made on both parts. Zimmerman shouldn't have followed him and stared at him aggressively enough for him to notice the staring and get upset. In turn, Martin shouldn't have beat up Zimmerman. Neither of them, it appears, even tried to defuse the situation. "Hey, I'm the Neighborhood Watch guy. We've had quite a few bad things happen round here, so let me know if you see anything, OK?" Or, Martin could have said something like, "Hey there, I'm staying at my dad's house. I saw you watching me. Everything OK?"

They both acted badly, and it's just a huge pity that someone ended up dead. I am guessing that in a state without stand-your-ground then Zimmerman would have been found guilty of manslaughter. If Martin was beating him up badly and showed no sign of stopping, then I can see how Zimmerman was afraid. The jury had no choice but to apply the law of Florida, and if they believed that Zimmerman was really frightened, then they had to return a not-guilty law, at least that's the way I'm reading it.

There's a famous case in Britain of Tony Martin, the farmer who lived alone. He shot a couple of intruders who came into his house in the middle of the night, killing one of them. He went to jail and spent years there. He served all his time and was eventually released, stating that he'd do it all the same way again.

I guess it all comes down to whether you believe someone has the right to take a life to save their own. I'm not sure how I feel about it, because it isn't that simple when applied. For example, can we really say that Martin would have finished off Zimmerman that night, if Zimmerman hadn't shot him? We can't know that. And could Zimmerman have perhaps fired a disabling shot in the arm, say, rather than a fatal one right through the chest?

 

[lulu]

I didn't follow the case and only looked up something about it when the verdict came in, and it was such huge news.


I already said that I didn't follow the case and that I wasn't the best judge as I'm foreign and don't understand the cultural references. What is a cracker, if not a piece of crunchy food? Also, I didn't realise that Zimmerman was able to hear the conversation. I just looked up "cracker" and saw that it could be applied as a racial slur. This country's language is indecipherable. Where I come from, a cracker is a Jacob's cream cracker, something you eat with Marmite.

Anyway, I'm in full agreement with you. If he was privy to that phone conversation and he heard himself described as a creepy a$$ cracker, by which I gather that a donkey with a picnic is not what is being implied, then yes, Zimmerman could have got upset about that.

I'm sorry for not understanding, but you have to understand that this hijacked, beaten-up, mangled-beyond-repair version of English that you insist on calling English is a form of the language that I have never encountered in 32 years of living in the British Isles. I literally have no idea what most people are talking about on this continent, so I have limited ability to understand, well, anything here.

Wow. I had no idea we were such a disappointment to the British. Color me gobsmacked.

 

[Smith1942]

As somebody who has in all seriousness been called a "cracker" (in NYC as Jew, where for a variety of reasons, not so much - we've never really been the folks to hold the whips - AND where I've actually been personally attacked for racial reasons ... it's still really not a reason to shoot a person.

It wasn't a reason for Bernie Goetz thirty years ago. (He did, and I think it set this city back twenty years.) It wasn't a reason for my dad ( robbed violently three times, carrying the last two). It shouldn't have been a reason for a man who randomly and against the advice of the legal officers who spoke to him chose to stalk a kid.

I sort of feel like there's a faintly disingenuous air in play when we attempt to equate "cracker" with any racial epithet used against black folk. Or, for that matter, any other currently mistreated minority group. Being called a cracker didn't make me feel nearly as threatened as the time I was, say, called a cunt. Or a kike. Some words pass into the majority usage, usually when they're so inane as to be amusing, others don't. NONE of them act as an excuse for violence. Shooting an unarmed kid, though? I dunno.

I feel like whatever maneuvers we engage in, that should actually carry some consequences, regardless of race or class. Just because ... consequences matter. At the end of the day, they're the only things that matter. And yet, our laws currently involve workarounds.

Much more than this particular ruling, that concerns me. THAT is what we should be working on in order to rectify these circumstances, I think.

You know, I have an interesting take on the whole Cracker thing. I know that some mean it to be insulting, but knowing where the true history of cracker comes from in my state, I find it hard to be considered as an insult to myself. Florida Crackers were actually farmers, and were the first people to raise cattle in Florida. There is an entire breed of Cracker horse. Crackers have a very distinct historical influence on my state. Now whether it was developed as a degrading statement elsewhere, I don't know, but here, they are a historical figure, and they are quickly dying.

