| 
| Разборчивость | [Mar. 4th, 2007|05:08 pm] |  
|  |  |
 | 
| 
| Comments: |  | 
| ![[User Picture]](http://lj.rossia.org/userpic/80531/2147552741) | |  |  |  |  Re: ladylike / unladylike | (Link) | 
 | 
And what about "gentelmanlike"? Is it still positive, or is it just completely non-existent?  
| ![[User Picture]](http://lj.rossia.org/userpic/145590/2147609443) | | | From: | ![[info]](http://lj.rossia.org/img/imported-profile.gif) bhp1@lj | 
|---|
 | Date: | March 4th, 2007 - 04:01 pm | 
|---|
 |  |  |  Re: ladylike / unladylike | (Link) | 
 | 
We need a sociolinguist who is keeping statistics over time to be sure -- but for myself, "gentlemanly" is positive but old-fashioned.  
| ![[User Picture]](http://lj.rossia.org/userpic/80531/2147552741) | |  |  |  |  Re: ladylike / unladylike | (Link) | 
 | 
Thanks. I guess "genltelmanlike" must have been refreshed by the overwhelming popularity of some Jane Austen's TV-adaptations...  |  |