{"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}
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.