33

I have seen many people on the Internet from America sharing the sign “Stop Asian Hate”.

I know they mean “Stop hate against Asian people”, but why don't they say “Stop anti-Asian hate”?

I also see people saying “Stop white terrorism”, which means “stop terrorism by white people”, so why does “Stop Asian hate” has the opposite meaning?

I do not understand the grammar here, but I am not a native speaker.

MarianD
  • 226
  • 1
  • 4
  • 10
confusedgerman
  • 331
  • 3
  • 3
  • 46
    People who compile slogans and headlines are seldom concerned with grammar. – Ronald Sole Mar 18 '21 at 15:07
  • Clearly, it should be: "Stop Anti-Asian Hate". Please....but you could correctly say: Stop White Hate.... – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 15:52
  • 26
    English grammar lets us be pretty flexible with some things, particularly with uses like signs where precise grammar isn't really the point. Consider "car door" (a door belonging to a car) vs. "chicken soup" (soup made of chickens, not belonging to chickens) vs. "car wash" (a wash for cars, not belonging to them or made of them). – stangdon Mar 18 '21 at 16:12
  • 2
    English uses a lot of nouns as adjectives, but this is not one. Look at these collocations: Asian fashion, Asian cuisine, Asian customs. If you add Asian hate to the mix, you get what you bargained for. You have to follow the logic of the language. Don't blame the messenger. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 16:21
  • @Lambie Is a playa hater someone who hates players, or a player who hates? :^) – stangdon Mar 18 '21 at 16:53
  • 2
    Worth noting it might have originated as a social media hashtag #stopasianhate - they tend to be short and not necessarily grammatical – Andrew Tobilko Mar 18 '21 at 17:07
  • @stangdon Slang is not relevant to this question. Don't blame me if Americans use the slogan without adding anti. One sees: anti-Black violence and anti-Black racism. So, this should follow suit: anti-Asian violence and anti-Asian racism. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 17:07
  • @AndrewTobilko Absolutely, it was originally a hashtag. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 17:32
  • Stop hate for Asians and Stop hating Asians are better. But when it comes to slogans many of them sound a little ambiguous unless you put them in context. So, context matters! – Ammu Mar 18 '21 at 23:01
  • 5
    Fascinating how such a seemingly simple question has sparked violent disagreement among English speakers. I fear that we may have confused the German even further! – stangdon Mar 19 '21 at 01:31
  • 1
    Stop Anti-Asian Hate sounds like we have to tolerate the bigot instead. – Xwtek Mar 19 '21 at 08:07
  • 2
    @Xwtek it doesn't to me, although I see how you might take it that way if you've heard the other version first. If I had coined it I'd have gone for the anti version. Would you refer to "anti-Jewish prejudice" as "Jewish prejudice"? "Anti-Muslim discrimination" as "Muslim discrimination"? Still, we interpret based on context. With a basic knowledge of the sociopolitical context it's obvious what "stop Asian hate" means, i.e. stopping hatred against Asians. – rjpond Mar 19 '21 at 09:57
  • 7
    A slightly similar, classic example of ambiguity is "Smith's murder", where we can't tell whether Smith carried out the murder or was the victim of it (though my out-of-context intuition is that he was the victim). If the phrase was "Smith's murder of Jones" then Smith would be unambiguously the perpetrator, and if it was "Smith's murder by Jones" then Smith would be unambiguously the victim. – rjpond Mar 19 '21 at 10:19
  • 2
    I wonder if there's literally a single person in the world who doesn't understand the intended message behind the slogan. – thumbtackthief Mar 19 '21 at 13:52
  • 2
    Your nickname is "confused german", so obviously you are native German speaker. Do you understand "Stoppe Asiaten-Hass" and "Stoppe weißen Terrorismus"? Yes, the German language is somewhat more clear in this regard. – rexkogitans Mar 19 '21 at 13:57
  • 8
    I'm curious if you all think "gay bashing" means that there's a bunch of us angry homosexuals out there beating up people. – thumbtackthief Mar 19 '21 at 15:25
  • Also, the word "hate" here is used as a noun, instead of the usual usage as a verb. – wyphan Mar 19 '21 at 16:01
  • 2
    @wyphan "Hate" as a noun goes back to 1175, although by the 19th century it was apparently considered a rare or literary usage. Nowadays it is perfectly normal (and for literary usage, one might prefer "hatred"). I think it is so common that is no longer remarkable. – rjpond Mar 19 '21 at 16:10
  • Your Question can't be answered in its own context, because it cannot be clear except from unspoken context that “Stop Asian hate” means “Stop hating Asians” rather than “Stop Asians hating”. Without the context, read Ronald's Comment.

