little surprise

Anne Cuneo · Post by **Anne Cuneo** » 2007-07-06 02:19:26

It's fixed now. Just reload NWP.

So, are we girl excluded again?

ninjagame · Post by **ninjagame** » 2007-07-06 02:36:05

Anne,

I really don't want to be the one dragging this subject on and on but - I was afraid that finally someone would come up with this "solution". As a matter of fact, it has been used in the 80s and the 90s mostly in academic circles - but that's all that is to it. Its spreading was - and is - limited to academic communication and some leftwing newspapers. It's way short of being "accepted philologically by just about anyone". From a philological point of view which is not tainted by ideology, there would be severe doubts to be brought forward against it.
But - that's definitely not a subject that should be discussed in this forum.

Have a nice day!

- ninjagame

martinkerz · Post by **martinkerz** » 2007-07-06 03:39:52

Anne Cuneo wrote:
It's fixed now. Just reload NWP.
So, are we girl excluded again?

No, both forms are used now.

I had my own personal solution which I propose to everyone familliar with and sensitive for the problem. I call it the originator principle: If the speaking/writing person is female, she should use female plural forms. Men should proceed repectively.

Anne Cuneo · Post by **Anne Cuneo** » 2007-07-06 22:16:26

As a matter of fact, it has been used in the 80s and the 90s mostly in academic circles - but that's all that is to it. Its spreading was - and is - limited to academic communication and some leftwing newspapers.

I must be living in academic circles, among left-wing people (publishers of the german-speaking Swiss dailies included

), and in a time-gap, then… Interesting, I hadn't noticed.

PS. Personally, I couldn't care less, I don't need feminine endings to express my identity, in fact I hate forced feminins if the language does not use them spontaneously, and would never use BenützerIn and such myself. I was just explaining…