Mfcttrf

What is the lowest-speed bogey a jet fighter can intercept/escort?

Is this photo showing a woman posing in the nude before teenagers real?

How much were the LMs maneuvered to their landing points?

What to do when you reach a conclusion and find out later on that someone else already did?

How to handle a player that cannot be convinced his actions are a problem for both GM and party

Print sums of all subsets

Can the term divorcée apply if a woman has not only divorced, but subsequently remarried?

How do I address my Catering staff subordinate seen eating from a chafing dish before the customers?

Can I make a matrix from just a parts of the cells?

Is it legal for private citizens to "impound" e-scooters?

How do campaign rallies gain candidates votes?

Will any serial mouse connect to Classic Macs?

Is my employer paying me fairly? Going from 1099 to W2

Why are so many countries still in the Commonwealth?

What is "I bet" in German?

Examples of simultaneous independent breakthroughs

How can I receive packages while in France?

Can the 2019 UA Artificer's Returning Weapon and Radiant Weapon infusions stack on the same weapon?

How to deal with a player who makes bad characters and kills them?

Is dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/mem safe?

How do I stop my characters falling in love?

Spoken encryption

Unethical behavior : should I report it?

Are there any examples of technologies have been lost over time?

Can the term divorcée apply if a woman has not only divorced, but subsequently remarried?

Can “crepuscular” and/or “twilight” apply to morning half-light as well as in the evening“But Only” - How to Figure Out the Meaning?can the term “pro rata” include cutting for non-use in the middle of a period?Can something be efficient but not effective?Colloquially, does the term “redhead” apply specifically to a person with naturally red hair?What is the name for a description which is not true but is common place?Seeking Generic Word: Place where opponents fightWhy is a young man called “son,” but a young woman is never called “daughter”?Can the word 'fertility' be used in reference to whether you choose to have children or not?What does the English word “widow” NOT include?

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

1

1

Can the term divorcée apply if a woman has not only divorced, but subsequently remarried? The definitions I have perused do not address the matter, but I would think the answer is "no."

meaning

share|improve this question

asked 8 hours ago

Chuck BumgardnerChuck Bumgardner

4633 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  That sounds like it would be very confusing if she has already remarried. "Divorced" and "married" refer to current marital state, not history. On the other hand, I think they continued to refer to Wallis as a divorcée even after she was married to Edward.VIII, but possibly that was out of spite.
  
  – Cascabel
  7 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

1

1

Can the term divorcée apply if a woman has not only divorced, but subsequently remarried? The definitions I have perused do not address the matter, but I would think the answer is "no."

meaning

share|improve this question

asked 8 hours ago

Chuck BumgardnerChuck Bumgardner

4633 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  That sounds like it would be very confusing if she has already remarried. "Divorced" and "married" refer to current marital state, not history. On the other hand, I think they continued to refer to Wallis as a divorcée even after she was married to Edward.VIII, but possibly that was out of spite.
  
  – Cascabel
  7 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Can the term divorcée apply if a woman has not only divorced, but subsequently remarried? The definitions I have perused do not address the matter, but I would think the answer is "no."

meaning

share|improve this question

asked 8 hours ago

Chuck BumgardnerChuck Bumgardner

4633 bronze badges

share|improve this question

asked 8 hours ago

Chuck BumgardnerChuck Bumgardner

4633 bronze badges

share|improve this question

asked 8 hours ago

Chuck BumgardnerChuck Bumgardner

4633 bronze badges

asked 8 hours ago

Chuck BumgardnerChuck Bumgardner

4633 bronze badges

asked 8 hours ago

Chuck BumgardnerChuck Bumgardner

4633 bronze badges

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

4

The Cambridge online dictionary defines divorcee as

a man or a woman who is divorced and who has not married again (in the UK)

and
​

a woman who is divorced and who has not married again (in the US)

so, according to the Cambridge online dictionary, a woman (or a man in the UK) ceases to be a divorcee when they marry again. This makes sense since their marital status (as given when they fill in a form) changes from "divorced" to "married".

