Inclusive or Neutral: What do they propose to do with gender in world languages?
Dmitry Kurkin
The initiative of the Hanover authorities on the introduction of a gender-neutral language in official documents, once again leads one to ask: can gender parity be achieved in languages where inequality has taken root at a basic, grammatical level? And if so, in what ways? If a new language should meet the demands of the new time, then what exactly are these requests? And won't the early unification of the language lead to the fact that it will sound too unnatural and official, which opponents of innovations fear?
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis that the structure of a language affects the perception of the world remains a hypothesis - discussed and criticized. But even those who agree with it have two different approaches to how to achieve gender equality in the language. Some advocate for a gender-neutral language — that is, one where the very mention of gender will be reduced to zero (except when it really matters). Others believe that the language should be gender-inclusive - that is, to make visible all, including non-binary people with a third gender marker (aka X, sometimes not quite correctly called the "third sex"). They look mutually exclusive, although in practice they can be combined: the use of a neutral language in official documents does not contradict the idea of inclusiveness in everyday language. But this potential bilingualism is also a question for a big discussion.
By itself, the genderlessness of a language is not that fundamentally unattainable horizon. In linguistics there are enough examples of gender-neutral languages, from Finno-Ugric to Austronesian, where childbirth is more precise and in speech it is possible to do without them.
It is quite another thing - the languages of the German and Italic branches, where gender separation is sewn not even at the level of designation of professions and social roles by masculinity and feminity, but at the level of everyday pronouns. In them, the masculine historical dominance is noticeable even in the pronouns of the plural: for example, the male "we" in French and Spanish goes by default to designate a company of mixed gender or abstract "we" of an unidentified circle of persons.
Who neologisms really need are people with a third gender marker who remain invisible at the level of everyday vocabulary
Supporters of gender equality in language is annoying. In Spain, members of the Podhemos party called for more frequent use of the female "we" ("nosotras") instead of the male ("nosotros"). In France, a similar proposal was made by the Secretariat for Equality of Women and Men, insisting on replacing the plural male number (example: "citoyens", "citizens") with a universal female-male ("citoyen · ne · s", something like "citizens "). Not all proposals are supported at the highest level - moreover, French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe has forbidden the use of gender-inclusive language in official documents. At the same time, the UN has a policy of gender inclusion in its six official languages.
At the same time, experiments on introducing a gender-neutral language are continuing. And, perhaps more curious, those that are held in specific environments where gender biases are strongest. For example, in December 2017, it became known that British Army officers were advised to refrain from using gender-colored vocabulary. So "mankind" ("humanity") was advised to replace with "humankind", "forefathers" ("ancestors") - with "ancestors", "man in the street" (in the meaning of "ordinary / random person") - with "average person / citizen "," best man for this job "(" best candidate ") -" best person for the job "," gentlemen's agreement "- to" unwritten agreement ", etc. This example shows that for gender a neutral language does not always require neologisms - sometimes fairly simple synonyms.
To whom neologisms are really necessary, it is for people with a third gender marker, who remain invisible at the level of everyday vocabulary. To change the situation, all two approaches are offered: neutrality and inclusiveness. In Swedish, a gender-neutral pronoun "hen" was introduced in addition to "han" ("he") and "hon" ("she"). Supporters of gender-neutral Spanish insist on legitimizing the ending of the plural "-es" - instead of the male "-os" and the female "-as". The English "them" is used to designate people with a third gender marker, while at the same time it is used as a neutral singular, according to linguists, English authors used regularly at least from the 16th to the 19th centuries.
It is obvious that gender balance in languages remains the battlefield of grass-roots initiatives, official instructions and experiments, which are very dependent on grammatical features and historical baggage. But the latter, in spite of a common misconception, does not always protect the bias towards the masculine.
Photo: biancadesigns, Sebastian Crocker - stock.adobe.com