Gender Neutrality...
fra Kalantir,2011 10 15
Meldinger: 162
Språk: English
razlem (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 03:45:16
robbkvasnak:One of the people on here invented a new language. It is absolutely volapükish - a nightmare to learn in its attempt to use words from about 50 different languages in altered forms.Does Esperanto not do the same thing?
Fun tangent/story- some of the words in my language helped me recognize several words in Arabic. Dare I say- it made learning Arabic easier.
marcuscf (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 04:47:40
Are men discriminated because they have no dedicated suffix?
Or are these things simply unrelated, and the discrimination is just in our heads?
marcuscf (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 05:03:06
darkweasel:pravemarcuscf:And -end.
Two new affixes have been added to Esperantoso far: mis- and -acx- (*).
And -ism-
So we have 4 new affixes
Maybe -icx- is just around the corner?
PS.: Bovicxo/Bovino looks and sounds much better than virbovo/bovino. We even could have homicxo/homino. Viricxo, however looks silly to me.
barat (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 05:27:50
flipe (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 05:31:46
marcuscf:..Or are these things simply unrelated, and the discrimination is just in our heads?These things are simply unrelated, and the discrimination is just in 'they' heads!
ceigered (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 07:02:17
flipe:Discrimination, and the lack of its perception, are always things that the human mind comes up with, so of course it's in their headsmarcuscf:..Or are these things simply unrelated, and the discrimination is just in our heads?These things are simply unrelated, and the discrimination is just in 'they' heads!
Anyway, my oposition to sexists forms is not that I care particularly about the other sex, but that I find it strange to refer to one in a completely different way to the other, being a bit of an egalitarian myself (but not in a forced way, which is why I don't support any overhaul-movement, only gradual, logical changes).
-----
One problem I've already noticed - if some people are using things like "edzo" gender neutrally, how can we tell them apart from people who aren't?
I saw on the EO forums a male refer to their "edzo" - but was their edzo a male or female? The traditional analysis is "male", but you'd expect a male to marry a *female*, but then again gay rights etc make it extremely hard to discern these sorts of things.
Thus the confusion!
-----
Ultimately, this isn't really a discussion about major, core-affecting reforms. Gender isn't that widespread an issue, it's only a problem with a small range of words (thank god). The fact that it's perceived indicates it's something worthy of being discussed (diskutinda
)Robbkvasnak sums it up well - the solution is in a gradual change that on the small scale looks insignificant but the big picture is a change in thinking and methodology.
-----
Razlem:Evolution is change over a long period of time. A reform happens relatively quickly and implies a conscious decision by a person or group of people.Even easier (for me
):evolution: Process of coming out of the cycle
e(x) (out (of)) + volv- (roll/tumble) + -tion (act/process of)
reform: Changing the form, appearance or structure all over again.
re- (again, back-to, return, intensifier) + form (shape/figure/form/structure).
There's a slight overlap between the two, when a reform contributes to the overall evolution of a product, but such isn't really a reform as much as it's a harnessed, directed evolution.
ceigered (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 07:03:50
Barat: If you don't count the gradual conversion of country names in -UJO to country names in -IO, then maybe it hasn't.This actually seems to be in reverse from what I see. At least, there's some particularly strong supporters of -ujo, more so than I see people like myself who support -io.
Which goes to show how Esperanto's always torn between various perceived traditions
johmue (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 07:28:31
Kalantir:In that article, it states that some people have started using the suffix -iĉ as a masculine equivalent of -in. But I was just curious how many Esperanto speakers would understand me if I were to use it? It seems like a good idea to me and I'm rather curious why this wasn't a feature to begin with.First of all: Become a fluent Esperanto speaker and get to know how the Esperanto community works, before you suggest changes.
How come everyone hasn't begun using it? Is there a valid reason not to?
Regarding the -iĉ- sufikso, I know a group of people, who are using it as well as the pronoun "ri" in their everyday language. I sometimes call this "Hernusanda dialekto".
From a logical point of view, to me the symmetry of -iĉ-; -in- is indeed better than the existing system, also a genderneutral pronoun like "ri" would be nice. But one should be aware of the change this would mean to the language. Proposers of the -iĉ- suffix often underestimate it.
If your Esperanto reading capability is sufficient, read the section in PMEG about it: http://bertilow.com/pmeg/vortfarado/neoficialaj_...
I do recommend not to use all this, unless you want to derail conversaitons to linguistic-political discussions about sexism.
Johannes
ceigered (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 08:34:17
johmue (Å vise profilen) 2011 10 17 09:27:34
ceigered:Iĉ is at least well known though, better known than ri from what I've seem.True, but nevertheless -iĉ- is causing more confusion in conversations in my experience, because patriĉo, viriĉo, knabiĉo are rimarkebally different to patro, viro, knabo. In contrast to "ri" which sounds quite similar to "li" and "ŝi" if spoken fluently fast.
"Ĉu vi vidis Anjon?"
"Ne, mi pensas ke ri ankoraŭ dormas."
as opposed to
"Ne, mi pensas ke ŝi ankoraŭ dormas."