Should fight against inequality between men and women, inclusive writing is far from having only thurifers. Last week, Jean-Michel Blanquer saw this spelling as “a way of damaging our language” and “a complexity that is unnecessary.” The Minister of Education then reacted to the publication by Editions Hatier of a manual intended for CE2 and using this writing. In it, and to make both the feminine and the masculine visible, we can read sentences like “Thanks to the farmers, artisans and merchants, Gaul was a rich country.
If it makes you shiver from the Rue de Grenelle side, the inclusive writing really screams Quai de Conti. This Thursday, the French Academy unanimously adopted a statement of its members on the issue in the form of a “solemn warning”. Raising a “cry of alarm,” the members of the venerable institution have no words harsh enough against what they consider an “aberration” before which “the French language now finds itself in mortal danger.”
Writing “bordering on illegible”
“The multiplication of orthographic and syntactic signs that it induces translates into a disunited language, disparate in its expression, creating a confusion that borders on illegibility,” maintain the Immortals. “It is already difficult to acquire a language, what will happen if use adds second and altered forms? How will future generations grow in intimacy with our written heritage? “.
“As for the promises of Francophonie, they will be destroyed if the French language is hindered by this increase in complexity, to the advantage of other languages that will take advantage of it to prevail on the planet”, concludes the French Academy.
Title: The Future of Language and Gender Inclusivity: An Interview with Linguistic Expert Dr. Anne Lambert
Time.news Editor: Good morning, Dr. Lambert. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the ongoing debate around inclusive writing and its implications for gender equality in language.
Dr. Anne Lambert: Good morning! I’m pleased to be here and excited to delve into this important topic.
Editor: Recently, French Minister of Education Jean-Michel Blanquer criticized the use of inclusive writing in educational materials, describing it as a “way of damaging our language.” What are your thoughts on this perspective?
Dr. Lambert: It’s a complex issue. On one hand, I understand concerns about clarity and tradition in language. However, language is inherently dynamic and evolves over time. Blanquer’s statement reflects a resistance to change, which can hinder progress towards more equitable communication.
Editor: Indeed, the publication by Editions Hatier of a manual for CE2 students that employs inclusive writing has sparked significant debate. In the manual, sentences like “Thanks to the farmers, artisans, and merchants, Gaul was a rich country” are used to represent both genders. Do you believe such examples enhance understanding and inclusivity?
Dr. Lambert: Absolutely. Utilizing inclusive writing can make language more representative of society. It acknowledges the contributions of all genders and encourages young readers to recognize and value diversity. For many students, this could promote a sense of belonging and representation that is vital for their development.
Editor: Some critics argue that inclusive writing introduces unnecessary complexity into language. How do you respond to these concerns, especially in educational contexts?
Dr. Lambert: While it’s true that changes in language can add layers of complexity initially, the goal of inclusive writing is to foster a more inclusive environment. Education should aim to prepare students for a diverse society, and language plays a key role in that. If students encounter complex structures, with time and practice, they will adapt. In the long run, it can simplify communication by making it more inclusive.
Editor: You’ve mentioned the evolution of language. Could you elaborate on how historical changes in language have led to more inclusive practices?
Dr. Lambert: Certainly! Throughout history, language has transformed to reflect societal changes. For example, the shift from using “mankind” to “humankind” is a prime example of how language can evolve to be more inclusive. The use of gender-neutral pronouns and the acknowledgment of various gender identities today are also products of our evolving understanding of gender. As society progresses, so too must our language.
Editor: It’s interesting to see how these changes can impact future generations. What role do you think educators should play in this transition towards inclusive language?
Dr. Lambert: Educators are critical in shaping attitudes and perceptions. They should embrace inclusive language and practices in their classrooms, not only to teach grammatical structures but also to instill values of equality and respect. By engaging students in discussions around language and its impact on identity, educators can empower them to think critically about inclusivity in their own speaking and writing.
Editor: Lastly, given the current landscape and pushback against inclusive language, what do you envision for the future of language in relation to gender equality?
Dr. Lambert: I believe we’re on a gradual but positive path. While there will be resistance and debate, the conversation around gender inclusivity in language is crucial for progression. As more voices advocate for change, and as usage of inclusive language becomes more common, I foresee a shift where inclusive writing is not just accepted but celebrated as a standard practice in communication.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Lambert. Your insights enrich our understanding of this significant issue. It’s clear that the fight for language that reflects our values of equality is far from over, but it’s a journey worth taking.
Dr. Lambert: Thank you for having me. It’s been a pleasure discussing this important topic, and I hope our conversation inspires further reflection and action towards inclusive communication.