Inclusive Language in Spanish as Interpellation to Educational Authorities 2019 Darío Luis Banegas.pdf

该【Inclusive Language in Spanish as Interpellation to Educational Authorities 2019 Darío Luis Banegas 】是由【玉柱儿】上传分享，文档一共【6】页，该文档可以免费在线阅读，需要了解更多关于【Inclusive Language in Spanish as Interpellation to Educational Authorities 2019 Darío Luis Banegas 】的内容，可以使用淘豆网的站内搜索功能，选择自己适合的文档，以下文字是截取该文章内的部分文字，如需要获得完整电子版，请下载此文档到您的设备，方便您编辑和打印。Downloadedfrom-article-abstract/doi/,EGMinerLibraryuseron16May2019
AppliedLinguistics2019:0/0:1–6
doi:
FORUM
InclusiveLanguageinSpanishas
InterpellationtoEducationalAuthorities
1,2,ÃDARI´OLUISBANEGAS
and1MARI´AFERNANDALO´PEZ
1MinisteriodeEducacio´ndelChubut,Argentinaand2UniversityofWarwick,UK
ÃE-mail:D.******@
Theaimofthiscommentaryistodiscussandpromotediscussiononsomelin-
guisticandpedagogicalissuesaroundtheuseofgenderinclusivelanguage,
particularlythe-emorphemeinpluralforms,-
encingandbecomingawareoflanguagechangeinrealtimeconcerningtheuse
ofmorphosyntacticchoicesthatseekembracegenderequality,diversity,repre-
sentation,-
cationandeducationaladministratorswhoareunderpressurenotonlyfrom
differentsocialactorsbutalsofromtheirownbeliefsonwhethertheyshould
promote,ignore,ormitigatethelinguisticchangesthatsocietyisproducing
,towhatextentare
educationalauthoritiesprofessionallypreparedtoencourageacademicdiscus-
sionsoninclusivelanguageineducation?Howcanappliedlinguistshelp?
HavingthesequestionsasourSouthernCross,ourcommentaryliesattheinter-
sectionoflanguagechangeandeducationalauthorities’professionalknowledge.
INCLUSIVELANGUAGEASINTERPELLATION
,agroupofprimary
schoolsuperintendentsinsouthernArgentinainvitedustodiscussasociolin-
guisticphenomenon:theuseofinclusivelanguageinSpanishbyfellowsuper-
intendents,schoolheads,
ofopinionsaroundinclusivelanguageinonlineeducationalcirclesandthe
incipientpracticeofsomeschoolheadsandteachersusinginclusivelanguage

advicefromthegeneralsuperintendentattheMinistryofEducation,who
instructededucatorstofollowthedominantlinguisticnormofusingthemas-
culinenounformstoidentifymixed-
wouldcausetensions,theirsecondreactionwastoseekprofessionalguidance
fromus,twoappliedlinguistsworkingatalocalteachereducationinstitution.
ßTheAuthor(s)(2019)..
Forpermissions,pleaseemail:journals.******@
Downloadedfrom-article-abstract/doi/,EGMinerLibraryuseron16May2019
2FORUM
SOCIALCHANGEANDINCLUSIVELANGUAGE
Agreementonthesocio-culturalandsocio-politicalreasonsbehindlanguage
‘speakerinnovation’(Holmes2013:206)
occurswhenanewformisusedalongsideanalreadyacceptedform.
Language,asasemioticandmeaning-makingsystemofchoices,isaliving
organisminthehandsofitsspeakers;therefore,languagechangeisanatural
,itisdifficulttodiscernwhetherachangeisa
phasethatwillsuccumbtodifferentsocialfactors,orwhetheritwillbecome
,alanguagechangebecomes
normalizedwhen(i)speakersuseitnaturallyand(ii)itdoesnotbecomea
distractorormiscommunicationfactor.
Concerninginclusive/non-sexist/gender-neutrallanguage,therearetwo
,feministgroupsandlinguiststogether
withlesbian,gay,bisexual,andtransgender(LGBT)supportershavede-
velopednewlinguisticformstoensuretherespect,discursiveinscription,
andvisibilizationofallsocialactors(Mare2018).Drawingonsocialconstruc-
tionisttheoryandfeministlinguistics,Baxter(2013)explainsthatlanguage
andgenderresearchhasadoptedapost-modernturnto(i)studygenderas
diversityandlanguageasaconstitutivefactorand(ii)raiseawarenessofgen-