Admittedly Merriam Webster does not make the distinction between a person who is divorced and remarried and a person who has remarried but they make no statement either way while Cambridge make a definite statement. It seems that a remarried person is no longer a divorcee any more than a remarried widow is still a widow after her remarriage.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

BoldBenBoldBen

8,3671313 silver badges2525 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The trouble is that a remarried widow is still a widow. It's her widowhood which validates her second marriage. And if she wasn't a widow any more, then no-one could be widowed twice -- which is obviously a nonsense.
  
  – Andrew Leach♦
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, I think we'd have to distinguish between status -- here, "widow" -- and event -- here, "being widowed". If a woman is widowed, then remarries, her status is no longer that of a "widow" (which by definition is someone whose husband has dies and who has not remarried -- so I have to disagree that "a remarried widow is still a widow"), even though the event of "having being widowed" still obtains. Thus, if she loses her second husband, and regains the status of "widow," she can be said to have been "twice widowed."
  
  – Chuck Bumgardner
  53 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

I think the answer is yes.

The fact that you have remarried doesn't erase the fact that you were divorced. And you remain divorced from your first spouse: that is what validates your second marriage.

Note that an argument substituting single doesn't work: yes, you were single, and now that you're married you're no longer single; but to say you are invalidates your marriage.

In most cases, the fact of divorce ceases to be socially important following a remarriage, which is why divorcees are unlikely nowadays to be referred to as such. Cascabel's example of the Duchess of Windsor is a counter-example: in her case [which was of her time] her divorce continued to be socially notable. But the fact that a divorce may not be socially notable doesn't erase it entirely.

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

Andrew Leach♦Andrew Leach

81.3k88 gold badges159159 silver badges260260 bronze badges

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f506499%2fcan-the-term-divorc%25c3%25a9e-apply-if-a-woman-has-not-only-divorced-but-subsequently-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

4

The Cambridge online dictionary defines divorcee as

a man or a woman who is divorced and who has not married again (in the UK)

and
​

a woman who is divorced and who has not married again (in the US)

so, according to the Cambridge online dictionary, a woman (or a man in the UK) ceases to be a divorcee when they marry again. This makes sense since their marital status (as given when they fill in a form) changes from "divorced" to "married".

Admittedly Merriam Webster does not make the distinction between a person who is divorced and remarried and a person who has remarried but they make no statement either way while Cambridge make a definite statement. It seems that a remarried person is no longer a divorcee any more than a remarried widow is still a widow after her remarriage.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

BoldBenBoldBen

8,3671313 silver badges2525 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The trouble is that a remarried widow is still a widow. It's her widowhood which validates her second marriage. And if she wasn't a widow any more, then no-one could be widowed twice -- which is obviously a nonsense.
  
  – Andrew Leach♦
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, I think we'd have to distinguish between status -- here, "widow" -- and event -- here, "being widowed". If a woman is widowed, then remarries, her status is no longer that of a "widow" (which by definition is someone whose husband has dies and who has not remarried -- so I have to disagree that "a remarried widow is still a widow"), even though the event of "having being widowed" still obtains. Thus, if she loses her second husband, and regains the status of "widow," she can be said to have been "twice widowed."
  
  – Chuck Bumgardner
  53 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

The Cambridge online dictionary defines divorcee as

a man or a woman who is divorced and who has not married again (in the UK)

and
​

a woman who is divorced and who has not married again (in the US)

so, according to the Cambridge online dictionary, a woman (or a man in the UK) ceases to be a divorcee when they marry again. This makes sense since their marital status (as given when they fill in a form) changes from "divorced" to "married".

Admittedly Merriam Webster does not make the distinction between a person who is divorced and remarried and a person who has remarried but they make no statement either way while Cambridge make a definite statement. It seems that a remarried person is no longer a divorcee any more than a remarried widow is still a widow after her remarriage.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

BoldBenBoldBen

8,3671313 silver badges2525 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The trouble is that a remarried widow is still a widow. It's her widowhood which validates her second marriage. And if she wasn't a widow any more, then no-one could be widowed twice -- which is obviously a nonsense.
  
