Re: CLDR Usage of Gregorian Calendar Era Terms: BC and AD -- Can we please have "CE" and "BCE" ?

From: Ed Trager (ed.trager@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Dec 19 2007 - 20:20:05 CST

  • Next message: Javier SOLA: "Re: CLDR Usage of Gregorian Calendar Era Terms: BC and AD -- Can we please have "CE" and "BCE" ?"

    I forgot to add that the default should be CE/BCE precisely because it
    is religiously neutral as the religioustolerance.org article points
    out.

    AD/BC may still enjoy greater usage since in the end users are free to
    do whatever they want with CLDR, but if CE/BCE became the default, at
    least no one could accuse CLDR of having a hidden agenda or Western
    imperialist tendancy ...

    - Ed Trager

    On Dec 19, 2007 9:15 PM, Ed Trager <ed.trager@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > Am 19.12.2007 um 19:58 schrieb John Hudson:
    > > > While I agree that BCE and CE should be *added* to CLDR, I don't agree
    > > > that BC and AD are best removed, because they are the preferred terms
    > > > of a very significant user community. CLDR should reflect the usage,
    > > > and that includes both BC/AD and BCE/CE.
    >
    > > I join this statement.
    > > Whatever your beliefs are, one cannot deny the simple fact that the
    > > Gregorian calender is of christian origin. I am far from being a
    > > christian propagandist, but I don't see any point in making attempts
    > > for ideological cleansing of language, as was common practice under the
    > > communist dictatorship of dubious and questionable memory (M. Everson
    > > quite reasonably pointed at that).
    >
    > I don't think anyone has the intention of denying the Christian origin
    > of the Gregorian calendar. Nor do I believe there is an attempt at
    > ideological cleansing. The interest in adding CE/BCE as an alternate
    > pair for era notation is rather based on acknowledgment of a current
    > socio-linguistic phenomenon: the use of CE/BCE has already gained wide
    > acceptance in the United States, among scholars world-wide, and
    > apparently also in English-speaking Canada.
    >
    > The article from religioustolerance.org mentioned earlier in this
    > thread (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ceintro.htm) provides fairly
    > good evidence that certain groups of people who are actually quite
    > interested in religion and religious tolerance are those who are
    > promoting this usage the most. I for one find it interesting that it
    > is --perhaps-- not so much the secular humanists who want to use these
    > terms as those who believe deeply in religion and see these terms as a
    > way to better facilitate dialog across differing religious communities
    > in the inter-connected modern world. As the aforementioned article
    > points out:
    >
    > "The world is becoming more integrated financially, politically,
    > socially and religiously. A universal calendar notation is needed.
    > Recall that for every Christian there are about two non-Christians
    > worldwide. References to Christ and to the Judeo-Christian God offend
    > many of the latter. A universal notation needs to be religiously
    > neutral in order to be generally accepted. CE and BCE meet these
    > requirements."
    >
    > Happy holidays to all -- Ed Trager
    >
    >
    > > Merry christmas (or should I more correctly say: 'merry x-y-z-mas –? )
    > > A:S
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 19 2007 - 20:22:12 CST