Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!degas.berkeley.edu!asimov
From: asimov@degas.berkeley.edu (Daniel Asimov)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Grammar and Spelling on the Net
Message-ID: <12460@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Mon, 17-Mar-86 16:34:34 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12460
Posted: Mon Mar 17 16:34:34 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Mar-86 00:57:54 EST
References: <658@frog.UUCP> <62800002@ism780> <3403@umcp-cs.UUCP> <323@meccts.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: asimov@degas.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Daniel Asimov)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 11

It has been suggested that examining cultures in whch the language
is neuter can show that it may be of little value to try to 
"neuterize" the English language.  

I would like to comment that this idea ignores the effect of 
*change* itself.  The process of changing our language from one
which routinely uses ambiguous words ("man" for either all humans
or a male) or highly assymetrical ones (as "mailman" for mail carrier)
to a hypothetical English which doesn't do this, will (I conjecture)
have the effect of raising a lot of consciousnesses.  No?
--Dan Asimov