Taboo in Lexicography: The Status of Gender and Gendered – "Lexicological Principles in Lexicographic Practice (Application)" (Gender Revisited) Discussion

Abstract

Taboo in Lexicography: the status of gender and gendered - "Lexicological Principles in Lexicographic Practice (application)" (gender revisited) is an insight into "Taboo-motivated lexical replacement". A taboo classification is a direct link to Freud’s "Totem and Taboo" which is a historical and current insight into gender issue among primitive tribes as a group in society. If gender is not being mentioned it can augment to taboo (cf. "White Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy" – Derrida! The paradox: the myth is not written, only the euphemised is being written, etc.) What is the current status of a taboo unit? Are they really always re-evaluated? What about neologisms? Are the neologisms marked as a taboo? Are we really at the end of a taboo era? Is taboo "silent omission" or transfer? What about the old dictionaries? In the era when a "Bologna student" has no idea what a headword is, uses a cell phone as a tool, what is to be done? Is gender in language a social component then? Did the change happen? Is a discourse analysis the only solution? Who records the findings? When? How often? For native speakers? Everyman knows that discourse is to be analyzed and then reanalyzed! Is gender variation to be recognized? When is the end of the hidden phase? Is "gender-sensitive" the only option? Does brutality happen in society due to gender? Is it always named? What is the current status of euphemised variation? How can unnative notice the change? What is the aftermath of cell-phone tradition – oral tradition?! If gendered is not written it is to become a myth again!