Linguistic inclusivity in the context of the Ecuadorian national version of the Spanish language

Demianova Polina Ivanovna ORCID: 0000-0001-9698-2835 Lecturer; Institute of Foreign Languages; Patrice Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University of Russia Postgraduate student; Institute of Foreign Languages; Patrice Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University of Russia 6 Miklukho-Maklaya str., Moscow, 117198, Russia demianova_pi@pfur.ru Other publications by this author

Currently, the topic of linguistic inclusivity attracts the attention of many domestic and foreign researchers in various fields of linguistics. Scientists are actively discussing the development of this phenomenon and its impact on the linguistic norm, which is reinforced by the current need of society to create the most inclusive linguistic system within a particular national variant of one language ^[1]. Thus, the Republic of Ecuador is one of the Latin American states where the issue of gender inclusivity is becoming increasingly important for local society every year, which follows from the increasing number of various social movements and initiatives aimed at fighting for women's rights ^[2]. An important role in this process is also played by the understanding that "the adaptation of language for inclusive communication contributes to the strengthening of a single cultural space" ^{[3, p. 62]}. The described social transformations contribute to the process of changing some language practices in the region, transforming language policy in general and correcting everyday interpersonal communication in particular. In this regard, the Ecuadorian national version of Spanish is unique, since the Government of the Republic seeks to develop in this direction, adapting the local national version of Spanish to modern requirements of gender inclusivity, taking into account not only the requests of the monolingual population who speak only Spanish, but also taking into account the needs of bilingual representatives of 14 autochthonous communities who also speak Quichua, Shuar languages and others ^[4].

Considering the problem of linguistic inclusivity, it seems necessary first of all to turn to the theoretical side of the issue and analyze the main concepts related to this topic. Thus, the very definition of "linguistic inclusivity" is of great interest. Obviously, the word inclusivity is an Anglicism from the word inclusion and has acquired such derivatives in Russian as inclusive, inclusion, etc. According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the first use of the word inclusion was recorded back in the 17th century, and it was understood as "an action aimed at including a part of something in the general." Since then, its definition has changed somewhat, and the word has acquired a number of meanings; in particular, Merriam Webster offers the following interpretation: "the action or practice of integrating and accommodating people who have historically been excluded from society." This fact may be directly related to the changes taking place around the world that relate to the problems of inclusivity and equality.

In turn, "linguistic inclusivity" as a term originates in issues of gender equality and is a relatively new concept; for example, only in 2016 the Linguistic Society of America created the "Guidelines for Inclusive Language". At the moment, scientists believe that, despite its relative novelty, this term is actively gaining popularity ^{[5; 6]}.

To establish the principles of the functioning of an inclusive language, O. A. Leontovich conducted a study that confirmed the presence of a number of mechanisms in it, namely:

1) the use of euphemisms;

2) exclusion of words that may be interpreted negatively in certain contexts;

3) avoiding stereotypes;

4) the appearance of new meanings in existing words ^[7].

As for the Spanish language, it considers the problem of linguistic inclusivity as "the expression of one's thoughts orally and in writing without discrimination of any gender and without maintaining gender stereotypes" ^{[8, p. 29; 9]}. In almost all Spanish-speaking countries, inclusive language is promoted both at the government level and by educational, civic and international organizations such as the United Nations and UNESCO, as well as activists. Thanks to them, "guidelines" on the elimination of discrimination in language were developed (Fundéu de la RAE (2019); Instituto Andaluz de la Mujer (2019); Spanish for Social Justice (2020)) ^[10].

A certain difficulty in the formation and promotion of the most inclusive language is introduced by the fact that Spanish has a clearly defined system in which nouns belong either to the feminine gender (as a rule, having the ending -a) or to the masculine gender (ending -o). Despite some exceptions to this rule, it is true for most nouns. According to the researchers, the problem lies in the fact that the "neutral", perceived as a universal variant, is precisely the masculine form ^{[11; 12]}. Thus, the masculine gender is called unmarked and is used in relation to both men and women, while the feminine gender is marked, since it serves only to designate women ^{[2, p. 2]}.

Based on this, four main ways to make the language more inclusive have been proposed:

1) Using a gender-neutral ending. This includes replacing traditional gender endings such as -o and -a with the ending -e (todos and todas can be converted to todes).

2) Duplication of nouns. In official contexts, expressions such as los y las estudiantes or todos y todas are often used to include people of both sexes in the dialogue.

3) The use of unmarked terms. Instead of the words profesores (M.R.), which translates as "teachers", we can say "teaching staff" (cuerpo docente), instead of the word "students" (alumnos, M.R.) – "student collective" (cuerpo estudiantil).

4) The use of neologisms. Some Spanish-speaking regions have started using pronouns such as elle or ellx instead of the gender-labeled ellos and ellas.