Yes, when I looked up the term I read that in South Florida it wasn't considered an insult. That is very interesting about the history of the word, Dragonfly.

In the UK, cracker has at least four meanings:

- Crackers the foodstuff
- To say that someone is going crackers is a slightly old-fashioned term for saying that someone is going crazy
- To refer to a woman as a cracker is a compliment meaning that she's got both a great personality and a great figure, "She's a cracker, that one!"
- Or, there are Christmas crackers, which are a kind of table decoration with a small firework inside. Each person grabs the end and pulls, and there's a small bang. Inside is a joke, a paper hat and a small toy.

 

[Smith1942]

I'm sorry for not understanding, but you have to understand that this hijacked, beaten-up, mangled-beyond-repair version of English that you insist on calling English is a form of the language that I have never encountered in 32 years of living in the British Isles. I literally have no idea what most people are talking about on this continent, so I have limited ability to understand, well, anything here.

Let's be fair! Just because American English has developed differently doesn't mean it's mangled. I had also never heard of the term "cracker" until recently, so it was very fascinating to learn about the etymology.

Brits also have their own terms that are virtually gibberish to people overseas. Some examples? "Fit", "toff", "yob", "Chav", "stroppy" etc. I just happen to know a bunch of them as I read the Daily Mail as a guilty pleasure.

So do the Aussies, the Canadians, the Indians, and the ex-Brit colonies. English belongs to all of us, and in the end, we should remember it was a big hodge-lodge to begin with, cobbled together from Old Norse, Anglo-Saxon, Latin, French, German vocabulary.

I am neither American or English but English is my first language and I enjoy it in all its forms.

Excuse me for this detour from the Zimmerman case! If I have anything to add, it's only to say that the problem of crime, safety and race is very complex in the States. I have had friends visiting me in Canada who felt totally safe roaming the city at night and then felt very unsafe after crossing the border to American cities. If people don't feel sale in their own neighborhoods, I think it is very hard to say ban guns or to tell them not to take action to protect their community. This was a great tragedy.

I take umbrage at the first comment. (And honestly, how often do I get to use the word "umbrage". It's a good day!) And most heartily agree with the second. English is a living language and constantly changing, even in the British Isles. Does anyone honestly think that Shakespeare would understand a modern Brit? HIS was REAL English. What are YOU guys speaking, because it's incomprehensible and clearly NOT English! Right?

Like all changes, some I like and some I do not, but I adore all the flavors of it. It's completely wonderful that there ARE so many flavors. English is so vital and endlessly expressive. Long live English!

Sorry. I'd just come back from the pub and was feeling a bit feisty.

 

[Smith1942]

I didn't follow the case and only looked up something about it when the verdict came in, and it was such huge news.


I already said that I didn't follow the case and that I wasn't the best judge as I'm foreign and don't understand the cultural references. What is a cracker, if not a piece of crunchy food? Also, I didn't realise that Zimmerman was able to hear the conversation. I just looked up "cracker" and saw that it could be applied as a racial slur. This country's language is indecipherable. Where I come from, a cracker is a Jacob's cream cracker, something you eat with Marmite.

Anyway, I'm in full agreement with you. If he was privy to that phone conversation and he heard himself described as a creepy a$$ cracker, by which I gather that a donkey with a picnic is not what is being implied, then yes, Zimmerman could have got upset about that.

I'm sorry for not understanding, but you have to understand that this hijacked, beaten-up, mangled-beyond-repair version of English that you insist on calling English is a form of the language that I have never encountered in 32 years of living in the British Isles. I literally have no idea what most people are talking about on this continent, so I have limited ability to understand, well, anything here.

Wow. I had no idea we were such a disappointment to the British. Color me gobsmacked.

Well, now you know!

That was just a joke. See my comment above re. pub-induced feistiness. I'm sorry.

Very frustrating when I see an innocent word like cracker used in a context within which I can't possibly tease out its meaning. If I were in France, I'd expect not to understand. But I'm told that English is the language of this country, so I don't expect to come up against so many linguistic roadblocks. It doesn't arf interrupt the flow when you're reading. Most frustrating.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

I accept the verdict. I however have one question that was not settled for me. If GZ did not have his gun out when he approached TM, how could he possibly have gotten his gun out with TM on top of him? I think that gun was out before the fight began. I'm not looking for a big discussion. Thats the question left in my mind.


