1
   

Rice - getting away from "Punish France, ignore Germany..."?

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 08:40 am
Well, according to Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002 those definitions are:

Quote:
Main Entry: co·quet·ry Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: kktr, -ri sometimes kket-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): -es
Etymology: French coquetterie, from coquette + -erie -ery
1 : the conduct or art of a coquette : effort or action intended to attract admiration, gallantry, or affection without responsive feeling : a trifling in love
2 : a dallying or trifling attention or consideration (as to a cause) without serious espousal
3 : delicate charm of a type distinctive of coquettes <lack of coquetry -- in the sense of a lighthearted desire to please -- is a lack of charity, of natural kindness -- English Digest>



Quote:
Main Entry: co·quette Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: kket, usu -ed.+V
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): -s
Etymology: French, feminine of coquet
1 : a woman who endeavors without affection to attract men's amorous attention : FLIRT <instruct the eyes of young coquettes to roll -- Alexander Pope> -- sometimes, with male, used of a man
2 : any of several tropical hummingbirds (of Lophornis and related genera) with crested head and metallic-tinted neck feathers
3 : a moderate to strong yellowish pink that is yellower and paler than coral blush



But since Lash wrote "coquettish", I copied the definition of that.
0 Replies
 
WhoodaThunk
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 09:06 am
Walter: Generally the -ish suffix converts the noun into an adjective.

With or without Webster's, you have an admirable command of the language. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 09:19 am
WhoodaThunk wrote:
Walter: Generally the -ish suffix converts the noun into an adjective.

With or without Webster's, you have an admirable command of the language. :wink:


Green - greenish :wink:

Nevertheless, thanks for the compliment.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 12:01 pm
Well, the "coquettish" remark reminds me of an article I read regarding Dr. Rice's trip which started out by describing her "purple suit"...maybe it was "plumb-colored", can't remember, but my immediate thought was "hmmmph, they wouldn't start an article that way if it had been Colin Powell showing up".

Two seconds later I realized...wait, if Colin Powell showed up in a purple suit that indeed would be comment-worthy LOL!

In the meantime, EU VP says Europe economy is worse...

Quote:
"We are lazy, to say it simply," said Roca.


Perhaps this is, in part, the root-cause of Europe's anti-American anger. After all, with the US fighting the WOT in Iraq, they lost a good client, not to mention all those very advantageous contracts that many Euro governments had made with Saddam.

Quote:
The solution to the problem Roca suggests is to convince the European community of the need for deep structural reforms, in order for the European Union to subsist in a global economy in the 21st Century, with hopes that the United States may look to Europe as a strong contender and ally.


Hmmmm. Who's schmoozing whom?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 12:21 pm
Well, Roca certainly presents the conservative opinion within the EU-Parliament.

(Just a small aside, although it is verified in the article partly later on:

Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca is one out of 14 (sic!) vice-presidents of the European Parliament [and not the EU, as the headline says].)
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 12:32 pm
The other day, the Washington Times (JW's quote is from the WT, February 10) obviously corrected my above nota :wink:

Quote:
Spanish center-right lawmaker Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca, a vice president of the European Parliament ...
Source
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 01:49 pm
WhoodaThunk wrote:
McTag wrote:
And why stop now? Let us attack every regime which is openly opposed to our way of life. May as well go the whole hog. Rolling Eyes


BTW, isn't that old line about ready for mothballs? You couldn't find a taker for that in junior high debate club. :wink:


If you read back, you will find I was echoing your own words.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 01:55 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
McTag wrote:
WhoodaThunk wrote:
georgeob1 wrote:
What crime? What is your standard for this exceedingly complex judgment?


An excellent post, georgeob1, and certainly a valid question.

I, too, await a reply that's based on more than opinion and media hype.


Not complex, but simple. No need for historical obfuscation.

Iraq did not attack us. We attacked Iraq. That's a crime.


Well at least there is a standard here. Progress! However. Iraq did attack Kuwait without provocation or justification, and later failed to abide by the agreement which concluded our successful campaign to drive them them out. Our case was that we attacked in 2003 to enforce an armistice agreement concluded with Iraq after driving them out of Kuwait to redress what was itself an obvious Iraqi crime. Sounds convincing to me.