Of the options presented above, the use of gender-neutral endings and duplication have become the most widespread. The first method has been widely adopted in the educational environment, although, as noted, it cannot always be used by speakers, since it requires a higher level of abstraction ^[13]. The second method is adopted in legislative and administrative contexts, but is also criticized ^[14]. Scientists point out that duplication by its nature contradicts the principle of saving speech efforts, which usually prevails in language ^{[15; 16]}. There are also researchers who believe that "if these principles were applied in their strictest understanding, communication would be impossible" ^[14]. Often, the following variants are also found on the letter: maestros/as and even maestr@s ^[17]. However, it is obvious that they are not reproducible in oral speech and therefore do not solve the problem.

The situation in Ecuador is further complicated by the fact that, in addition to discrimination against women as such, the problem of inequality especially affects women from among the indigenous population ^[18]. The works of the authors considering this issue say that the struggle of Ecuadorian women for their rights began a long time ago, but only in 1997. she bore the first fruits. It was then that the National Council of Women, or CNW (Consejo Nacional de la Mujer, CONAMU), a government body responsible for ensuring gender rights, was established ^[19]. So far, an important indicator of the existence of inequality is the total number of working hours (paid and unpaid): if women work an average of 77.5 hours per week, then for men this indicator decreases to 59.9 hours; in rural areas this gap is even greater ^[20]. But the total working hours of indigenous women are higher not only compared to men, but also with other women ^[21]. Consequently, there is still significant inequality in this issue, which needs to be eliminated at the governmental level through organizations such as the NCW, as well as at the linguistic level through the promotion and widespread dissemination of an inclusive language.

In order to achieve the highest possible level of awareness on the issue of gender inclusivity of the national version of the Spanish language spoken in the territory of the Republic of Ecuador, a population survey consisting of 7 questions was conducted. The respondents were selected according to the following criteria: 1) age over 18 years; 2) higher education. A total of 33 people took part in the survey – 19 women and 14 men. The following are the questions and answers:

1. How do you rate your awareness of gender inclusivity in language?

A) Very high.

B) High.

C) Average.

D) Low.

E) Very low.

2. Do you use gender-inclusive language in your daily life?

A) Yes, often.

B) Sometimes.

C) Rarely.

D) Never.

3. What forms of gender inclusivity do you use or hear? (you can select several options)

A) Using @ (for example, tod@s).

B) Using x (for example, todxs).

C) Using -e (for example, todes).

D) The use of neutral terms (for example, personas instead of hombres and mujeres).

E) I do not use gender-inclusive language.

4. How do you feel about the use of gender-inclusive language in official documents and the media?

A) I fully support it.

B) I support it.

C) Neutral.

D) I do not support it.

E) Totally against it.

5. Do you think that using a gender-inclusive language is important for achieving gender equality?

A) Yes, it is very important.

B) Yes, it is important.

C) I don't know.

D) No, it doesn't matter.

E) No, it doesn't matter at all.

6. In your opinion, what is the main reason for the lack of gender inclusivity in the language? (you can select several options)

A) An established language norm.

B) Lack of awareness.

C) Resistance to change.

D) Lack of support from government agencies.

7. Do you think it is necessary to make changes to the language in order to increase its gender inclusiveness?

A) Yes, absolutely.

B) It is possible, but not urgent.

C) No, no changes are required.

The data obtained formed the basis for the following graph:

Fig. 1. Distribution of responses to the request according to gender

The survey results revealed noticeable differences between men and women in the perception and use of gender-inclusive language. An analysis of the data showed that women are more aware of the importance of gender inclusivity: 68% of female respondents say that the use of gender-inclusive vocabulary is crucial in achieving gender equality, while only 50% of men agree with this. Women are also more likely to use gender-inclusive language in everyday life: 32% compared to 14% of men. There is also a clear division on the issue of supporting language changes in order to achieve a greater level of inclusivity: 78% of women believe that this is necessary, compared with men, among whom only half agree. These results indicate the existence of gender differences in attitudes towards language practices.

The study highlights the importance of developing linguistic inclusivity in Ecuadorian society. The survey presented by you demonstrates that women are more likely than men to realize the importance of gender-inclusive language, which reflects their concern about gender equality.

The proposed ways of introducing an inclusive language are periodically criticized; however, they can also open up new opportunities for increasing inclusivity, especially among younger generations and in educational institutions where new language norms are emerging.

Thus, the study highlights the need for an integrated approach to promoting linguistic inclusivity in the Republic of Ecuador and demonstrates the importance of taking into account the gender and cultural characteristics of the region in the framework of the introduction of new language practices so that they become an integral part of everyday communication and contribute to increasing gender equality.