hand,languageacademiesandorthodoxlinguists(Echeverrı´a2006)defend
alreadyestablishedlinguisticformsdrawingontraditionallinguisticsandmor-
(2013)explainsthatwhiletheformerbasetheir
stanceonsocialtheories,thelatterresorttotraditionallinguisticsandatech-
nicalviewoflanguage.
INCLUSIVELANGUAGEINSPANISH
Spanishhasabinarysystem,masculineandfeminine,fortherepresentation
,forexample,‘Elnin˜oeshermoso’(The
boyisbeautiful)or‘Lasnin˜assonhermosas’(Thegirlsarebeautiful),the
gendermorphemes-oand-aarecarriedthroughinthephraseasthere
mustbegender–,themasculine
optionisusedasagenerictorefertoagroupregardlessofitsgendercompos-
,Estomba(2017)indi-
catesthat-odoesnotcarrymasculineinformation;itisanunmarkedoptionby
defaultinSpanish,,itis
usuallyperceivedthattheunmarkedformscorrespondtooneparticular
genderandthatfemalesderivefromareincludedinmales(Liddicoat2011).
InSpain,Bengoechea(2006)foundtheuseofpluralfeminineasageneric
,this‘feminist’
optionseemstomarginalizeothersinthesamewaythatthemasculineforms
asfalsegenericsdo,andspeakerswouldbemovingfromapatriarchaltoa
matriarchaluseoflanguage.
Downloadedfrom-article-abstract/doi/,EGMinerLibraryuseron16May2019
FORUM3
Sincethespreadofdemandsongenderequity,diversity,andsocialjustice
(Pauwels2003;Sunderland2006;Lomotey2018)inrelationtoinclusivelan-
guage,twoparticularphenomenahavebeenobservedinSpanish:(i)theintro-
ductionofamarkedformwiththefemininemorphemeinitemswhichdidnot
haveitand(ii)theintroductionofsyntacticandmorphologicalvariationsto
identifymixed-gendergroups.
Concerningthefirstphenomenon,anounsuchas‘presidente’(president)is
thepresentparticipleoftheverb‘presidir’(topreside);therefore,the-nte
,historyshowsthatmostlymaleshave

inLatinAmerica,thissituationchangedwhenCristinaFerna´ndezdeKirchner
waspresidentofArgentinabetween2007and2015,afactwhichtriggeredthe
useof‘presidenta’,Mare
(2018)observesthatthischangeprovokeddebatesbetweenfeministsand
orthodoxacademics,butdidnotalterthedynamicsofeducationalinstitutions.

form,Mare(2018)notes,issyntacticduplicationthroughcoordination:‘todos
ytodas’(everybody)or‘los/lasdoctores/doctoras’(thedoctors).Althoughthis
optionhelpsvisibilizewomen,itbecomestedioustosustaininoralandwritten
communicationandcompromisesonelinguisticfeature:economy.
Furthermore,suchasyntacticduplicationisbinaryandthusheteronormative.
Asecondformistheuseofthesemioticsign‘@’toincludeallgendersand
avoidthe-oand-amorphemesasin‘******@s’(teachers).Theproblemisthat
thisoptionisonlypossibleinwritingasitdoesnothavephonologicalrealiza-
‘x’asin‘maestrxs’.Whilethis
signhasphonologicalrepresentation(pronouncedeither/s/or/ks/depending
onitsposition),itcannotbepronouncedwhenitisininterconsonantalpos-
,theuseof‘@’and‘x’amongothersmayberecognizedin
,Lagneaux(2017:6)observesthatstudentsat
theSchoolofJournalism(UniversidadNacionaldeLaPlata,Argentina)use
genderinclusivelanguageinacademicwritingassignof‘emancipacio´nescri-
tural’(writingemancipation).Similarly,officialdocumentanalysisshowsthat
guidelinesoninclusivelanguageagreedbyUruguayanmayors(Furtado2013)
andthejudiciarysysteminSpain(Rubio2016)haveincorporatedthethree
formsdescribedabove.
Thefourthformentailsthesubstitutionofboth-oand-afor-esothatwe
cansay‘lesmaestres’.Thisisaradicalchangeasitunmarksandneutralizes