  – Andrew Leach♦
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, I think we'd have to distinguish between status -- here, "widow" -- and event -- here, "being widowed". If a woman is widowed, then remarries, her status is no longer that of a "widow" (which by definition is someone whose husband has dies and who has not remarried -- so I have to disagree that "a remarried widow is still a widow"), even though the event of "having being widowed" still obtains. Thus, if she loses her second husband, and regains the status of "widow," she can be said to have been "twice widowed."
  
  – Chuck Bumgardner
  53 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

The Cambridge online dictionary defines divorcee as

a man or a woman who is divorced and who has not married again (in the UK)

and
​

a woman who is divorced and who has not married again (in the US)

so, according to the Cambridge online dictionary, a woman (or a man in the UK) ceases to be a divorcee when they marry again. This makes sense since their marital status (as given when they fill in a form) changes from "divorced" to "married".

Admittedly Merriam Webster does not make the distinction between a person who is divorced and remarried and a person who has remarried but they make no statement either way while Cambridge make a definite statement. It seems that a remarried person is no longer a divorcee any more than a remarried widow is still a widow after her remarriage.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

BoldBenBoldBen

8,3671313 silver badges2525 bronze badges

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

BoldBenBoldBen

8,3671313 silver badges2525 bronze badges

answered 5 hours ago

BoldBenBoldBen

8,3671313 silver badges2525 bronze badges

answered 5 hours ago

BoldBenBoldBen

8,3671313 silver badges2525 bronze badges

2

I think the answer is yes.

The fact that you have remarried doesn't erase the fact that you were divorced. And you remain divorced from your first spouse: that is what validates your second marriage.

Note that an argument substituting single doesn't work: yes, you were single, and now that you're married you're no longer single; but to say you are invalidates your marriage.

In most cases, the fact of divorce ceases to be socially important following a remarriage, which is why divorcees are unlikely nowadays to be referred to as such. Cascabel's example of the Duchess of Windsor is a counter-example: in her case [which was of her time] her divorce continued to be socially notable. But the fact that a divorce may not be socially notable doesn't erase it entirely.

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

Andrew Leach♦Andrew Leach

81.3k88 gold badges159159 silver badges260260 bronze badges

add a comment | 

2

I think the answer is yes.

The fact that you have remarried doesn't erase the fact that you were divorced. And you remain divorced from your first spouse: that is what validates your second marriage.

Note that an argument substituting single doesn't work: yes, you were single, and now that you're married you're no longer single; but to say you are invalidates your marriage.

In most cases, the fact of divorce ceases to be socially important following a remarriage, which is why divorcees are unlikely nowadays to be referred to as such. Cascabel's example of the Duchess of Windsor is a counter-example: in her case [which was of her time] her divorce continued to be socially notable. But the fact that a divorce may not be socially notable doesn't erase it entirely.

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

Andrew Leach♦Andrew Leach

81.3k88 gold badges159159 silver badges260260 bronze badges

add a comment | 

I think the answer is yes.

The fact that you have remarried doesn't erase the fact that you were divorced. And you remain divorced from your first spouse: that is what validates your second marriage.

Note that an argument substituting single doesn't work: yes, you were single, and now that you're married you're no longer single; but to say you are invalidates your marriage.

In most cases, the fact of divorce ceases to be socially important following a remarriage, which is why divorcees are unlikely nowadays to be referred to as such. Cascabel's example of the Duchess of Windsor is a counter-example: in her case [which was of her time] her divorce continued to be socially notable. But the fact that a divorce may not be socially notable doesn't erase it entirely.

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

Andrew Leach♦Andrew Leach

81.3k88 gold badges159159 silver badges260260 bronze badges

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

Andrew Leach♦Andrew Leach

81.3k88 gold badges159159 silver badges260260 bronze badges

answered 7 hours ago

Andrew Leach♦Andrew Leach

81.3k88 gold badges159159 silver badges260260 bronze badges

answered 7 hours ago

Andrew Leach♦Andrew Leach

81.3k88 gold badges159159 silver badges260260 bronze badges