Infamous women are on the agenda again. This is due to the decision of the Supreme Court regarding the LGBT movement, which is widespread in the media (the International LGBT Social Movement is considered extremist and is prohibited on the territory of the Russian Federation).
“Participants in the movement are united through a specific language (the use of potentially feminine words such as leader, director, writer, psychologist),” the material says.
I would like to point out that the authenticity of the document has not been officially confirmed. However, this was not denied either. This seems to give a clue.
Let me remind you what we’re talking about. Feminitives are words that refer to women. As a rule, they are created from masculine dictionaries using special suffixes.
Let me emphasize this: “Masculine” does not mean “male.” Gender is just a grammatical category here. Therefore, the word “student” means a person studying at a university. It can be both a boy and a girl. However, the word “student” clearly indicates the female gender. The same goes for the doctor, the teacher, the director. In the Russian language, there is a norm that such words indicate a profession, regardless of the gender of the person.
In the late 2010s, Russian feminists decided that such language practices did not reflect women’s contribution to the country’s economy. Activists found new feminists to remedy the situation.
The method chosen was clearly disrespectful of established norms. Instead of using the ready-made nomina feminina known in the Russian language (e.g. doctor’s wife, writer’s wife, school principal), they invented new forms. Words were formed mainly using the -k- suffix: doctor, writer, director. This hurt the ears: normally the feminine is formed with the help of -ka when the previous syllable is stressed. For example, the same student. However, this did not bother women’s rights activists.
Runet was drowned in irreconcilable disputes on the subject. The conservative part of society met this innovation with extreme rejection. And then… he himself began to actively use words like “writer”. True, only in relation to the women activists themselves. Of course, in a sarcastic tone.
However – this is my personal amateur observation and does not claim to be the absolute truth – omissions gradually decrease over time. Even in the speeches of adherents of “traditional values”. Including respectable family men, churchgoers and patriotic people. That is, those who cannot be suspected of belonging to LGBT individuals. Of course, we didn’t hold a candle.
What happened?
Here you need to understand how the language system works. To explain this, I’ll tell you about the Russian forest (what? yes!). The fact is that our Russian forest is almost as resilient as the Russian language. It is constantly threatened by something – either fires or bark beetles. In general, they also need to be saved. But how? Russian ecologists have a good theory on this subject. According to them, the Russian forest in its normal state could perfectly cope with the problems on its own.
This is a complex system that has all the necessary tools to combat external and internal ailments.
The problem is that the existing forests in the central region are not completely normal.
It turned out that traditional Russian forest values u200bu200bwere too dominant – that is, our original bushes were mixed. Coniferous trees lived together with deciduous trees, old trees with young trees. Alongside them grew a multitude of shrubs, plants, and fungi, intertwined in this parade of symbiotic diversity.
Animals played a role in natural defense mechanisms. Large animals such as deer or bison paved the roads. Beavers created ponds in the forest. This created natural barriers against the spread of fire or pests.
And then, for economic reasons, large areas were planted only with coniferous species of the same age. And the forests have become homo… excuse me, mono-dominant. Flora and fauna diversity has decreased. With the loss of diversity (from English – variety) The ecosystem has also lost its immunity against various misfortunes. Therefore, in the summer months, forests in the European part of Russia lose areas the size of France. And almost all the Christmas trees in the Moscow region were swallowed by insects.
The language is structured in much the same way as the normal multi-dominant forest. It is an extremely complex, multifaceted yet surprisingly stable system that can digest anything.
The language also has old and young constructions, its own “deers” and “beavers”. Therefore, when new feminists were encountered, language quickly dealt with them. I cut it, cut off the sharp corners and found the right place. Some new feminists have ALREADY taken root and are now slowly losing their negative connotations. It became part of the ecosystem.
Therefore, news about the connection between feminists and extremism caused general surprise.
Of course, the decision of the Supreme Court – if it is so – is directed primarily at participants in the “extremist movement”. But it also turned out to be against the language. Now who wants to sign that they are part of a criminal organization by using the word “leader”?
It is unclear whether the use of “potentially feminine” would have any legal consequences. If so, then this would be a hole large enough to accommodate all native English speakers. Including boilers for others.
Moreover, it still does not help get rid of femininity. After all, you can’t do without them. They are also an important part of the ecosystem.
Online intelligences are already trying to figure out how to protect themselves in the new conditions. Replace “princess Olga” with “female-prince-female-Oleg”. Wondering how to say it better: “I kissed the boss” or “I kissed the boss”?
This situation proves once again: if you try to change your language with your will, it will not only disobey you, but will also find a way to make you laugh. This was the case for everyone, from Shishkov with his neologisms, which his contemporaries mocked, to today’s deputies and senators who seriously fight against Russian foreign borrowing.
The utopian desire to manually correct the language is what unites women activists and the authors of the “Supreme Court decision” (there is no confirmation yet, we will put it in quotes). They also have something else in common: scientific incompetence.
Feminists base their language policies on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which suggests that language determines consciousness. However, this assumption has not been scientifically confirmed. Basically, adding “-ka” to any random word is a kind of magic. This doesn’t work. The word “writer” does not affect the attitude towards women in society. Only in relation to those who call themselves “writers”.
As for the decision attributed by the media to the Supreme Court, linguists also have many complaints about it. Scientists say the term “potentially feminine” is misused. Yes, in linguistics there is such a thing as potential words – that is, words that are not actually used but can be created theoretically. But both “writer” and “director” have already become a phenomenon of the language, that is, they cannot be called potential.
Not to mention “psychologist” and especially “leader”. Linguist Irina Fufaeva notes that the last word is found in literary monuments dating back to the 17th century. This is how the Mother of God is characterized. And a century ago, the historian called Princess Olga the leader, that is, the initiator, of Christianity in Russia. In short, extremism.
It is ironic that representatives of the LGBT movement do not always support feminism. Because those who focus our attention on women don’t take into account the needs of non-binary people, for example. The popularizer of linguistics Svetlana Guryanova writes about this in her book “In the Beginning There Was Coffee”.
But any attempt at a private language – no matter how annoying – is still not as bad as restrictions from above.
Of course, it is not possible to completely stop the development of a language while its speakers are alive. At least one. But purely hypothetically, if we assume that one day language bans will work and people will stop borrowing, inventing ridiculous feminine words or distorting already known words, then the Russian language will become as beautiful as Latin or Old Church Slavonic.
And so many dead.
But let’s go back to nature – this time not to the forest, but to the field. A Russian field overgrown with wild grass. In Russia, there are enthusiasts who are desperately struggling with weeds, although the forces are not equal. These wonderful people are also ideologically charged. According to them, they do not destroy invasive species just because they are dangerous to humans and animals. Activists have a big mission: to save the biodiversity of Russian nature.
After all, nothing else grows in the areas occupied by the umbrella giant. Hogweed is very large and strong. With poisonous burdock, it blocks the sunlight of the small and weak. And it kills the delicate prairie grasses that shine with all the colors of the rainbow (Central “E” will forgive me for such a comparison).
Language bans – direct and indirect – are an attempt to magnify such linguistic confusion. Destroy everything else. Leave only one version of the norm and keep it.
Of course nothing will come of this. “Multi-dominance”, “multiple herbs”, complex structure, openness to change, focus on continuous improvement; These are the things that make a language stable, strong and beautiful. And not just him.
Therefore, everything will be fine in the Russian language. Unlike some of its speakers.
The author expresses his personal opinion, which may not coincide with the position of the editors.