Timeline for What's the definition of 'unpatient'?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 18, 2017 at 14:04 | comment | added | wibble | @DanBron: found it here: prntscr.com/dx7g34 | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 13:17 | comment | added | Spagirl | @DanBron That journal has 'part II, 6' of the 'Critical mini-dictionary and guide to usage', unpatient might be in one of the other sections. | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 13:12 | comment | added | Hot Licks | From what little context you present, these are "nonce words" invented by various authors to describe medical/psychological conditions, and the author of your quote is complaining that, since they lack clear definitions, they are impossible to translate to other languages. (Actually, "immunostain" is a relatively old word, and the other two have "taken off" in current culture, but "unpatient" was left at the starting gate.) | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 13:09 | answer | added | Spagirl | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 12:59 | comment | added | Dan Bron | Here is the original Navarro reference in Panace, btw, and the relevant article excerpted from that journal as Minidiccionario critico de dudas. But, as I said, unpatient doesn't make an appearance in the work. | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 12:56 | comment | added | Dan Bron | @Spagirl That's the same sense I got from that site, but it's not clear that site's usage is connected to the text the OP quotes. FWIW, I chased down the full citation to Navarro, 2007 (it was spelled out in the bibliography if the complete work, available in Google Books), and the word unpatient dies not appear. So it's not clear where the author of OP's work picked it up or what the original source meant by it. Given that, I'd say it's fair to dispense with it altogether. It doesn't need to be translated at all. It's a stillborn term. | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 12:50 | comment | added | Spagirl | 'Unpatient' is apparently an obsolete form of 'impatient', but given the medical field and reference to neologisms, I'm guessing that isn't the meaning you are after. I think this is a jargon question rather than english usage. The website you link seeks to separate historic notions of paternalism and suffering associated with 'patient' from an updated model of an informed and empowered individual with control of their health data. So maybe it is riffing off the obsolete usage to convey non-passive patient-hood? | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 12:38 | comment | added | Dan Bron | I've never heard of it. If it's a neologism, and what's more, a neologism in a particular field's jargon, it may have never taken off enough to have a well-defined or fixed meaning at all. | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 12:36 | history | asked | wibble | CC BY-SA 3.0 |