Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Culture Forum

Culture Forum

  1. 18 Mar '08 06:40
    Does anyone know about this subject?

    In a class we talked about marriage evolving to determine who owned property and family. Anyone know about this and maybe a source?
  2. 18 Mar '08 08:27 / 1 edit
    I think the correct nominalisation of "evolve" is evolution, or possibly, the gerund "evolving." But evolvement?
  3. Standard member Seitse
    Doug Stanhope
    18 Mar '08 09:06
    Dear Pizza & Tea,

    Indeed, marriage has evolved throughout the centuries, from a tool for survival, hygiene and order, into a monopoly, and then finally into a partnership based on synergy rather than ownership.

    However, due to the rapid pace of modern life, the loneliness it brings paired up with wealth creation and better individual development opportunities -added to AIDS-, slowly marriage is returning to its original place: A tool for survival, though now survival should be understood in its emotional (and health) sense.

    If you would like to gain insight on this matter, please read the Bible, preferably the New International Version. You may acquire it through internet, any local bookshop, borrow it from your local library, or stary in any motel where a free copy is available in the night table next to the bed.

    Regards,
    Seitse
  4. Standard member Nemesio
    Ursulakantor
    18 Mar '08 14:27
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    I think the correct nominalisation of "evolve" is evolution, or possibly, the gerund "evolving." But evolvement?
    I'm sure Pizzantea no longer has any questions about marriage since you've decided to clear up
    his grammar. You're always a pal!

    Nemesio
  5. Standard member Nemesio
    Ursulakantor
    18 Mar '08 16:32
    Originally posted by pizzintea
    In a class we talked about marriage evolving to determine who owned property and family. Anyone know about this and maybe a source?
    In order to discuss the evolution of marriage, you're going to have to define the timeframe and
    culture in question. Even today, different cultures -- Western, Middle Eastern, indigenous Native
    South American -- have widely divergent views about what marriage entails.

    So, do you mean the evolution of marriage in Western European thought? If you do, then Seitse's
    recommendation is not too bad, since the Bible and the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church
    (and later the Protestant ones) were profoundly influential in shaping the social mores around
    marriage.

    But, I'm under the impression you meant marriage in pre-civilized time, which would the Bible
    would be pretty useless, since the pre-literate period is much longer than the literate ones
    the Bible represents.

    Nemesio
  6. 18 Mar '08 19:45
    That is exactly what I meant, before the Bible was around. How marriage came to be before the Church and such.
  7. 18 Mar '08 22:28
    Originally posted by pizzintea
    That is exactly what I meant, before the Bible was around. How marriage came to be before the Church and such.
    Ah, the church took everything in those days.

    Before the church, marriage was mainly ceremonial, simply to signify a union between two people. Homosexual marriage was also not frowned upon as it is today. Now it's complicated business, with vows and rings and the like.
  8. 18 Mar '08 23:37
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    I'm sure Pizzantea no longer has any questions about marriage since you've decided to clear up
    his grammar. You're always a pal!

    Nemesio
    How else does anyone learn the correct way of doing things?
  9. 20 Mar '08 01:48
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    I think the correct nominalisation of "evolve" is evolution, or possibly, the gerund "evolving." But evolvement?
    Evolvement is a word.
  10. Standard member Nemesio
    Ursulakantor
    20 Mar '08 04:06
    Originally posted by amannion
    How else does anyone learn the correct way of doing things?
    Do you really think that belittling someone with a callout in the middle of a forum with a
    minor grammatical correction while not addressing their perfectly intelligible question is a way
    to stimulate learning?

    Nemesio
  11. Standard member Nemesio
    Ursulakantor
    20 Mar '08 04:07
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    I think the correct nominalisation of "evolve" is evolution, or possibly, the gerund "evolving." But evolvement?
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolvement

    Jerk.
  12. 20 Mar '08 06:06
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    Do you really think that belittling someone with a callout in the middle of a forum with a
    minor grammatical correction while not addressing their perfectly intelligible question is a way
    to stimulate learning?

    Nemesio
    I don't recall anyone belittling anyone else, and I would agree that that is not an appropriate way to learn anything. I would accept that people learn by making mistakes only if those mistakes are pointed out.
    As has been pointed out since, evolvement is in fact an existing and correct form to use.
    I therefore have learnt something.
  13. 20 Mar '08 07:59 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolvement

    Jerk.
    I do not recall ever belittling anyone. In fact, I very cautiously said "I think", rather than assert from on high that I was irrefutably right. I also invited others to correct me if I was wrong. The giveaway was when I asked, "But evolvement?" From what I had understood, evolution is the nominalised form of "to evolve"; I had never encountered the term evolvement; hence, I wanted confirmation of which was the right form.

    I also did not hurl any gratuitous insults like "jerk" - which one would think the epitomy of belittling.

    EDIT: I have little to contribute to the question. The original poster already had the answer. Marriage is a convenient unit of relationship to govern complex ideas of property and ownership. I would also add that the role of women across cultures is as a patriarchal currency exchanged between father and husband. So, until only recently, marriage has been another way to institutionalise control of women - whether because of sexual needs, like ensuring children are of the same father, or making use of the domestic convenience of women.
  14. 20 Mar '08 22:01
    Back to the OP ... Can anyone name a successful culture that embraced a non-traditional marriage model (e.g. that exhibited by the western world today)?
  15. 20 Mar '08 23:22
    Originally posted by dinosaurus
    Back to the OP ... Can anyone name a successful culture that embraced a non-traditional marriage model (e.g. that exhibited by the western world today)?
    A number of cultures have approved of polygamy.