    If this is about grammar then change the wording to “Stop Crusader/Saracen hate” or - though I hate to say it - “Stop Islamic hate”.

    Simplified slogans depend solely on context.

     – Robbie Goodwin Mar 20 '21 at 18:26
  • @thumbtackthief There is at least one. I suppose this is an American phenomenon, but I had never heard of it before reading this question. – Richard Beasley Mar 21 '21 at 12:12
  • Suggested reading by a media expert: https://printculture.com/empathy-explanation-and-tagging/ – Lambie Mar 23 '21 at 21:12

8 Answers8

28

The difference between "Stop Asian hate" and "Stop white terrorism" isn't one of grammar, it's one of semantics.

"Stop Asian hate" and "Stop white terrorism" have the same basic grammatical structure: "(imperative verb) (noun phrase)". That is, there's a verb directing the reader to do something ("stop") and then a noun phrase describing the thing to stop.

Even the noun phrase has the same grammatical structure: "(noun adjunct) (noun)". That is, there's the thing that you want to stop (hate/terrorism) and that's preceded by a descriptor for which specific type of that thing you want to stop. Both of those descriptors are nouns for groups of people, used like an adjective. (There's some potential ambiguity in how you view "white", but I think it's clearest if you think of it as a nominalized adjective subsequently used as a noun adjunct - that is, an adjective turned into a noun turned into an adjective.)

It's in that noun adjunct where the ambiguity lies. Grammatically, the noun adjunct forms a connection between the nouns, but the grammar doesn't specify the type - that is, grammar itself doesn't say if "Asian hate" should be interpreted as "hate towards Asians" or "hate from Asians" - that distinction is entirely found in the semantics.

This sort of contextual ambiguity for noun adjuncts is common in English. Consider "chicken feed" and "chicken soup". One is food for chickens, and one is food made from chickens. Or "fuel oil" versus "corn oil". One is a specific type of oil used as fuel, one is oil made from corn. (Or "baby oil", which is an oil to be used on babies, and not an oil made from babies, despite the theoretical possibility of the latter.) There's nothing grammatically different, the difference is all in the contextual meaning.

R.M.
  • 935
  • 8
  • 9
  • if the distinction is found in the semantics and the slogan can mean two things, that is a good argument for ridding it of ambiguity by adding the word anti-. Also, I fail to see why people don't the the "Internet effect" of the slogan such as being created in great haste, etc. – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 16:16
  • 1
    EDITED "Corn oil" is vegetable oil. “Fuel oil” is oil for fuel, I find neither ambiguous. On the other hand, I agree with the OP that Stop Asian Hate appears to be ambiguous as there are two possible interpretations. It's unlikely a specific oil is needed for corn when that oil is already a byproduct of corn and fuel does not produce oil. *It is context* (as you also mention) that tells us which meaning is inferred in the slogan. – Mari-Lou A Mar 19 '21 at 18:06
  • 3
    @Mari-LouA I'm not disputing that "Stop Asian Hate" could be ambiguous in a way which "corn oil" is not. I'm just emphasizing that it is the meaning rather than grammar which makes it so. I presume the makers of the placards felt it was obvious that "hate against Asians" was the one that made sense, and "hate by Asians" didn't warrant consideration, just as the makers of "baby oil" figured most people will assume it's oil for babies, despite the fact you could theoretically make an oil from babies, just as you can make oil from corn. – R.M. Mar 19 '21 at 20:08
  • 4
    I actually think "baby oil" is a much better example. I'm sure its ambiguity has been mentioned by someone somewhere. – Mari-Lou A Mar 19 '21 at 20:11
  • 3
    This gives a whole new meaning to “for sale: baby shoes, never worn”. – wizzwizz4 Mar 19 '21 at 22:03
  • 1
    @Lambie Is anti-Asian hate hate towards anti-Asians or hate coming from anti-Asians? (where is anti-Asia anyway? seems to be off the coast of Chile) – user253751 Mar 20 '21 at 00:17
  • "isn't one of grammar, it's one of semantics." Isn't this subjective, and depending on the ideological view and biases of the one uttering the slogan (and of the intended audience)? If the same people heard "stop white hate" and "stop Asian terrorism", would they understand it the same way? Or would they think of "stop white hate" as hate done (instead of targeted toward) white people, the opposite of the original sentence? – vsz Mar 20 '21 at 11:41
  • @user253751 Ok, there are people willing to stoop to the lowest depths. I cannot argue with your type of comment. Do you feel vindicated? How about: anti-American X or anti-French x? or anti-Chinese x? – Lambie Mar 20 '21 at 13:40
  • @Mari-LouA a 'corn' is also a hard callus on the foot, and one of the treatments for corns is putting oil on them, so 'corn oil' can be interpreted in the same way as 'baby oil'. – Pete Kirkham Mar 20 '21 at 18:28
  • @Lambie If it was "the hate that Asian's have/show", then surely it would, grammatically, be "Asians' hate", in the same way that we have "women's suffrage". Instead, it's "hate of Asians", in the same way that "male rape" is "rape of males", not "rape by males". Your argument suggests that it should be "anti-male rape". – Chronocidal Mar 20 '21 at 23:55
  • Girl Scout Cookies (made with real Girl Scouts). – user3067860 Mar 22 '21 at 17:48
24

