Kilt, Skirt, MUG, etc.

[Freedomlover]

Hey, all I know is that my Concise OED that is sitting in front of me at this very minute defines Kilt as "a skirtlike garment, usu. of pleated tartan cloth and reseaching to the knees, as traditionally worn by Highland men. 2 a similar garemnt worn by women and children." and this same OED defines "skirt" as "a woman's outer grament hanging from the waist." From this is it quite difficult to come to the conclusion that the OED writers, editors and publishers believe that English speakers believe that kilts are skirts.

I have provided you with a link to the online Compact OED which, beyond all possibility of argument, defines a kilt as a skirt, as do all other English dictionaries I know about.

If you are so sure I am lying about what my copy of the OED says, why don't you go to your library and have a look in a Concise OED and tell us what you see. Better yet, why don't you find the full length version of the OED and see what it says.

No one has accused you of lying. What I said was that the online Compact OED contradicts you. Why do you suppose that different editions contain different definitions?

Fine, the online version of the OED (Compact and not Concise) defines "kilt" as "a knee-length skirt of pleated tartan cloth, traditionally worn by men as part of Scottish Highland dress" which seems to be to be verbatim what the definition in Websters was. I would suggest that the Concise version trumphs the Compact version.

I see. You have attached youself to one verse of scripture, and reject all others.

The puzzling things is that, although the online Compact version defines a kilt to be a skirt, this same version defines "skirt" to be "a woman’s outer garment fastened around the waist and hanging down around the legs." How then can a man's kilt be a skirt if a skirt is a woman's garment. An internal inconsistency!

It certainly is. I have been on Webster's case for twenty years about that very point.

The only lesson to be drawn (and a lesson learned by all reading your posts) is that you cannot believe everything you read on the internet. Trust the printed version!

Oooo, the ad hominem, that's a nice touch.

HEY, I'm not the one with the fixed position. I recognized the ambiguity and the, as someone else called it, fuzziness. I can accept your position that a kilt is a skirt. I don't like it, but I do accept it. Can't you accept my position?

Of course. I fully recognize your right to think whatever you want. I have no problem with you or what you want to think.

I think I will start a poll. Let's find out what the members think.

[Mike1]

Let's keep things friendly here, OK? ;)

[jkdesq]

Freedomlover,

I notice how you pick and choose the portions of my post to which you respond. If you evaluated the entire piece, I think you would find that I have already answered to the points you draw out in your response:

i) you know about the Concise OED that says a kilt is "skirtlike" not a "skirt"; plus you acknowledge that both Websters and OED define a "skirt" as a woman's garment
ii) the Compact is smaller than the Concise, I guess the editors either copied Websters (shutter) or economized on the "like"
iii) I don't attach myself to any verse -- I have identified the ambiguity and have take the position I prefer -- kilts are not skirts, because generally skirts are viewed as woman's clothing -- a view arrived at by looking at many sources
iv) The internal inconsistency -- thanks for agreeing with me -- this supports point iii)
v) ad hominem -- learnt from you -- you can't suggest that you weren't ad hominem in your post of 4:49 am today
vi) If you can accept my position, why do you keep responding saying yours is the only correct one?

We can agree that a poll would be a great idea.

[Freedomlover]

Freedomlover,

I notice how you pick and choose the portions of my post to which you respond. If you evaluated the entire piece, I think you would find that I have already answered to the points you draw out in your response:

Sure I do. Not everything anyone says, including myself, requires a detailed response.

i) you know about the Concise OED that says a kilt is "skirtlike" not a "skirt"; plus you acknowledge that both Websters and OED define a "skirt" as a woman's garment

ii) the Compact is smaller than the Concise, I guess the editors either copied Websters (shutter) or economized on the "like".

Nevertheless, you have a version that says one thing, and I have a version that says another. I guess you would have to agree that in this matter, at least, the OED contradicts itself.

iii) I don't attach myself to any verse -- I have identified the ambiguity and have take the position I prefer -- kilts are not skirts, because generally skirts are viewed as woman's clothing -- a view arrived at by looking at many sources

I know where you are coming from, and I have no problem (I'm saying now for the third time) with you believing whatever you like. But the inescapable fact remains that a strip of cloth wound around the area of the waist, no matter how it is constructed, can be legitimately called a skirt. Some people don't like that. You, for instance, but it changes nothing.

v) ad hominem -- learnt from you -- you can't suggest that you weren't ad hominem in your post of 4:49 am today

I cordially direct the attention of all readers to my post #64. There is nothing in it that even faintly resembles a personal attack.

vi) If you can accept my position, why do you keep responding saying yours is the only correct one?

Please show me where I have said that my position is the only correct one. (It is, of course, but I have not made the bald claim )

I have said that I accept your absolute right to believe whatever you want to. I have exactly the same right, and I believe you are wrong. jkdesq, you seem to be taking personal offence where none was intended. Evidently you don't much care for me articulately expressing an opinion you don't agree with. There are hundreds of members here at Xmarks, and disagreements are commonplace. Because I disagree with you does not mean that I don't respect you as a man.

[flyv65]

I think I will start a poll. Let's find out what the members think.

In the words of Invader Zim, "that's a good question...BUT I DON'T CARE!"

I'd like to think that people would call them kilts because of the subtle differences in connotation (and to an extent the historical implications), but it won't impact my actions one bit. About the only time I take umbrage is when people say "nice dress"...they must clearly be thinking of a tabard or some type of tunic.

Bryan...does that make my shorts become "panties"?...