0
User_gary Posted 19 years ago
Grammar

lame

Suppose a person has no right leg, and walks on one leg only. Can I say, "He is lame"?

Also, "Does the word "lame" always implies permanent lame?
  

Top answer

Lame is a pretty old-fashioned word, and would be quite offensive if you used it to describe a person. We tend to say 'lame' for a horse, but this doesn't usually mean a permanent condition. In my part of the world, we'd describe a person with one leg as a person with a disability.

  • Lame is a pretty old-fashioned word, and would be quite offensive if you used it to describe a person.
  • We tend to say 'lame' for a horse, but this doesn't usually mean a permanent condition.
  • In my part of the world, we'd describe a person with one leg as a person with a disability.
  • Language to describe different abilities and conditions is a particularly sensitive area.
  • There are words which were commonly used fifty or even thirty years ago (crippled, handicapped) which are now socially unacceptable in the UK.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

10 Answers
0
Lame is a pretty old-fashioned word, and would be quite offensive if you used it to describe a person. We tend to say 'lame' for a horse, but this doesn't usually mean a permanent condition.

In my part of the world, we'd describe a person with one leg as a person with a disability. Language to describe different abilities and conditions is a particularly sensitive area. There are words
0
Hi Gary

I also would not use the word 'lame' the way you've suggested.
1. The word 'lame' is used especially often in reference to animals, and as Lil' Ruby Rose mentioned, especially horses..
2. If I were to use 'lame' in reference to a person, I might possibly say that the person 'has a lame leg' or a 'lame knee'.
3. As Lil' Ruby Rose has already
0
Thank you all friends. I got the use of "lame". Now, I know the other word "limp" also has the meaning of "lame", which could only be used as a "verb" or a "noun".

My question is : Does the word "limp" implies permanent or temporary lameness?
0
To walk with a limp means the person walks unevenly, usually with one leg stronger than the other. You can have a limp, walk with a limp, or simply limp.

It can be either temporary or permanent. However, I think your original example is a bit more than a limp.
0
If a person has only one leg, then he cannot walk [unless he has crutches]

Somone who is lame is limping - one leg/foot has been damaged and the pain means he will move his weight off it more quickly, which gives the uneven movement that is referred to as "a limp". Sometimes it is permanent; sometimes it is temporary.
0
If I see a man who has a lame leg,can I say he is a lame man,Is it polite ?

How will you usually/informally say if you see a people who has a lame leg ?
He is a man who has a lame leg or a man with a disability ? I think these sentences is quite long in spoken English.
0
Franklin OngIf I see a man who has a lame leg,can I say he is a lame man,Is it polite ?

No, don't say this.

How will you usually/informally say if you see a people who has a lame leg ?He is a man who has a lame leg or a man with a disability ? I think these sentences is quite long in spoken English.

He's got a bad leg.

0
Grammar GeekHe's got a bad leg.
Is it a common way to talk a person who is lame ?Any expression for it else ?

Can you reply these question about adverb-ever and preposition-when for me,because nobody replied to me,but it is very important to my examination.

Here the questions are
0
Please review the earlier posts in this thread, especially this one:
Lil' Ruby RoseLame is a pretty old-fashioned word, and would be quite offensive if you used it to describe a person.
Don't refer to people as lame!

I suggested "He's got a bad leg" because you asked for a way to describe it. What is the point of then asking me if "He's got a bad leg"
0
Grammar GeekImagine this exchange:
A: What is 2 + 2?
B: It's 4.
A: Okay. So, what is 2 + 2, then?

That's how I feel in this thread right now.

As far as I can tell, this is just another "ancient" post dredged up by a relatively newcomer who doesn't realize that once a question is answered it's better to leave it alone (as the original

Related Questions