Annette

 

[mrs jam]

Very frustrating when I see an innocent word like cracker used in a context within which I can't possibly tease out its meaning. If I were in France, I'd expect not to understand. But I'm told that English is the language of this country, so I don't expect to come up against so many linguistic roadblocks. It doesn't arf interrupt the flow when you're reading. Most frustrating.

Different regions, ethnicities, and age groups use different terms to describe things. It can be a challenge to stay current as the language here does seem to be heavily influenced by pop culture. I work with primarily 3rd - 5th graders (8-11 year olds) who watch a LOT of television and are constantly exposed to vocabulary targeted to the lowest common denominator (that sounds snotty, I know, but it's the best way I can describe it). What concerns me most is not the "mangling" of the English language, but that many students don't possess the understanding that there are different vocabularies and acceptable ways of speaking to fit different situations and contexts. All they have is very informal, pop-culture vocabulary and ways to address people. I think it's never too early to teach kids to adapt their vocabulary/ways of speaking to different situations. It's perfectly normal and ok to use informal language and slang among friends and siblings, but you need to know how to adapt your speech in more formal settings, like when you're interviewing for a job.

Sorry for the thread jack. I just feel that like Smith1942 stated, things would have gone very differently if Zimmerman and Martin had simply addressed each other more appropriately in those very first moments.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi Smith.

I didn't have a clue that crackers was an insult or racial slur, so you are not alone. The word cracker to me is a category of a house style in Louisanna, very , very narrow, and long. (Called Cracker Houses) i have forgotten who used to live there , but people do buy this style and renovate.


Annette

 

[Smith1942]

Hi,

I accept the verdict. I however have one question that was not settled for me. If GZ did not have his gun out when he approached TM, how could he possibly have gotten his gun out with TM on top of him? I think that gun was out before the fight began. I'm not looking for a big discussion. Thats the question left in my mind.


Annette

I don't know....I think it's possible, if the pocket was an easily-accessible one on the side of his trousers and not zipped up. If Martin was on top of him, Zimmerman's arms were probably near his sides...I think it's possible he could have grabbed it. At least one of Martin's hands was occupied with punching, so...And you do hear stories of cases where someone was beating up another, and the victim managed to pick up something and crown the attacker with it. But now that I'm thinking about it, if Zimmerman had got his gun out of his pocket and Martin was on top, it would have been much easier to fire a disabling shot into Martin's thigh, for example, than clean into his chest. I'd imagine so, anyway.

 

[Smith1942]

Hi Smith.

I didn't have a clue that crackers was an insult or racial slur, so you are not alone. The word cracker to me is a category of a house style in Louisanna, very , very narrow, and long. (Called Cracker Houses) i have forgotten who used to live there , but people do buy this style and renovate.


Annette

Yet another meaning for the word cracker! No wonder confusion reigns.

 

[Smith1942]

Very frustrating when I see an innocent word like cracker used in a context within which I can't possibly tease out its meaning. If I were in France, I'd expect not to understand. But I'm told that English is the language of this country, so I don't expect to come up against so many linguistic roadblocks. It doesn't arf interrupt the flow when you're reading. Most frustrating.

Different regions, ethnicities, and age groups use different terms to describe things. It can be a challenge to stay current as the language here does seem to be heavily influenced by pop culture. I work with primarily 3rd - 5th graders (8-11 year olds) who watch a LOT of television and are constantly exposed to vocabulary targeted to the lowest common denominator (that sounds snotty, I know, but it's the best way I can describe it). What concerns me most is not the "mangling" of the English language, but that many students don't possess the understanding that there are different vocabularies and acceptable ways of speaking to fit different situations and contexts. All they have is very informal, pop-culture vocabulary and ways to address people. I think it's never too early to teach kids to adapt their vocabulary/ways of speaking to different situations. It's perfectly normal and ok to use informal language and slang among friends and siblings, but you need to know how to adapt your speech in more formal settings, like when you're interviewing for a job.

Sorry for the thread jack. I just feel that like Smith1942 stated, things would have gone very differently if Zimmerman and Martin had simply addressed each other more appropriately in those very first moments.