If you drive in the UK, you'll see road signs that have one word on them - STOP - and this is perfectly acceptable. English learners are sometimes taught as a "rule" that a simple sentence must have a subject and a verb as a minimum, but that isn't the case with orders.

Orders, such as on signs and slogans, don't have to follow the grammatical structure of everyday speech. They are often in the imperative mood, aimed at the reader (or hearer) who is the implied subject. In effect it is asking you to obey the order.

"Stop Asian Hate" is punchy and succinct - it seems clear to me that it is a campaign to stop hate against Asian people - what else could it mean? The only other alternative would be that it is a campaign to stop Asian people hating something else - but what? It wouldn't be a very good slogan if there was no object.

Your suggestion of "Stop anti-Asian Hate" doesn't sound right. It could mean stop hating people who are anti-Asian. Consider "female oppression" - you'd understand that meant oppression of females. You wouldn't say "anti-female oppression".

Astralbee
  • 100,700
  • 2
  • 111
  • 222
  • @TypeIA I know it's not a rule, thats why I put 'rule' in quotes like that. It's the reason the OP is asking the question - they can't understand how a slogan can be grammatical, and this is most likely because, as an English learner, they've been told a sentence must have an object and a verb as a minimum. – Astralbee Mar 18 '21 at 15:44
  • @rjpond it's not a rule taught to native English speakers learning grammar, but rules like this are sometimes taught to non-native speakers learning English as a second language. I thought I'd made it clear with my use of quote marks I didn't consider it a valid rule but I've edited it for you. Hope you like it. – Astralbee Mar 18 '21 at 15:48
  • 4
    Syntactically, it is an imperative with "Asian Hate" as object. I'd take "Asian" as complement, not modifier, of "hate". (cf, the hatred of Asians"). – BillJ Mar 18 '21 at 15:49
  • punchy and succinct and wrong: Stop Anti-Asian Hate and the right thing to do is: Stop White Hate. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 15:54
  • 4
    @Lambie "Stop Anti-Asian Hate" could mean stop hating people who are anti-Asian. Embrace the anti-Asians, they're your friend. No, "Asian hate" is like "third-world hunger", it's clear enough as part of a slogan. – Astralbee Mar 18 '21 at 15:57
  • Quote: "Stop Anti-Asian Hate" could mean stop hating people who are anti-Asian. Unquote Yes, stop the hate against Asians. Clearly. stop Asian hate can only mean: stop hate that is Asian, which is wrong. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 16:00
  • 8
    @Lambie Nah. What about "female opression" - is that the oppression of females, or are females doing the oppressing? – Astralbee Mar 18 '21 at 16:01
  • 1
    @Astralbee thanks, I have voted for your revised answer. – rjpond Mar 18 '21 at 16:05
  • 3
    female oppression is oppression of females, of course. But Asian is a non-noun adjective. as in Asian cuisine, Asian fashion. So, it you say "Asian hate", you have a problem, Houston. And I really do not think any standard speaker would disagree with what I have said. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 16:18
  • The edit reads much better to me and I reversed my vote. Thanks for the clarification! – TypeIA Mar 18 '21 at 16:38
  • "Asian" is of course an adjective, but if its function is that of complement (which it is), not modifier, then the usual PP interpretation is fine, cf. "hatred of Asians". – BillJ Mar 18 '21 at 17:02
  • 1
    Ok, so, you guys accept: stop Black Violence, Stop Jewish Violence, Stop Black racism and Stop LBFT Violence or Racism? You can't have it both ways. Either all of them work, or none of them do. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 17:10
  • 2
