I have actually read the entire article
, and consider Beth's effort a brave but immature attempt to change the world. It is a well written argument, but fundamentally flawed: IMHO, semantics cannot clear up the improper teaching of a technique, or the inadequate understanding of it's principals.
A spud is still a spud, even if you call it a potato.
"Release" has more gravitas to it than "throw", but the implication that no energy is to be added to a technique, because you call it a 'release' instead of a 'throw,' well, that belies my experience with baseball, as a pitcher, controlling the release of the ball -- I added a LOT of energy to that object before it was released.
Don't get me wrong -- people who accelerate the throw prior to release are a potential
danger to themselves and others. BUT - sometimes you have to add energy to a throw to compete it safely. Not all the time or under all circumstances is uke's initial attack present total sufficient energy to complete the technique. Nage has the option of adding energy to the throw or subtracting (negating, actually) existing energy from the throw, prior to the release, to harmonize with the attack and the attacker.
Trying to institute a semantic change to try to impede this kind of activity for moral or philosophical reasons is surely a misguided effort... Changing 'attack' to 'approach' doesn't change the fact that the person standing in front of me is trying to hit me in the head with a bokken (in-love-and-harmony).
Keiko Keiko Keiko --
shut up and train.