There was no media hype in my earlier arguments, and what you term "historical obsfucation" was not obsfucation at all - instead it was an attempt to apply some of the texture of reality and historical fact to what appear to me to be simplistic, logically inadequate (and therefore ultimately intenable) arguments and sweeping jnudgements.


Sorry I've been away for a few days, and did not therefore reply sooner.

The judgement is sweeping all right, and basis can be simply put.

Here it is again.

Iraq did not attack us. We did attack Iraq. Crime.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 06:14 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Lash wrote:
(Some idiot European newspaper called Condi--"coquettish". That should clear up any questions as to their ability to read people... I like her, but hell, she is the most sexless person I can think of. She's sort of the conservative Hillary in that aspect.)


Well, I don't know, how much of Rice's visit you followed.

I really can understand that some could see her 'coquettish'. (And I can't follow you, when you connect this with 'sex':
Quote:
Main Entry: co·quett·ish Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: ()k|ked.ish, -eti-, -sh
Function: adjective
: having the air or nature of a coquette or coquetry : practicing or exhibiting coquetry <heartless, coquettish women, who put self first and played with fire -- Margaret A. Barnes>
)


I guess that would be because I know what the word means. How can you NOT connect sex with it--and you've got to help me out here. Why is it you always insist on attempting to insinuate I am somehow not fully informed of my subject matter in my posts? If I know a European paper referred to Rice as "coquettish", why do you feel the need to say --you don't know how much of Rice's visit I followed? What does it matter? I think the information I need to make my comment was:
A paper in Europe referred to Rice as "coquettish."
The definition of "coquettish". It is flirtatious.

As it is-- I think between you and I--you were the one with less information than necessary to comment on my post.

Wouldn't you say?

JW-- I agree with you about your insight into how Europe treated Condi as a sexual object rather than a Secty of State. Coquettish is a sexist comment. They think WE'RE archaic...
0 Replies
 
WhoodaThunk
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 07:46 pm
McTag wrote:
WhoodaThunk wrote:
McTag wrote:
And why stop now? Let us attack every regime which is openly opposed to our way of life. May as well go the whole hog. Rolling Eyes


BTW, isn't that old line about ready for mothballs? You couldn't find a taker for that in junior high debate club. :wink:


If you read back, you will find I was echoing your own words.


Yes, McTag, I know you pick and choose certain words which I've written and then slap them together and claim I said them. Nice try. I've said, repeatedly, that the end game in Iraq cannot be separated from the previous 15 years of history between that country and the American-led coalition. Where you made the leap between that and what you claim to "echo" is beyond me.

I realize it's a losing battle to get you to ante up some factual accountability for your wild "committing a crime" claim. Apparently you, too, realize there's no defense for it.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2005 11:33 pm
Okay, Lash, I've to admit: I'm the uninformed one.

Furtheron, I admit that your linguistic skills of French are better than mine.
I'm uneducated as well.

Sorry for my previous responses.
0 Replies
 
WhoodaThunk
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 04:05 am
Walter: Coquettish is a sexist comment. It's not only sexist, it's off-the-charts sexist. It's disrespectful and demeaning. It's insulting. It's bad.

Rolling Eyes Coquettish = BAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 06:43 am
To be described as coquettish could be insulting to (or on behalf of) a minister of state, but I would think not necessarily so. I wonder what Ms Rice would say of this, if she could speak on her own behalf?

Margaret Thatcher famously used her feminine wiles on her colleages, and others. Quite ourageously and deliberately, if her biographies are to be believed. Men were aware of the woman within. Francois Mitterand (steady, George) said she had "the lips of Marilyn Monroe, but the eyes of Caligula".
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 07:11 am
WhoodaThunk wrote:
Walter: Coquettish is a sexist comment. It's not only sexist, it's off-the-charts sexist. It's disrespectful and demeaning. It's insulting. It's bad.