    I see protest signs as an extreme case of headline-ese, where compactness trumps grammar. As long as you can be understood (which may assume certain social context), anything goes. – StephenS Mar 18 '21 at 18:27
  • 1
    @Lambie 'Asian' can be a noun or an adjective, exactly like 'female'. You can say "a female dog" or "an Asian woman". You can also say "She is an Asian" and "They are a female". You can safely assume that this slogan is aimed at Asian people, not food, just as you can assume 'Stop Female Oppression' is aimed at female humans, not dogs. – Astralbee Mar 18 '21 at 19:12
  • "Stop Asian Hate" sounds terrible and the people who started the campaign have now screwed the pooch. If you accept it, then, you have to accept the other collocations: Stop Black Hate//Stop LBTG Hate. Do you accept those? I should think not. If you do, there is really nothing more to say. They are female. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 21:53
  • Finally, try finding the term "Asian hate" per se in a sentence in a decent article that talks about violence or hatred of Asians. You won't. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 22:01
  • 7
    "female oppression is oppression of females, of course." I wouldn't say it's so obvious. Antifeminists do exist, and they may well say that (feminist) women are oppressing men. – nick012000 Mar 18 '21 at 22:37
  • 3
    @Lambie: I am a native speaker of standard English and I disagree with what you have said. Are you going to claim that "wife beating" is domestic violence carried out by women? – psmears Mar 19 '21 at 11:44
  • Road signs aren't exactly known for correct grammar. In residential areas in the US, there's a common sign that reads "GO CHILDREN SLOW". They put the words in that order instead of the more grammatical "GO SLOW, CHILDREN" because the sign is diamond-shaped and "Children" is longer than the other 2 words, but it does absolutely change the meaning. – Darrel Hoffman Mar 19 '21 at 13:30
  • 1
    @psmears It is not helpful to try and throw everything in the book at me. Like I said: try and find the term "Asian hate" in any serious article about violence against Asians and you won't. Why? Because it does not work. Or "Black hate" to mean: against Asians or against Blacks, and you will not. I am done trying to argue my case. It is just so obvious that the AAPI invented a slogan hashtag that is really unfortunate. – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 19:27
  • 1
    @Lambie: I'm not throwing anything, at you or anywhere else :) The comment you're responding to is the first I made on this page. You asked about use of "LGBT hate", so I gave examples of that below; if you want examples of "Asian hate" those certainly exist as well. – psmears Mar 19 '21 at 22:49
13

This isn't a matter of grammar, but of context. Grammatically it is ambiguous, and could mean either "stop hatred directed at Asian people" or "stop hatred perpetrated by Asian people". We know which one is meant, because we know which one is an issue.

Especially Lime
  • 3,107
  • 9
  • 18
  • Of course, therefore it's best to get rid of any ambiguity by adding the word anti- to the mix. – Lambie Mar 22 '21 at 13:46
  • @Lambie except that has exactly the same problem: are we talking about hatred directed at anti-Asians or perpetrated by anti-Asians? – Especially Lime Mar 22 '21 at 13:48
  • "anti-Asian hate" is not ambiguous. Here are some more for you: anti-American sentiment, anti-French feelings, anti-Russian attitudes, anti-Chinese behavior etc. etc. etc. – Lambie Mar 22 '21 at 13:51
1

It isn't grammatical. A native speaker like me sees this phrase and parses it exactly the way you parsed it: as a command to stop hate by Asians.

but why don't they say “Stop anti-Asian hate”?

Because they wanted a short slogan and didn't care that it didn't make sense.