Very interesting, MrsJam. I think there IS a very high usage of slang among young people these days. I don't know if it's the same at home. Possibly it is, but we have very high workloads of homework in the UK in preparation for the government's exams, so perhaps there is less time to watch TV and absorb the slang, and less chance to use it when you're engaged in writing endless essays and three-hour mock exams, and suchlike. I've never liked slang, though, even as a teenager. Sometimes it can be a useful shortcut, but other times a given expression's connection to its original meaning is so tenuous that it wobbles on the brink of gibberish, and then I just find slang annoying.

And yes, in the Martin/Zimmerman case, it's a great pity that neither party made an attempt at defusing the situation. I guess more blame should be laid on Zimmerman for that, since he is 11 years older and Martin was a high school kid with the usual cocktail of teen hormones - not that that's an excuse for beating someone.

 

[lovebug1031]

Kenny - You translated my thoughts very well. A white man kills a white man, very little is heard. A black man kills a black man, the same. They might get covered on local news and that is that. If the media smells a good story, something to make money on, like racism, or the killing of one's family, they're all over it like mud on a pig. It's really very sad to see. Race should never have been a factor, and never should be.

It's not just race that is a factor with the news media. If the victim is an attractive woman the story will get more coverage than if she was plain looking. The media sensationalizes the stories that will get the most public attention and sell. It's a sad fact but true. It's big business and there is nothing fair or equal about coverage.

Jodi Arias is a prime example of that....except she was the accused in that case...

 

[dragonfly411]

Hi Smith.

I didn't have a clue that crackers was an insult or racial slur, so you are not alone. The word cracker to me is a category of a house style in Louisanna, very , very narrow, and long. (Called Cracker Houses) i have forgotten who used to live there , but people do buy this style and renovate.


Annette

And cracker house comes from the southern Crackers! Many Crackers lived in tin roof houses, many times accompanied by large porches. Porches aren't just a southern staple for relaxation, porches make it easier to sit outside on hot days and shuck corn, shell peas, clean fish, shuck oysters, etc.! There is a book about the Southern Cracker history, it's all very fascinating to me. I love the history of farmers, especially here in FL. There weren't many plantations, and the people who lived here and chose to forge homesteads here were braving many struggles, including swamps, snakes, gators, humidity that fostered diseases etc. I'll have to find the book. Maybe people can learn to look at the word a little differently from this thread

 

[Smith1942]

Kenny - You translated my thoughts very well. A white man kills a white man, very little is heard. A black man kills a black man, the same. They might get covered on local news and that is that. If the media smells a good story, something to make money on, like racism, or the killing of one's family, they're all over it like mud on a pig. It's really very sad to see. Race should never have been a factor, and never should be.

It's not just race that is a factor with the news media. If the victim is an attractive woman the story will get more coverage than if she was plain looking. The media sensationalizes the stories that will get the most public attention and sell. It's a sad fact but true. It's big business and there is nothing fair or equal about coverage.

Jodi Arias is a prime example of that....except she was the accused in that case...

And Amanda Knox, also an accused. Many people think her case got so much attention because she's young and pretty.

 

[Matata]

and the victim managed to pick up something and crown the attacker with it.

Why on earth would someone want to crown their attacker? I thought crowns were for royalty. Surely it's more acceptable to gift an attacker with a concussion.

I'm joking with you. I very much appreciated your pub-induced feisty evaluation of our native Manglish. The US has a labyrinthine language that is considered one of the most difficult to learn. We have so many ways to say the right/wright/rite thing.

 

[lovebug1031]

Kenny - You translated my thoughts very well. A white man kills a white man, very little is heard. A black man kills a black man, the same. They might get covered on local news and that is that. If the media smells a good story, something to make money on, like racism, or the killing of one's family, they're all over it like mud on a pig. It's really very sad to see. Race should never have been a factor, and never should be.

It's not just race that is a factor with the news media. If the victim is an attractive woman the story will get more coverage than if she was plain looking. The media sensationalizes the stories that will get the most public attention and sell. It's a sad fact but true. It's big business and there is nothing fair or equal about coverage.

Jodi Arias is a prime example of that....except she was the accused in that case...

And Amanda Knox, also an accused. Many people think her case got so much attention because she's young and pretty.

ah yes! I forgot about her - it's so interesting to see the cases the media chooses to sensationalize

 

[peacechick]

English is the language of England. The dialect version of English spoken in America doesn't exist in England, so over here the language should be called American, in my view.