Rolling Eyes Coquettish = BAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rolling Eyes


Quote:
one German newspaper was so impressed with Dr Rice's diplomatic skills that it described the way she looked at Mr Schroeder as "coquettish"
Source
Quote:
An Iranian leader called Rice "emotional," and one German headline said she was "coquettish" in her news conference with Schroeder.
Source

I couldn't find any notice of more mentions of this.
And I couldn't find the quoted German paper either.

I'm most sure, however, that this German paper was printed in German.
There's no sexist word like "coquettish" in German - 'kokett', which could be the German equivalent, isn't thought to sexist like the English version of this French word.

I think, Dr. Rice was told by some officials, who know German about this. Otherwise she surely and rightly would have complained.


But - as said - above: it really will be that Lash here is the one with the most knowledge.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 07:18 am
I have seen a photograph of Dr Rice and Chancellor Schroeder sharing a joke (I think it was in "The Observer" on Sunday), and there was definitely some chemistry going on, however fleetingly. Maybe for 1/500 th of a second, while the camera shutter was open. Maybe longer Smile

She is not known for this, I hear. Maybe she just doesn't find American men sexy. :wink:
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 08:03 am
McTag wrote:
To be described as coquettish could be insulting to (or on behalf of) a minister of state, but I would think not necessarily so. I wonder what Ms Rice would say of this, if she could speak on her own behalf?

Margaret Thatcher famously used her feminine wiles on her colleages, and others. Quite ourageously and deliberately, if her biographies are to be believed. Men were aware of the woman within. Francois Mitterand (steady, George) said she had "the lips of Marilyn Monroe, but the eyes of Caligula".


I agree (mostly). McTag is not utterly without merit, mostly, but not utterly.

Well the term "coquette" or "coquettish" is indeed a highly "sexist" epithet in the language of the thought police of contemporary political correctitude. However, that merely demonstrates two salient things; (1) the Inquisition never really died, it merely changed venues; and (2) serious people should ignore the narrow-minded cant that passes for correct values and speech in this idiotic cult of political correctitude.

The term is descriptive and either flattering or insulting, depending on the context and intent of the speaker. The notion of intrinsic "sexism" in the word and concept defies common sense and experience: it is absurd.

I am familiar with Mitterrand's metaphor, and do find it quite delightful, if inaccurate in the choice of emperors. Thanks for sharing it, but I suggest a modification;

I would say the eyes showed the calm and steady resolve of Hadrian or either of the Antonies who followed him. Of them the inestimable Gibbon wrote,
Quote:
If a man were called on to fix a period in the history of the world during which the condition of the human race was most happy and prosperous, he would, without hesitation, name that which elapsed from the death of Domitian to the accession of Commodus. The vast extent of the Roman Empire was governed by absolute power under the guidance of virtue and wisdom. The Armies were restrained by the firm but gentle hand of four successive emperors whose characters and authority commanded involuntary respect. The forms of the civil administration were carefully preserved by Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, and the Antonies, who delighted in the image of liberty and were pleased with considering themselves as the accountable ministers of the laws.
0 Replies
 
WhoodaThunk
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 10:46 am
Did Marilyn Monroe have lips? That's what the French remember about her? Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 11:00 am
A quotation from another thread

HofT wrote:
Briefly able to log in from an airport can reassure posters that in French "coquet, coquette" is an adjective with no "sex object" connotation whatsoever. It can be used for buildings (well-taken-care-of), cars (comfortable, well-designed) very old people - it was the standard adjective applied to the late Queen Mother, e.g., even when she was 103 and nobody could call her sexy.
[...]
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 11:06 am
WhoodaThunk wrote:
Did Marilyn Monroe have lips? That's what the French remember about her? Rolling Eyes


My intent is not on political matters. I just want to made clear that questions as above are merely connected to bashing. Those who have interesting thoughts to explain, should stay on it.

(As for the matter, my memories of Marylin Monroe are a lot wider than that.)
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2005 12:18 pm
There's a lot of posts merely connected to bashing here. Francis. It's what folks do when the argument is slipping away from them.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.39 seconds on 02/07/2025 at 12:19:02