Non-sexist Spanish policies: an attempt bound to fail?

Bengoechea, Mercedes

doi:10.1080/14664208.2010.541389

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The analysis was carried out on morphological, lexical, syntactical, semantic and text levels, and the occurrences were computed quantitatively and presented in diagrams, where a positive development can be observed over time. In comparison to Velasco et al (2009), Bengoechea (2011) focuses more on qualitative analysis of causes and on how the Spanish language policy action against sexist language in 2007 could have succeeded than on systematic quantitative analyses, despite including an analysis of legal documents. Teso and Crolley (2013) adopted a hybrid approach.…”

Section: Methodology Concerning Corpus Datamentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Not unlike Velasco et al (2009), Bengoechea (2011) and Teso and Crolley (2013), I believe that evaluations are best carried out by studying authentic documents in relevant sectors and relating the documents to policy in order to determine whether a change in the desired direction has taken place. And in keeping with Velasco et al (2009), I compare texts over time; specifically, I am interested in texts from before and after the launch of the language policy action (October 2007).…”

Section: Data Of the Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…time in legal documents, and concludes that a positive development has taken place, but that sexist usage is still widespread and coexists with non-sexist language (Bengoechea, 2011). Gender-based linguistic reforms were also discussed in the third of these studies, with a focus on documents from the UN, the EU and the Council of Europe (Teso & Crolley, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

To evaluate corpus planning. A case of a Swedish language policy action concerning terms for disability

Vogel

2019

Current Issues in Language Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corpus planning has attracted attention ever since Deborah Cameron's seminal Verbal Hygiene (1995). However, evaluations of corpus planning aimed at addressing linguistic discrimination have been surprisingly scarce. Because corpus planning costs energy, time and money, evaluations are important for future actions. This study discusses how an evaluation of corpus planning can be conducted by performing a detailed, critical and empirical analysis of a limited Swedish language policy action aimed at addressing linguistic discrimination. The results show that, although the policy action was successful in terms of lexical change, the change was superficial, since the desired shift in focus, from individual/group to environment, occurred to only a very limited extent in the selected texts. From this analysis, I argue that there are three significant matters to attend to when evaluating corpus planning for these situations. The first is that a meaningful corpus should be created, preferably one comprising symmetrical texts from both before and after implementation of the policy. Additionally, the research questions that are formulated should be narrow enough to be operational. Finally, quantitative and qualitative methods should be combined to ensure a broad understanding of the outcomes of the corpus planning.

show abstract

Section: Methodology Concerning Corpus Datamentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Data Of the Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

To evaluate corpus planning. A case of a Swedish language policy action concerning terms for disability

Vogel

2019

Current Issues in Language Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The recommendations for non-sexist use of Spanish summarised by Pauwels (1998), Nissen (2002) and Bengoechea (2008) have been accompanied in Spain by a series of rules and regulations-among them an organic law-which initially encouraged and subsequently obliged the use of non-sexist language in various fields, basically the government/legal field and the media. This phenomenon can therefore be considered to be a fully fledged case of linguistic policy, which we have described as being in need of effective means of implementation (Bengoechea, 2011).…”

Section: Introduction: Linguistic Attitudes and Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although, on the other hand, this appears to be irrefutable proof of the spread of their use(Bengoechea, 2000(Bengoechea, , 2008(Bengoechea, , 2011.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes of University Students to Some Verbal Anti-Sexist Forms

Bengoechea¹,

Simón²

2014

OJML

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After more than two decades of non-sexist linguistic policies in Spain, a survey was carried out to evaluate the positive or negative attitude of almost 500 students from two Madrid universities to the most controversial verbal forms advocated in Spanish non-sexist linguistic policies: 1) the use of @ (as in alumn@s [students]); 2) the use of dual gender (as in alumnos y alumnas [studentsmasc and students-fem]); 3) the use of feminine terms for some women's professional titles and occupations (i.e. ingeniera [engineer-fem], bedela [caretaker-fem], arquitecta [architect-fem], médica [physician-fem], aparejadora [quantity surveyor-fem], gerenta [manager-fem], perita [expert-fem], cancillera* [chancellor-fem]); 4) the use of non-sexed collective nouns (as in profesorado [teaching staff]). Our aims were to know to what degree these resources were accepted by highly-educated young people, whether differences exist between the attitudes of men and women with respect to these forms, and which of these uses was the best accepted and which the least. Various examples of these non-sexist uses were presented to university students, who were asked to make a pronouncement on the feeling which these gave them or whether they used them. Our study concluded that the @ symbol and collective nouns are widely accepted among the student community. The dual gender seems to be also accepted, although greater vacillation was seen and sometimes the levels of rejection or indifference are higher. Nevertheless, of the four uses studied, the one which appears to provoke the greatest hesitation, vacillation or even opposition is the use of the feminine for some names of professions. In general, the number of female students in favour of the four features studied exceeds the number of male students.

show abstract

Non‐Sexist Language Use

Weatherall¹

2016

The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Gender and Sexuality Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non‐sexist language use is about changing and raising awareness about the unequal ways language represents women and men. There is a lot of variability in the ways that gender is encoded across different languages. As a result the strategies to promote non‐sexist language differ. Linguistic activists have employed a range of creative strategies to highlight gender issues. For example, feminists coined herstory to highlight male dominance in historical accounts and queer activists have promoted terms such as female bodied as a way of challenging a dominant assumption that gender identity matches biological sex.

show abstract

Non-sexist Spanish policies: an attempt bound to fail?

Cited by 26 publications

References 22 publications

To evaluate corpus planning. A case of a Swedish language policy action concerning terms for disability

To evaluate corpus planning. A case of a Swedish language policy action concerning terms for disability

Attitudes of University Students to Some Verbal Anti-Sexist Forms

Non‐Sexist Language Use

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About