  • 6
    I think "not grammatical" is putting it rather strongly. If I had been asked to come up with the wording, it would have been "stop anti-Asian hate", and I don't think anyone would have interpreted that as "stop hate against anti-Asians" (if they now do so, I think it's because they've seen the other version first). However, how would you respond to the point that "Armenian genocide" means the genocide of the Armenians, not by the Armenians? – rjpond Mar 19 '21 at 10:32
  • "didn't care that it didn't make sense." They may not have realized it either in their haste to create the slogan. – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 14:48
  • 2
    It makes perfect sense. Do you have an example of where someone couldn't understand it? – thumbtackthief Mar 19 '21 at 15:34
  • It's an ambiguous parse. It's far too strong to say your preferred parse is ungrammatical. It originates because "Asian" "Canadian" etc. have noun or adjective uses. Other note I take some issue with the word "they" here. It's what caught on. These things are tweet hashtags nowadays so shorter is increasingly preferred. – djechlin Mar 21 '21 at 18:05
  • Why is it that I got so much "abuse" and this answer gets none? Hmm. – Lambie Mar 24 '21 at 13:02
  • @Lambie Because this answer is relatively short and to the point, without all the obnoxious soapboxing and excessive use of emphatic formatting present in yours? It certainly makes this come across as possessing a more reasonable / less condescending tone. Sometimes it's not just what people say, but how they say it. Even when I agree with your posts, sometimes I hesitate to upvote them, because you frequently come across as a bit of a dick. – Chronocidal Mar 24 '21 at 20:13
  • @Chronocidal Please spare the village morality tone. – Lambie Mar 24 '21 at 22:02
1

Terrorism is a noun - hate is a verb.

This is a good one!

At first, this looks like pure semantics. After all, in the present culture if you saw a sign "Stop White Hate" you would interpret it a different way.

But not all is settled yet - let's do it the other way: "Stop Asian terrorism". Is that terrorism against Asians? As a native speaker, my guess is that it would be taken to mean terrorism by Asians, same as if the word "white" is used.

So now we've got a conundrum, and we'll have to dig futher. Switching the adjective in #1 is going to get results all over the place: Stop Lithuanian Hate, Stop Kenyan Hate, Stop Norwegian Hate, Stop Brazilian Hate, Stop Dutch Hate... which ones do you take which way? But there's a little clue in the last one, maybe: Stop Netherlander Hate would probably be taken only one way -- I think? --, as hatred of Dutch people, because someone is more properly a Netherlander than a Dutch. There is still some rudimentary differentiation between whether your adjective is a noun or an adjective, I suppose. I'm not convinced that logic goes very far with the others.

But for the second one, we can take all those adjectives and there's no doubt that Dutch terrorism, Netherlander terrorism, Lithuanian terrorism and so on are all referring to the nationality of the terrorist.

So not every nationality is the same part of speech, precisely, but are "terrorism" and "hate" the same part of speech? Hate is a verb turned into a noun. I think when we say "XXX hate" we sometimes mean the verb of hating, by its object (not subject), turned into a noun. In this usage "Asian hate" = "hating Asians" just like "pea planting" means "planting peas". And sometimes we mean the verb of hating, turned into a noun, modified by a noun or adjective used as an adjective. For hate = V, that gives us "STOP (N V)" and "STOP A (V)" to choose from with different meanings. But in terrorism = N, we have "STOP A N" only - with the proviso that almost any A can be replaced with a noun used as an adjective.

Edit: the suggestion below to substitute "hatred" is a good one. Stop Asian Hatred would be unambiguously taken to mean hatred by Asians, because it is forced to be a noun rather than a verb used in a noun phrase. (You could still get the other meaning by inserting a hyphen ... though I'm not quite sure why)

