On 2014-12-23, 9:57 AM, Holger Granholm -> Tom Walker wrote:   
    HG> In a message dated 12-22-14, Tom Walker said to Ed Vance:   
      
    HG> Hi Tom,   
      
    EV>> I call both Hens and Roosters Chickens.   
      
    TW>> And that is True. Both "Roosters" and "Hens" are "Chickens" just   
    TW>> like "Males" and "Females" are "Humans".   
      
    HG> Analogue to that would be to name them "Hens" because Chicken isn't   
    HG> a race as Humans are! A chicken is a baby or young hen.   
      
    HG> Or what do you call a young hen. Remember; chicken or roosters don't   
    HG> lay eggs but hen do.   
      
    HG> If chicken is a race there must be a gaping hole in the amlish language.   
      
      
    HG> Happy Holidays,   
      
   As people (of any language) move into different parts of the world and   
   different occupations, their language evolves to reflect their new interests -   
   the cliche is of Inuit/Eskimos having 50 different words for snow, while a   
   tribe living in a tropical rain forest has many precise words for different   
   shades of green, but hardly any words for other colours. (I don't know if   
   either of these stories are actually true).   
      
   When most people lived on farms, most languages had many different words for   
   farm animals of different genders and at different stages of their lives.   
      
   Now most people in North America live far from anyplace where farm animals are   
   grown - and their vocabulary has become impoverished for words that describe   
   these animals, except in the most generic way - 'chickens', 'pigs', 'cows',   
   and 'horses'.   
      
   On the other hand, we have lots of words describing technology that would not   
   have been understood even a few decades ago.   
      
   --- Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thund   
    * Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)