"Rodney Webster" <rgw_news001@knot.mine.nu> wrote in message
news:rgw_news001-000BD7.09530802062004@news01.so-net.ne.jp...
> In article <WDUuc.76988$be.73674@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com>,
>  "necoandjeff" <spam@schrepfer.com> wrote:
>
> > But that's precisely the problem. It is only "half," full stop. Not
> > "half-something." The fact that the half isn't specified implies that
the
> > Japanese don't really care what the other half is. You're only half of
what
> > everyone else is and nothing more. A very good friend of mine who is
> > half-Japanese, half-American used to tell me, half-jokingly, that she
> > preferred "daburu" to "half."
>
> See my reply to Elbow.  Basically I think you are doing the same thing,
> which is reading meaning and implications into the word "haafu" that the
> person using it almost certainly did not intend.  Even if they did
> intend to imply negative connotations, they would do the same regardless
> of what word they use.

First, while there is something to be said for your "what the speaker
intends" argument there is also something to be said for the "how it is
taken" argument. No matter how nicely I walk up to someone and say "[fill in
firmly established racial pejorative of your choice]," and no matter how
innocent, ignorant or well intended I may be in saying it, I can't be
completely absolved of my responsibility to consider the words that I use
and what effect they may have on someone before I say them. Communication is
a two way street. Words don't merely have the meaning that the speaker
intends. They also have to be heard and interpreted and it is the speaker's
responsibility to take that into account as well.

In any event, I'm simply pointing out how the word "half" could be
considered (and in fact is considered) by some to be offensive. I agree with
you that more often than not it is not the intent of people who use the word
"half" to be offensive (although offense could be the intent, particularly
if it is another child saying it, which you may not have much opportunity to
witness first hand.) But that doesn't change the fact that it may still be
insensitive (i.e. insensitive with respect to how the word may be received,
regardless of how you intend it), particularly when it is used as a label
rather than in a purely descriptive sense.

Jeff