this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2023
76 points (84.5% liked)

Deutschland

6711 readers
1 users here now

Sammelbecken für deutsche Kartoffeln und ihre Geschichten über Deutschland.

Nicht zu verwechseln mit !dach und !chad.

Regeln

Bundesländer:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Oftmals wird ja argumentiert dass bei der maskulinen Form die weibliche miteinbezogen ist, umgekehrt aber regt es auf. Also kann es nicht ganz unbedeutend sein.

Ich finde es einen spannend Denkansatz und die Reaktion zeigt dass darüber durchaus gesprochen werden muss.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Von dem Problem abgesehen, dass es noch schwieriger sein dürfte, Begriffe abzuschaffen, die es schon gibt, als neue zu erfinden - mindestens eine Generation an Frauen müsste sich damit abfinden, sprachlich ausgeschlossen zu werden - wird ziemlich genau diese Idee in dem Paper diskutiert. Hier der relevante Absatz (plus etwas Kontext, um zu verstehen, wie argumentiert wird) (TL;DR am Ende):

Moreover, Stahlberg and colleagues (2007) have noted that languages that create significant gender distinctions (i.e., grammatical gender languages) are often thought to lead to greater sexism, while languages that do not distinguish grammatical gender (i.e., genderless languages) may on the surface appear less sexist. However, as they note:

All language types… could in principle be used in a symmetrical and gender-fair way: In grammatical gender languages the feminine could be used consistently in referring to female persons and the masculine in reference to males. In natural gender languages symmetry could be achieved, above all, by the consistent use of sex-marking pronouns. And in genderless languages sex can be disregarded symmetrically (Stahlberg et al. 2007; p. 167).

However, as we have seen from the above examples, this is rarely the case, and all grammatical groups display gender asymmetry, as it is expressed in language through lexical structures, generic terms, social use of language, and gender related word structures. Despite the fact that gender neutral conventions can be developed for languages within all three grammatical groups, this does not imply it is equally easy to address gendered grammar conventions across these groups. In fact, Stahlberg and colleagues (2007) note that grammatical gender languages (like German) involve much more effort to create a gender neutral configuration—compared to natural gender languages like English—because such reconfigurations require changing a large number of personal nouns in addition to pronouns. Furthermore, although it might appear that genderless languages already exhibit a gender fair grammatical style, there is evidence that gender neutral nouns and pronouns can be interpreted with an implicit male bias (Stahlberg et al. 2007). Take, for example, research showing that different solutions to the use of masculine generics are not equally effective in natural gender languages like English. Several studies have shown that replacing masculine generics with gender-symmetrical terms, like he/she, led to greater visualization of female actors compared to gender neutral terms, like the singular they (Hyde 1984; Switzer 1990).

Kurz gesagt: Bewusstes Gendern führt zu mehr konzeptueller Gleichberechtigung als Generika und genderlose Sprache. Weiterer Kontext nachzulesen auf Seite 5 des verlinkten Dokuments, bzw. S. 271 in der Seitennummerierung des Papers.