I’ll go ahead and let my point stand.
Carry on if you are sufficiently impressed with your moral superiority
Sociopolitical is just your standard left vs right screaming matches. Pre-allo arguing is much more interesting 😉
That's exactly how I feel, even though I have only been on this forum for a day!
Indeed
My pal Homeskool described its usage in the essay to me.
I don’t know...I ended each paragraph with a cliffhanger to lead in to the next one...pretty cliche but reads fantastically...
Nothing controversial or bad about using "Latinx," its just like saying "white" or "black." If its a community with which you identify, not using that term would be terrible.
I used Latinx constantly in my primary and secondaries. Don't think it's been a problem.
Genuine question, what’s wrong with just saying Latinos? Isn’t that the Spanish term for all encompassing? Like...Wouldn’t the most accurate name for a community be the one that most closely identifies with the heritage or original language? LATINX Just seems like a Anglicized version of something that didn’t need it? Or am I missing something…
Those changes are coming from people who are native speakers. Americans don't have a monopoly on inclusive language.
What does it imply when the suffix for the masculine form is also the suffix for the neutral form? How come the suffix for the feminine form isn't also the suffix for the neutral form?
Excellent! Thank you for letting me know! How would it be pronounced in Spanish? When I read it I read it as Latin space X and it just sounds funny, would love to know how to pronounce the proper term.
Lah-TEEN-ex.
Just like there are people that argue that gender doesn't belong in the english language or that there should be gender neutral options, there are those that argue it doesn't belong in the spanish language, or simarly would prefer gender neutral options. Generally in Spanish the masculine form of an adjective is the same as the mixed-gender form (so like you said, latino could refer to a man or a person without specifying gender). However, introducing gender neutral vocabulary is a movement that exists in Latin America, but like most liberal movements related to gender, it's stronger in the U.S.
So emphasis on the een* part and the X is more like a soft X? Along the lines of ecs? We really need a phonetic alphabet LOL
Lol well I can give you the International Phonetic Alphabet spelling if my keyboard had the proper characters.
I'm not commenting on the actual legitimacy of having a gender neutral form for Latino. I am simply explaining what has been formed. Frankly, I am big into linguistics and know that these purposeful, orchestrated changes to a language are largely ineffectual. Again, that is not a commentary on whether a gender neutral form for personal nouns should or shouldn't be the case. Just that from a linguistic, scientific perspective, it does not work; native speakers most of the time don't adopt these changes consciously, especially when they go against the fundamental structure of the language as Latinx does in spanish and gender neutral pronouns do in English.
For spoken lexical and grammatical changes you're definitely right, but don't written lexical, grammatical, and orthographical changes tend to come top-down, as in from the upper/educated class or academia?
English may just be a weird example, but the reason we have Cow v Beef or Pig v Pork is because of the peasants vs the royals using different words for different things....so I don't think that is always the case.
The entities that institute those changes are doing basically the same thing as the social progressives who are trying to introduce new pronouns and terms like Latinx. Language change is organic and the type of change that catches is almost never structurally and intentionally employed. The main propogators of change in language are young people, often female. And these changes eventually become legitimately grounded in the grammar of a language, both spoken and written. Even the use of "like" as a vocal pause/filler has a very systematic and grammatical way that it is used. Eg. "I like have to like get into like médical school". All of the "like"s in this sentence follow an intuitive system. Compare that to if you heard somebody say "I have like to get into medical like school", a native speaker would likely (hehe) interpret that as someone who is just learning English trying to parrot Englishisms that they've noticed.
What does this mean? If I interpreted it correctly, you mean that these gendered languages aren't changing in respect to gender?
Ask the people who came up with Spanish.
Weird sentiment. Native speakers (like both of us, I assume) came up with it. You don't have to like it, but let's not pretend it's been foisted on us by a woke elite
Again, Spanish speakers came up with the term. It is not a particularly novel idea (not Latinx, but other third gender language changes) in other Spanish-speaking countries
My understanding is that the origins of the word are murky. Merriam-Webster has no mention of where it originated.
www.merriam-webster.com
Yup, big digression. But I think you misunderstand me. There are native Spanish speakers who are American by birth. The two aren't mutually exclusive. They don't have less of a claim to the language.My understanding is that the origins of the word are murky. Merriam-Webster has no mention of where it originated.
'Latinx' And Gender Inclusivity
How do you pronounce this more inclusive word?
And then there's this:
Latinx is a group identity used exclusively in the United States. People in Latin America do not self-identify as Latinxs, unless they move there.
The term Latinx emerged from American Spanish in the early 21st century,
Latinx - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Ahhh, we Americans. Patronistically thinking we know better than the natives.
But we digress.
Regardless of where you think the term latinx comes from, gender-neutral speech in spanish is not a specifically american phenomen. Hell the mexican government released a whole freaking manual with recommendations on how to modify your speech to be more gender neutral. As far as I remember it doesnt ever talk about Latinx (because that term is generally american as far as i know) but it does explicitly say things like the use of masculine grammar to represent mixed-gender groups is NOT neutral nor inclusive, and should be avoidedMy understanding is that the origins of the word are murky. Merriam-Webster has no mention of where it originated.
'Latinx' And Gender Inclusivity
How do you pronounce this more inclusive word?
And then there's this:
Latinx is a group identity used exclusively in the United States. People in Latin America do not self-identify as Latinxs, unless they move there.
The term Latinx emerged from American Spanish in the early 21st century,
Latinx - Wikipedia
Ahhh, we Americans. Patronistically thinking we know better than the natives.
But we digress.
There is only one *correct* interpretation of drinking the kool-aid.
edited to 'one cOrReCt way'
No, it’s the whole reason this thread was created.