Mike Serfas
  • 342
  • 1
  • 4
  • I don't see how hate can be a verb in that context. Looks like a noun to me. – Colin Fine Mar 20 '21 at 20:48
  • To hate someone is a verb. To hate Asians is a verb with an object. Asian hate is a verb, with its object, that has been converted into a noun by being viewed as the action of hating Asians. Now if you use Asian hate as the variety of hate that is done by Asians, then "hate" is still a verb converted to a noun (the act of hating) but it is completely generic and can definitely be found with an "(n)" by it in the dictionary. But either way, it starts off as a verb. – Mike Serfas Mar 20 '21 at 22:27
  • 2
    Certainly, hate started off as a verb. But Terrorism is a noun - hate is a noun would be equally accurate. Asian hate is a noun phrase, and like many noun phrases is formally ambiguous: this is not dependent on hate being a verb. The semantic relation of the parts in housecoat, raincoat, and overcoat is different in each case, and they are unambiguous only because they are established words with established meanings. – Colin Fine Mar 20 '21 at 22:52
  • Cooking is a verb, but I would take "try Asian cooking" to be "attempt cooking in an Asian style", rather than "attempt to cook Asians". – Chronocidal Mar 20 '21 at 23:50
  • Cooking is a verb in “I am cooking a dinner”, but it's a noun in “Cooking is difficult”. Same goes for “Stop Asian Hate” – it's a noun both semantically and syntactically. Stop the car = stop the hate, but stop walking = stop hating. – MrVocabulary Mar 21 '21 at 10:35
  • Alternatively, try substituting the word for “hatred”: if you can, it's a noun, if you cannot, it's a verb. Same goes for “brush” and “hairbrush”, for instance. – MrVocabulary Mar 21 '21 at 10:39
1

tl;dr– Yes, it's poor English: hatred is properly understood as a condition of the hater, not the hated.

To be fair, it's understandable that some might tolerate brevity in a tagline. But it backfires here: the tagline forms a negative association with Asians while purportedly arguing against negative associations with Asians. It's a poor choice of terminology.

It should be "anti-Asian hate".

Properly, it ought to be either

  • anti-Asian hatred

  • anti-Asian hate

, depending on if the noun-form of "hate" is taken to be "hatred" or simply "hate".

It's not "Asian hate".

Literally, "Asian hate" would be hate associated with Asians.

The problem is that hatred isn't equally associated between the hater and the hated. Hatred belongs to the hater; they might feel it toward the hated, but the hated can be entirely unaware. So the Asian association specified in "Asian hatred" would reference hatred in which Asians are the hater; the slogan's construction is clumsy.

Discussion: On choice of adjectives in associations.

Consider Companies A and B. If they've signed a contract with each other, then:

  • Company A may refer to it internally as "the Company B contract";

  • Company B may refer to it internally as "the Company A contract";

using different terms despite referring to the same thing. This difference in qualifiers can make sense in those contexts, serving to concisely communicate what the speaker is referring to.

Now say that Company A makes a proposal for a new contract with Company B:

  • Company B may refer to it internally as "the new Company A proposal"; but

  • Company A is less likely to refer to it internally as "the new Company B proposal".

Though the new proposal is associated with both companies as with the prior contract, it's not equally associated; as the proposer, Company A has a special relationship to the proposal that makes it more theirs.

Hatred is asymmetric: the hater has a special relationship to their own hatred not shared by the target of their feelings. So while there is a connection to the hatred's target, it's not generally appropriate to attribute the hatred to its target.

Nat
  • 618
  • 1
  • 6
  • 12
  • "The problem is that hatred isn't equally associated between the hater and the hated" I think this explains why "white terrorism" parses differently. – djechlin Mar 21 '21 at 18:15
  • Yes, as I said in my answer. And had I been you I would have referenced me, after the drubbing I got, even if I was also entering my own answer. – Lambie Mar 22 '21 at 13:43
  • @Lambie: I empathize, and I wrote a comment in support of your answer plus a +1. Still, I think a lot's about presentation and communication.. which I understand is frustrating. There's a lot that I simply can't express. I ended up omitting a major addition to this answer for lack of time to figure out how to say it.. I was gonna present a programming-code explanation of how language-parsing works and why the current tagline has undesired connotations. But it got too lengthy even before I got into the bulk of the relevant concepts, and.. well, tried to keep things short-and-sweet. – Nat Mar 24 '21 at 03:44
  • Hey there again. Right. Thanks for your support. Yes, the programming angle is very, very interesting. It's funny but the OP, I assume, was puzzled by the grammar because they could not see how without anti- the thing made sense. Sometimes, I ascribe all the misprision to youth....:) – Lambie Mar 24 '21 at 13:15
0

At first language came into the picture, then the grammar. Even today we're inventing/creating new words for our needs and also new ways to talk(i.e. forming sentences). As you can see, human language never followed grammars, rather the grammar follows the language. It's communication and understanding that matters, not what we've used to communicate.

reyad
  • 101
  • 1
-6

This is not a grammar question: it is a question about what is the strongest slogan in stopping violence against Asians. It is the ambiguity of "Asian hate" that one precisely wants to avoid in designing a strong slogan.

