From: Alphax alphasigmax@gmail.com
Zoney wrote:
Most importantly, the whole BCE/CE thing is a POV lobby. It's nonsense to suggest that changing a very common phrase in the English language, hitherto used near-universally, is "neutral".
<snip>
I agree with your post entirely.
Alphax
Sigh. Until 40 years ago or so the word "Colored" for "African-American" was used near-universally in the United States, and was seen as "neutral" as well. Before that the neutral and near-universally used term was "Negro". They're now seen as offensive, though I'm sure some older users of the terms see (or saw) their replacements as "nonsense" and a "POV lobby". Regardless, I imagine that none of the members of this list would use those terms today, and there are many other examples of this kind of thing (e.g. "Mohammedan"->"Moslem"->"Muslim").
Language changes, and English probably changes faster than most other languages; usages that were once thought neutral are now seen to contain inherent bias. This has happened with other terms in the past, and may be happening with BC/AD today. Now, can we move the debate about BCE/CE vs. BC/AD to where it belongs, on some policy page?
Jay.