378
edits
Gender neutral language in French: Difference between revisions
m
→Indefinite and definite article: Big bug need to delete inserted text
m (→Indefinite and definite article: Improvements still going on) |
m (→Indefinite and definite article: Big bug need to delete inserted text) |
||
| Line 219: | Line 219: | ||
====Indefinite and definite article==== | ====Indefinite and definite article==== | ||
In the context of gender-inclusive language in French, the distinction between | In the context of gender-inclusive language in French, the distinction between compounds that blend or concatenate gender-marked agentive suffixes (e.g.: 'direct<u>eur</u>'''ice'''<nowiki/>') ''versus'' lexical (e.g.: 'sœur' and 'frère' In the context of gender-inclusive language in French, the distinction between portmanteau words/creative compounds versus completely new lexically forms is usually referred to as 'inclusif' versus 'neutre'.[1] However, since compounds — such as 'maon', from 'ma' and 'mon' — and portmanteau words, like 'utilisateurice', could theoretically be cognitively interpreted as neutral; at least, there have been no psycholinguistic studies disconfirming this yet (probably because the use of these neologisms is too peripheral in spoken French yet), to the extent that these forms could technically also be called neutral. Furthermore, since the so called 'neutre' forms are inherently inclusive of all genders, there is no reason why they cannot be called that way either. The subsequent pragmatic interchangeability of these terms makes them unsuitable for differentiating these two methods of creating gender-neutral/gender inclusive words in French. For this reason, the following table distinguishes them based on their morphological properties — blend words being more '''analytical''', and non blend words being more '''synthetic'''." | ||
1. "portmanteau words/creative compounds versus completely new lexically forms" doesn't seem like the most accurate term/hyperonym for describing the respective categories to which these neologisms belong, since they usually oppose [neo-compounds where sememes are added through the addition of the morpheme which contains the missing sememe for the word to be gender-inclusive (example: coiffeur+coiffeuse = "coiffeureuse")] against either completely new creations (example : "écrivan" is neither "écrivain" nor "écrivaine") or recuperations/borrowings (adelphe) or less analytical hence more synthetic compounds (for example: "coiffaire", where the standard French gender-unspecific person/actant suffix -aire is used productively to replace the originally gendered -eur or -euse person/actant suffix). | |||
2. I think both "maon" and "utilisateurice" are both portmanteau words, so they're not good examples to exemplify the difference between a French gender-neutral neologistic compound that isn't a portmanteau word and one that is. | |||
'adelphe') and morphological substitutions ('direct<u>aire</u>') is usually referred to as 'inclusif' ''versus'' 'neutre' in the queer-positive community, because.<ref name=":0" /> However, since compounds — such as 'maon', from 'ma' and 'mon' — and portmanteau words, like 'utilisateurice', could theoretically be cognitively interpreted as neutral; at least, there have been no psycholinguistic studies disconfirming this yet (probably because the use of these neologisms is too peripheral), to the extent that these forms could technically also be called neutral. Furthermore, since the so called 'neutre' forms are inherently inclusive of all genders, there is no reason why they cannot be called that way either. The subsequent pragmatic interchangeability of these terms makes them unsuitable for differentiating these two methods of creating gender-neutral/gender inclusive words in French. For this reason, the following table distinguishes them based on their morphological properties — blend words being more '''analytical''', and non blend words being more '''synthetic'''. | |||
The currently most widely accepted neutral forms are denoted in italics in the table. Apart from them, most of the forms depicted in the tables are not in use. The tables thus merely represent suggestions that have been made for degendering French, and feature the items that have been retained by most blogs, researchers and LGBT communities in the French-speaking world. | The currently most widely accepted neutral forms are denoted in italics in the table. Apart from them, most of the forms depicted in the tables are not in use. The tables thus merely represent suggestions that have been made for degendering French, and feature the items that have been retained by most blogs, researchers and LGBT communities in the French-speaking world. | ||