Asian cuisine, Asian fashion, Asian customs, etc. etc.

Asian is an adjective. If you think for just a second about the collocations given above, it becomes very clear that one would not want to say "Asian hate" with or without the word "stop" if what you want to do is stop hate against Asians.

Following the logic of the language, you are obliged to use:

  • Stop Anti-Asian hate
  • Stop Violence Against Asians
    As in:
  • Stop Violence Against Women [a well-known slogan]

The fact that "stop Asian hate" shows up on the twitterverse is proof of nothing, except an unfortunate occurrence.

It is just a hashtag:

“I’ve Experienced The Insidious Chill Of Casual Racism”: Why The #StopAsianHate Hashtag Is So Important

It is not a slogan per se.

stopasianhate hashtag and an organization

The New York Times says this:

Opinion Why Has There Been a Spike of Anti-Asian Hate? A small yet aggressive segment of America refuses to accept that the country is made up of people from many different backgrounds.

The AAPI unfortunately forgot to add ANTI- to its slogan.

New York Times

A Google exercise:

  1. Google this: "Asian hate" -stop

That means without the word "stop".

Now, look at the hits: Not one occurrence of: Asian hate.

  1. Google this: "anti-Asian hate", and you will get a number of things including: anti-Asian hate crimes, violence, etc.
Lambie
  • 44,522
  • 4
  • 33
  • 88
  • 7
    Asian is sometimes an adjective, and sometimes a noun, as in "Stop AAPI Hate...reported nearly 3,800 instances of discrimination against Asians in the past year" (NPR). But it's also not clear why that would matter here. "Armenian genocide" is genocide of Armenians, not genocide by Armenians, but "Turkish genocide" refers to the genocide carried out by Turks (against Armenians). These kinds of phrases can be ambiguous and we must rely on context. – Juhasz Mar 18 '21 at 16:41
  • Yes, Armenian and Asian genocide would be genocide of Armenians and Asians. However, "Armenian hate" and "Asian hate" would be hate by those of something. And the AAPI should have on its website: Stop Anti-AAPI Hate as in stop anti-black violence//stop anti-Black discrimination. Would you say: Stop LBTG hate? Really? – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 17:03
  • Give me lots of downvotes: Make sure to use: Stop Black Hate, Stop Armenian Hate. Stop American Hate, Stop British Hate. I mean, how can you have it both ways?? What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. So, the more downvotes I get, the more I feel vindicated. – Lambie Mar 18 '21 at 17:20
  • 6
    @Lambie: Some things in language are just ambiguous. Does "to dust" something mean to add dust, or to remove it? "Asian hate" just means "hate related to Asian people"; whether those Asian people are on the giving or receiving end of the hatred is determined by context. If you have a preference for understanding the phrase one way that's fine, but if you're going to claim that it can only have the one meaning then that is just not how language works. – psmears Mar 19 '21 at 11:49
  • @psmears And some things are all screwed up due to the internet and have nothing to do with grammar/stylistics or analysis thereof. Say what you like. I disagree completely with you and others who claim that anti is not needed. As I said, go find one article (not hashtags or titles using the hashtag) that use the term "Asian hate" on its own, like "Armenian genocide", and you will not find it. I never said it had one meaning: I am saying that the wrong meaning will result if you don't use "anti-" i.e. anti-AAPI hate. – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 14:42
  • This guy's out there complaining that Nike's slogan "Just Do It" is incorrectly using a pronoun without an antecedent. – thumbtackthief Mar 19 '21 at 15:34
  • @thumbtackthief How is that relevant here? Just do it. = imperative. There is no pronoun in imperatives, except implied ones: (you) Shut up. For example. – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 15:35
  • 1
    "it" is a pronoun, dear. No need to be rude just because you're wrong. – thumbtackthief Mar 19 '21 at 15:39
  • @thumbtackthief Nope, I'm right: There are no pronouns in imperative forms: (you) Do it. Because although it is a pronoun, it does not require an antecedent as a direct object. The only possible reading of that guy's objection is therefore about the : implied pronoun in the imperative and not the it pronoun as direct object. Get it? – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 15:44
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 15:57
