Apr 11, 2005 19:58
19 yrs ago
7 viewers *
English term
disabled/invalid
Non-PRO
English
Other
General / Conversation / Greetings / Letters
disabled/invalid/handicaped/incapacitated
severe disabled
could you please explain what is the difference between these terms in English UK?
Thank you
severe disabled
could you please explain what is the difference between these terms in English UK?
Thank you
Responses
4 +3 | invalid =weakened, feeble, disabled may be strong | mportal |
4 +3 | *explanation* | Michael Schubert |
5 | All meanings follow (encyclopedia) | Anna Maria Augustine (X) |
3 +1 | a bit more | Charlie Bavington |
Responses
+3
1 hr
Selected
invalid =weakened, feeble, disabled may be strong
An invalid is someone who is what I would call incapacitated (ie unable to do certain things, as the translator with hands in plaster)by illness or injury. They are dependent on other people.
Disabled people just means people who don't have all their normal faculties - blind, deaf, with one leg missing, but also with epilepsy, schizophrenia, severe memory loss. Handicapped can be seen as more patronising, but means the same thing. A disabled person can compete in the disabled Olympics,for example, (whereas an invalid certainly couldn't.)
Incapacitated means made incapable in some way. This could be by drink, even, or by a disability, or by illness. It would probably more often be used to describe a temporary condition, but not invariably.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr 12 mins (2005-04-11 21:10:52 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Severely disabled would be used to describe someone like the scientist Stephen Hawkins, who has difficulty moving on his own and has to use a special machine to speak, for example. It is a matter of opinion, to a certain extent, but someone who has lost both their legs or is schizophrenic would probably also be in this category, as someone with bad epilepsy could be, but not with mild epilepsy.
Disabled people just means people who don't have all their normal faculties - blind, deaf, with one leg missing, but also with epilepsy, schizophrenia, severe memory loss. Handicapped can be seen as more patronising, but means the same thing. A disabled person can compete in the disabled Olympics,for example, (whereas an invalid certainly couldn't.)
Incapacitated means made incapable in some way. This could be by drink, even, or by a disability, or by illness. It would probably more often be used to describe a temporary condition, but not invariably.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr 12 mins (2005-04-11 21:10:52 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Severely disabled would be used to describe someone like the scientist Stephen Hawkins, who has difficulty moving on his own and has to use a special machine to speak, for example. It is a matter of opinion, to a certain extent, but someone who has lost both their legs or is schizophrenic would probably also be in this category, as someone with bad epilepsy could be, but not with mild epilepsy.
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Refugio
11 mins
|
Thanks Ruth
|
|
agree |
juvera
2 hrs
|
Thanks, juvera
|
|
agree |
Saleh Chowdhury, Ph.D.
3 hrs
|
Thanks, Saleh
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Graded automatically based on peer agreement."
+1
22 mins
a bit more
No particular arguments with Michael (was it - you can't see other answers when you do this!!)
Handicapped & disabled are largely synonynous, and it can be either mental or physical, congenital or something that has developped/happened. Both terms cover most things
Invalid would usually imply a disability resulting from injury, e.g. war invalids. And would be physical not mental, and permanent or at least very long term
Incapacitated - also physical, usually. Usually temporary by implication, although possibly long-lasting. Also implication that the "condition" only precludes certain activities, and does not affect "life in general", e.g. incapacitated for work (such as a translator with both hands in plaster!)
Handicapped & disabled are largely synonynous, and it can be either mental or physical, congenital or something that has developped/happened. Both terms cover most things
Invalid would usually imply a disability resulting from injury, e.g. war invalids. And would be physical not mental, and permanent or at least very long term
Incapacitated - also physical, usually. Usually temporary by implication, although possibly long-lasting. Also implication that the "condition" only precludes certain activities, and does not affect "life in general", e.g. incapacitated for work (such as a translator with both hands in plaster!)
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Michael Schubert
: Important added information with which I fully agree!
