I understand that the meaning of the terms "literacy" and "literate" have
been extended to apply to other applications, processes, systems, say
"knowledges," if you will. Whether I "agree" with that phenomenon is quite
immaterial (except, perhaps, to my mental health): it's happened. However,
the other meanings do not cancel the primary meaning as it would be applied
to the example you gave. I think it is inaccurate to indicate, as you did,
that it would. I think, too, that this is an instance calling for the kind
of precision that Eliot was after. I don't think it is a small matter.
Would "non-literate" be any different?
At 01:07 PM 5/20/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Yes, that is one meaning of the word (and the one from etymology), but it
>has come into use in other ways. There are, for example, textbooks
>called "Literacies." You need not agree with it.