  • 1
    @Lambie: It's not hard to find examples of "LGBT hate" that are clearly in the same sense 1, 2 (page title). Or maybe you'd like a T-shirt? – psmears Mar 19 '21 at 16:20
  • @thumbtackthief The problem with people like you is that you claim a thing and then attack another with that same claim. The first answer you posted under your name has a comment by you about "love of grammar". Then, you come here and accuse me of memorizing "a few rules and vocabulary words [sic]". Hoy vey. What's good for the goose is not good for the gander, I guess... – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 16:21
  • @psmears The T-shirt says: imported, so....and though your first link says it the second says anti-LBTG hate......so.....But please find "Asian hate" without the word Stop which refers to the slogan created by the AAPI association. – Lambie Mar 19 '21 at 16:30
  • +1 I kinda agree with your logic but English is infamous for this type of thing. I doubt anyone seriously thinks that Asian as an adjective modifies "hate", I see it as a compound noun. Saying that, omitting "stop" does change the meaning of "Asian Hate" for me. – Mari-Lou A Mar 19 '21 at 18:14
  • @Lambie: "Imported" means manufactured abroad, not designed abroad - much imported clothing is designed locally - but I grant that we don't know that in this case. But both links do use "LGBT hate" without any "anti"; as I said, for the second link you need to look at the page title (not the headline) - eg this may be shown in the title bar or in your browser history etc. (In case your browser doesn't show it easily, it is: 50 diplomats sign note on ending LGBT hate in Poland). – psmears Mar 19 '21 at 23:00
  • @psmears There are tons of misworded T-shirts. And it's usually because they are manufactured abroad and the wording is done by non-English speakers. So, do you accept "black hate" and "white hate" alongside LBGT hate and Asian hate>? Hmmm. – Lambie Mar 20 '21 at 13:36
  • 4
    @Lambie: What do you mean "accept them"? They're grammatical English. Just as with the others, the grammar allows multiple meanings, and the context will determine which one people understand. It may be that people understand them to have a different meaning, because of the different contexts they tend to be used in. That sort of inconsistency in meaning is somehow unsatisfying, but it's how language works. If people say things intending to convey a concept, and their audience understand that concept, then that is a successful use of language - whether aesthetically appealing or not :) – psmears Mar 20 '21 at 20:51
  • In practice, English-speakers can lean heavily on context to clarify mis-constructed terminology. Even if someone says the opposite of what they mean, contextual clues can help readers understand what was meant -- so much so that a lot of readers might not even realize that there was a language issue in the first place. Still, have to agree with the general position in this answer -- it's properly "anti-Asian hate", even if many context-aware readers would be able to rectify "Asian hate". – Nat Mar 21 '21 at 06:22
  • @psmears The grammar may allow multiple meanings but I highly doubt that when one is trying to stop racist attacks and racism, one wants to elicit "multiple meanings". Au contraire, one wants to eliminate ambiguity and be clear. Gosh, people around here confuse grammar, usage, analysis and slogan writing! – Lambie Mar 21 '21 at 17:04
  • 1
    @Lambie The question was asked about the grammar; that's why I address the grammar. There was nothing in the question about "is this a good slogan" or "how can I make a good slogan". I agree that answers to that question might be somewhat different, but it isn't what was asked: a learner of English was not asking "how can I make a good slogan", but rather "I don't understand how this slogan means what I think it means; how does the grammar allow that (irrespective of whether it's good or not)". – psmears Mar 21 '21 at 20:42
  • @psmears Not worth any more effort by me. – Lambie Mar 21 '21 at 20:55
  • It might be difficult to significantly improve the vote-count on this answer now that viewership is liable to be significantly lower (with the parent-question having left the Hot Network Questions list), though fixing some of the formatting (like where the > doesn't create a proper block-quote) might go in that direction. – Nat Mar 24 '21 at 03:53
  • @Nat Sheesh, I see I really don't understand the workings of this site. Parent-question? By the way, thanks, I fixed the paragraph formatting. – Lambie Mar 24 '21 at 13:01