29 mins
|
1 hr
All meanings follow (encyclopedia)
Please check the following links from an encyclopedia:
www.thefreedictionary.com/disabled
www.the freedictionary.com/invalid
www.thefreedictionary.com/incapacitated
www.the freedictionary.com/severely+disabled
wwww.thefreedictionary.com/handicapped
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr 45 mins (2005-04-11 21:44:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
www.thefreedictionary.com/invalid
www.thefreedictionary.com/severely disabled
www.thefreedictionary.com/disabled
www.the freedictionary.com/invalid
www.thefreedictionary.com/incapacitated
www.the freedictionary.com/severely+disabled
wwww.thefreedictionary.com/handicapped
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr 45 mins (2005-04-11 21:44:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
www.thefreedictionary.com/invalid
www.thefreedictionary.com/severely disabled
Peer comment(s):
neutral |
Charlie Bavington
: the Asker did request UK English and this is American (e.g. disability check). I will concede, however, that differences in PC sensibilities aside, the definitions in this case are probably similar :-)
1 hr
|
+3
11 mins
*explanation*
I predict you'll get a lot of feedback on this question, as so much of this language is under siege from "linguistically/politically correct" hypersensibilities ... but here goes:
DISABLED/HANDICAPPED are more or less synonymous, are used as adjectives or adjectival nouns ("the disabled") to describe people primarily with physical disabilities. In particular, these words designate those who qualify for special protection under the law or benefits from the state. People will argue over which one of these two words is currently "in fashion," but fashion is all it is; they mean the same thing and are both currently in wide use.
INVALID in this context is used only as a noun; an invalid is someone who is wounded (as in war) or handicapped.
SEVERELY DISABLED is the augmentation of disabled, e.g. someone who is partially or wholly paralyzed.
INCAPACITATED means hindered and is often used to describe a temporary state.
I speak from a perspective of US-EN; I'll let any Brits who may be online at this hour add whatever distinctions are relevant for UK-EN.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 18 hrs 23 mins (2005-04-12 14:21:34 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
A basic problem with such language is the misunderstanding of what distinguishes a pejorative from a word that simply describes an unpleasant reality. \"Retarded\" and \"crippled,\" for example, were never pejorative, but they are hardly ever uttered any more because they are deemed too harsh. In time, \"special needs\" and \"disabled\" will sound similarly harsh, and the linguistic carousel will spin anew. Ironically, it\'s not the disabled themselves who care about these distinctions (they\'ve got more pressing concerns!) but their (admittedly well-meaning) fully abled advocates. The approach of saying \"people with disabilities\" rather than \"the disabled,\" so as not to define people wholly by their condition, is not w/o merit, but to apply it without exception simply makes for ungainly writing. If fully abled people learn to be as comfortable talking about disabilities as the disabled themselves, this problem would disappear.
DISABLED/HANDICAPPED are more or less synonymous, are used as adjectives or adjectival nouns ("the disabled") to describe people primarily with physical disabilities. In particular, these words designate those who qualify for special protection under the law or benefits from the state. People will argue over which one of these two words is currently "in fashion," but fashion is all it is; they mean the same thing and are both currently in wide use.
INVALID in this context is used only as a noun; an invalid is someone who is wounded (as in war) or handicapped.
SEVERELY DISABLED is the augmentation of disabled, e.g. someone who is partially or wholly paralyzed.
INCAPACITATED means hindered and is often used to describe a temporary state.
I speak from a perspective of US-EN; I'll let any Brits who may be online at this hour add whatever distinctions are relevant for UK-EN.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 18 hrs 23 mins (2005-04-12 14:21:34 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
A basic problem with such language is the misunderstanding of what distinguishes a pejorative from a word that simply describes an unpleasant reality. \"Retarded\" and \"crippled,\" for example, were never pejorative, but they are hardly ever uttered any more because they are deemed too harsh. In time, \"special needs\" and \"disabled\" will sound similarly harsh, and the linguistic carousel will spin anew. Ironically, it\'s not the disabled themselves who care about these distinctions (they\'ve got more pressing concerns!) but their (admittedly well-meaning) fully abled advocates. The approach of saying \"people with disabilities\" rather than \"the disabled,\" so as not to define people wholly by their condition, is not w/o merit, but to apply it without exception simply makes for ungainly writing. If fully abled people learn to be as comfortable talking about disabilities as the disabled themselves, this problem would disappear.
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Charlie Bavington
: Indeed, I see I have repeated a lot of what you said :-) (in my defence, I wanted to make the physical/mental distinction in a couple of cases, and you can't see other answers when you're writing your own)
13 mins
|
No problemo and no defense necessary. I agree w/your distinctions but felt my answer was already too long-winded :-)
|
|
neutral |
Refugio
: I believe that "people with disabilities" is more used now, so as not to make a noun label out of what is only one human characteristic among many (that is to say, people with disabilities prefer not to be totally defined by them).//On the contrary.
50 mins
|
Yes, that is true and I'm aware of it. It's part of what I referred to in my first sentence.
|
|
agree |
Anna Maria Augustine (X)
1 hr
|
agree |
Robert Donahue (X)
4 days
|
Discussion