斯洛伐克语、捷克语和波兰语使用者对性别包容性语言的态度

M. Ivanová, Miroslava Kyseľová
{"title":"斯洛伐克语、捷克语和波兰语使用者对性别包容性语言的态度","authors":"M. Ivanová, Miroslava Kyseľová","doi":"10.2478/jazcas-2023-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, the various arguments that have been presented with respect to usage of generic masculine forms and pair/feminine forms are discussed and analysed. The source of the data is provided by a questionnaire carried out in October 2019, including a sample of answers and comments from Slovak, Czech and Polish respondents. In the study, two dominant views on generic masculine forms, arbitrary and semantic, are introduced and discussed against empirical findings from many experiments and studies. The material from the questionnaire is qualitatively analysed with respect to the axiological reactions of the respondents. The language attitudes are further classified into eight categories: representation, offensiveness, addressing, economy, textual qualities, language naturalness, tradition and ideological markedness. The attitudes of participants from both “camps” are quoted to illustrate the argumentation process yielding to the acceptance or rejection of forms substantiating gender-inclusive language.","PeriodicalId":262732,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Linguistics/Jazykovedný casopis","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attitudes Towards Gender-Inclusive Language Among Slovak, Czech, and Polish Speakers\",\"authors\":\"M. Ivanová, Miroslava Kyseľová\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/jazcas-2023-0015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this paper, the various arguments that have been presented with respect to usage of generic masculine forms and pair/feminine forms are discussed and analysed. The source of the data is provided by a questionnaire carried out in October 2019, including a sample of answers and comments from Slovak, Czech and Polish respondents. In the study, two dominant views on generic masculine forms, arbitrary and semantic, are introduced and discussed against empirical findings from many experiments and studies. The material from the questionnaire is qualitatively analysed with respect to the axiological reactions of the respondents. The language attitudes are further classified into eight categories: representation, offensiveness, addressing, economy, textual qualities, language naturalness, tradition and ideological markedness. The attitudes of participants from both “camps” are quoted to illustrate the argumentation process yielding to the acceptance or rejection of forms substantiating gender-inclusive language.\",\"PeriodicalId\":262732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Linguistics/Jazykovedný casopis\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Linguistics/Jazykovedný casopis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/jazcas-2023-0015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Linguistics/Jazykovedný casopis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jazcas-2023-0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,讨论和分析了关于一般男性形式和对/女性形式的使用的各种论点。数据来源是2019年10月进行的一份问卷,其中包括斯洛伐克、捷克和波兰受访者的回答和评论样本。在本研究中,介绍和讨论了两种主流的男性一般形式的观点,任意和语义,并从许多实验和研究的实证结果。从调查问卷的材料是定性分析相对于应答者的价值论反应。语言态度又分为表征性、冒犯性、称呼性、经济性、文本性、语言自然性、传统性和意识形态标记性八类。本文引用了来自两个“阵营”的参与者的态度来说明论证过程,以接受或拒绝构成性别包容性语言的形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Attitudes Towards Gender-Inclusive Language Among Slovak, Czech, and Polish Speakers
Abstract In this paper, the various arguments that have been presented with respect to usage of generic masculine forms and pair/feminine forms are discussed and analysed. The source of the data is provided by a questionnaire carried out in October 2019, including a sample of answers and comments from Slovak, Czech and Polish respondents. In the study, two dominant views on generic masculine forms, arbitrary and semantic, are introduced and discussed against empirical findings from many experiments and studies. The material from the questionnaire is qualitatively analysed with respect to the axiological reactions of the respondents. The language attitudes are further classified into eight categories: representation, offensiveness, addressing, economy, textual qualities, language naturalness, tradition and ideological markedness. The attitudes of participants from both “camps” are quoted to illustrate the argumentation process yielding to the acceptance or rejection of forms substantiating gender-inclusive language.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信