This isn't the thread to go into details, but seriously, the differences between the two are vast and startling. They share a small core vocabulary and some of the simpler tenses, and that's where the similarities end.

Americans are very proud to be American and got rid of as much British influence as possible, so it seems a little strange that they are happy to call their language English - I would've thought they'd have switched to calling it American a long time ago, maybe at the time of the Revolution.

Smith1942, God knows I enjoy reading your posts, but all I want to say is that English no longer only belongs to the English now but the world. Your opinion is mixed up with national pride and possessiveness but it's good to look at the other view. I know you're specifically talking about Americans, but it's a really sweeping point of view.

Sure, English does come from England but I resent it when people say that English is strictly the language of England (sure, if we're talking origins), and that other variants of English do not count as English (English is my first language. I am not white and I come from a former Brit colony, and I bristle when people tell me how well I speak English.) The English language is evolving all the time and it takes in words from other languages all the time e.g. bungalow (Indian) and typhoon (Mandarin). What used to be slang hundreds of years ago has passed into common use as well.

English is also not the only language in which language variations exist. I live in Montreal, Quebec, where the first language is French, and believe me, the French is quite different from the French spoken in France. And they've been speaking like this since the 1600s, so don't come here telling the French Canadians they're speaking a mangled form of French. Similarly, don't tell the Latin Americans and Mexicans they speak a mangled form of Spanish to the Spaniards.

All right, that's all I'm going to say on this matter. Sorry for the threadjack, folks!

P.S: Is Shakespeare the ultimate master of English? What if I want to argue that it was Chaucer? Who decides these things?

 

[mrs jam]

Ooh, I'll go with Chaucer! He won my heart after I read about Nicholas letting flee a blinding fart, loud as a thunderclap. Sheer beauty!

 

[AGBF]

That was just a joke. See my comment above re. pub-induced feistiness. I'm sorry.

What's a pub?

Deb

 

[ksinger]

English is the language of England. The dialect version of English spoken in America doesn't exist in England, so over here the language should be called American, in my view.

This isn't the thread to go into details, but seriously, the differences between the two are vast and startling. They share a small core vocabulary and some of the simpler tenses, and that's where the similarities end.

Americans are very proud to be American and got rid of as much British influence as possible, so it seems a little strange that they are happy to call their language English - I would've thought they'd have switched to calling it American a long time ago, maybe at the time of the Revolution.

Smith1942, God knows I enjoy reading your posts, but all I want to say is that English no longer only belongs to the English now but the world. Your opinion is mixed up with national pride and possessiveness but it's good to look at the other view. I know you're specifically talking about Americans, but it's a really sweeping point of view.

Sure, English does come from England but I resent it when people say that English is strictly the language of England (sure, if we're talking origins), and that other variants of English do not count as English (English is my first language. I am not white and I come from a former Brit colony, and I bristle when people tell me how well I speak English.) The English language is evolving all the time and it takes in words from other languages all the time e.g. bungalow (Indian) and typhoon (Mandarin). What used to be slang hundreds of years ago has passed into common use as well.

English is also not the only language in which language variations exist. I live in Montreal, Quebec, where the first language is French, and believe me, the French is quite different from the French spoken in France. And they've been speaking like this since the 1600s, so don't come here telling the French Canadians they're speaking a mangled form of French. Similarly, don't tell the Latin Americans and Mexicans they speak a mangled form of Spanish to the Spaniards.

All right, that's all I'm going to say on this matter. Sorry for the threadjack, folks!

P.S: Is Shakespeare the ultimate master of English? What if I want to argue that it was Chaucer? Who decides these things?

Well, ME, of course.

In all seriousness, on any given day I could be the one grousing about mangled English, so I really do understand the sentiment. Really, all we're arguing over is slang, and that is always changing at a pretty good clip. For the rest of it, apart from accent and cadence, I've never had any problem understanding anyone from one of the other native English-speaking areas of the world. Obviously, our English is only superficially different. And written English, never. So how different are they really? Not much, I'm thinking.

I did get amused while talking to our New Zealand born server at a restaurant one day. We started talking about accents, and how she came to be in KC, MO., general chinwag dont'cha know, and she said that while she had been working for a youth camp as a counselor, she'd had to quit with the Kiwi version of "awesome/cool/great", which was "Sweet as!", because the kids kept hearing "Sweet ASS". Ha! Now there was a difference in slang, right?