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

From: Javier SOLA (lists@khmeros.info)
Date: Wed Dec 19 2007 - 22:03:38 CST

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

    Interesting paradigm... to take the name of the God from the Gregorian
    Calendar, but not the name of his representative Pope Gregory...

    :-)

    Javier

    Ed Trager wrote
    > 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 - 22:03:18 CST