The word as territory: inclusive uses and excluding uses
The debates around the so-called inclusive language were not only installed in academic spaces where the uses of the language are investigated and analyzed, but –and perhaps, above all– in tabletops, cafes and in corridors of all kinds of institutions. The discussion is not settled. It continues to...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Centro de Investigaciones de la Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/etcetera/article/view/33914 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | The debates around the so-called inclusive language were not only installed in academic spaces where the uses of the language are investigated and analyzed, but –and perhaps, above all– in tabletops, cafes and in corridors of all kinds of institutions. The discussion is not settled. It continues to make headlines when some known person or entity insist on issuing on the subject. In particular, against its use. In this short essay we recover quotes of some of those fervent opponents, among which are the successive directors of the RAE, in contrast to the inexcusable need –Cortázar dixit– that the words we use accompany our struggles and conquests. We reflect, from there and with the help of the sciences of language, about the real conditions of the alleged solidity or purity of the language, in tension with the events and components of social life, particularly in recent decades in our country, with the desire to think about how much words de-sign or cover, and how much we did –and we still have to do– so that no one takes away the right to be named. |
|---|