options,thismorphologicalalternativecanbepronouncedandthechangeis
,itrequiresahigh
degreeofconsciousnessbecausesuchamorphologicalchangeimpactson
otherlevelsofthelanguageasasystem;thus,thesyntacticandphonological
levelsalsoneedtobeaccommodatedtoavoidsyntagmaticinconsistencies.
BecauseSpanishseemstobemorepermeabletothischangeinparticular,it
istheonewhichhasunleashedcontroversies(Lomotey2018;Mare2018),
Downloadedfrom-article-abstract/doi/,EGMinerLibraryuseron16May2019
4FORUM
and,asdescribedatthebeginningofthiscommentary,hasmadesuperintend-
entsawarethattheeducationalcommunitydemandsguidanceandaclear
stanceonallformsofgenderinclusivelanguage,andonthisfourthformin
particular.
EDUCATIONANDAPPLIEDLINGUISTICSMEET
Inthecontextofthiscommentary,wesuggesttworeasonsforthesuperin-
tendents’concerns:(i)theideologicalforcebehindlanguagechangeand(ii)
limitedsociolinguisticpreparationtoaddresssuchtopics.
Thequestionofideologyandpowerisinherenttolanguagechange(Holmes
2013).Weagreethatlanguageusersneedtofeelnamedbythelanguagethey
usemostly;-
porters,linguisticdistinctivenessisapowerfulidentifyingvalueandsomespe-
cificlanguagechangesarenotonlytothem,butalsotodetractors,axiologic.
Ontheonehand,thepromotionandacceptanceofthegenderinclusivemor-
pheme-emaybetakenasasignofprogressandculturalsensitivitytospeakers.
Conversely,itsrejectionorrelegationcouldbeasignofdiscrimination,repro-
ductionofoppressivepatriarchalpractices,andthedefenceofnormsandforms
-drivenideologicalrepresen-
tations(NarvajadeArnouxandDelValle2010)wherethesuperintendents
standastheyareawareofthesocio-educationalimplicationsoftheirdecisions.
Thesecondconcerniscriticalsinceauthoritiesareexpectedtoclarifythe
topicofinclusivelanguagefromasystemicstanceintheeducationaldomain,
notinthespeakers’,educationalauthoritiesmay
lackupdatedsociolinguisticargumentstoguidediscussionswithineducational
communities,andinstead,theyrelyoninternaltheories,personalbeliefs,and

between(lackof)professionalknowledgeandlanguagechangethatthere
surfacesagenuinenecessitytofacilitatetransdisciplinaryworkbetweenpeda-
gogyandappliedlinguistics(RoseandMcKinley2017).
Wheneducationalauthoritiesareawareoftheirlimitedpreparation,they
mayalsobeawarethattheircontext-responsivedecisionsmayimpactonlin-
guisticplanningandpolicyandresentthedialoguewithinthecommunitiesin

istooffertheirexpertise;thus,sincethatfirstmeeting,wehavesupportedthe
-hoursessionsin
whichwediscussedinclusivelanguageandtheneedtounderstandlanguage

meetings,wediscussedlanguagefromasystemicfunctionalperspectiveto
emphasizemeaning,function,andidentityoverform,andexplainedthelim-
itedpowerthattheRealAcademiaEspan˜olaactuallyhasonSpanishspeakers.
Wehavealsoofferedreadingmaterialandsuggestedthatthesuperintendents
canacceptformalcorrespondencewritteningenderinclusivelanguage,but
theycanchoosewhethertheirreplywillfeaturegenderinclusiveformsornot
Downloadedfrom-article-abstract/doi/,EGMinerLibraryuseron16May2019
FORUM5

participatedinschoolmeetingscalledbythesuperintendentstohelpthecom-
munitydevelophigherdegreesoflanguageawarenessdrawingonother
changesSpanishhasundergoneandshowingexamplesofnaturallyoccurring
,weencouragetheschoolcommunitytounderstand
languagechangeasaprocessfromanon-
presencehasbecomeabridgethathelpstheschoolcommunityreconcilepos-
itions,respectopinions,andcelebrateinclusion.
CONCLUSION
FollowingKramsch(2015),criticalincidentsonL1usemaybecomeacallfor
appliedlinguiststoimmersethemselvesinL1practicesthatma