• Daerun@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Jokes aside, I think the correct one should be “binaria” because it’s “persona no-binaria”, where “persona” being a female-gendered word still includes everybody (persono doesn’t even exist).

    • potustheplant@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Native speaker here and no, that wouldn’t be correct as a general rule. The most typical would be talking about or someone else like “yo soy no binario/a” and “yo” would be a he or a she depending on who is saying that. If you’re talking about someone else it’s “el/ella es no binario/a” for example.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        The point of being non-binary, though, is that they are neither “he” nor “she”. Hence the post.

      • Vytle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Also a native speaker here. You can also just not specify “el/Ella” because the context isn’t relevant. I.e. “es no binaria”. You can also just pluralize the person to get around gendered wording, I.e. “ya llegaron” for “they have arrived” rather than “el/Ella ya llego” for he/she has arrived, but this is informal and may sound odd to someone of a different dialect from me, but I think this should at least be intelligible to Latin american Spanish dialects

        • Shardikprime@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Not only informal but a bit disrespectful, by saying ya llegaron to one person, it’s like adding disdain to them.

          It’s easier to say llegó + nombre de la persona

          ie: llegó Juana, llegó Pedro

          And so on

        • Shardikprime@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yeah then they would claim it was made by latin alphabet people

          It’s just a thinly veiled try to appropriate our Spanish language

          • mriormro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            For those who aren’t directly from Spain, the Spanish language is one of colonialism so I really don’t care if we want to re-adapt it which most lands that were colonized by the Spanish already do.

            • Shardikprime@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Yeah you can’t actually tell a whole population how to talk

              Contrary to what you guys think, you don’t own us

              • mriormro@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Huh? No one is telling a whole population how to talk. And I don’t even know where your last comment is coming from.

                I’m Mexican, and think the argument is silly. Whatever someone prefers to be referred to is how I will refer to them.

                The spanish language isn’t the heritage of the Central and Southern American people. That was mostly stolen from us by the Spanish.

                • Shardikprime@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I don’t see most of latam talking in quechua or in warao. Do you want to force them as well to talk in those?

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I’m digging how Japanese is just context based. The same sentence that says “He’s cool” is the same as “She’s cool” and “It’s cool.” What changes its meaning is the context you’re using it in.

  • silverflower67@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    As a native Spanish speaker, I must tell something: that’s the de facto (I think) right way to do things. Most people in my IRL environment, including myself, disprove the use of the “e” (although we don’t care about the “@”).

    Clarification: That’s IRL in my own POV only, maybe someone has a POV that is exactly the opposite. IDK

    • nublug@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      i know that every time ‘latinx’ comes up online it gets spammed with ‘rich white libs made it up’ replies but i’ve also seen deep in those comment chains people claiming to be latin american trans people and that the term was created by the latin american trans community itself.

      also, typically those replying with the above knee jerk ‘white libs’ response tend to be far right when i dug into their histories. on youtube and reddit over the years, that is. haven’t seen this discourse on lemmy. also i don’t have any sources for the origin of the term, just thought you might want to reconsider potentially being hateful to the latin american trans community if that wasn’t your intention.

      and tbh, even if it was some dem focus group in new york that came up with it, it’s pretty easy to see that trans people might take the above kind of response to that term as one rooted in hatred.

  • LostWanderer@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Gendered languages are quite confounding; one day I hope those languages become more accommodating to those who realized they didn’t identify with a gender and threw it away. Or worse, got their gender pickpocketed in a seedy part of town, because some tossers were quite desperate!

    • School_Lunch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s just one more thing to memorize when trying to learn them. I’m not going to intuitively know what gender a chair is…

      • Glowstick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I’ve asked the following question before and I’ve never gotten a good answer - why do the words need a gendered suffix at all? Why can’t the final O and A letters simply be omitted from all words that aren’t inherently gendered? Like the word for library is 'bibliotheca", so why can’t it just be called “bibliothec”?

        • phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          The long and short of it is that it was decided on however long ago and now the people who learn the language growing up are used to it and they decide the rules that are followed.

          English (and any non-native language) does many weird things that native speakers are just used to and will get upset if you try and change it.

          • Glowstick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            That’s sort of exactly why i as an individual don’t understand why they don’t do it, because I’m a native english speaker and there’s a lot i would like to change about it. Like imo in spelling, almost all the silent letters that don’t effect pronunciation should be eliminated. Debt should be spelled det, night should be spelled nite

            • Belastend@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              You do realize that this is kinda bad, right? No english spelling reform ever took hold because of the vast difference in english pronounciation. your “nite” might completely differ from the aussie version of “night”. so you’d have to declare one dialect to be the supreme one. That’ll be fun :)

              Secondly: Gender and gendered terms are sociallinguistic conventions. And they do not follow stereotypical gender norms. Often they radiate outwards from gendered terms for humans and then encompass things that follow similar sound structures. sometimes gender is historically motivated: Spanish generally divides things along the lines of “does it end with an -a or -o” and then assigns gender. But terms like “diversidad” stem from female latin words and retain their gender. “problema” seems feminine, but stems from a male greek word and is therefore male. Not because “tHe MaLeS aRe ThE PrrObLeM”, but because ancient greek sound structures classified this as “male-sounding” and Spanish ran with it.

              In German, “das Mädchen” (the girl) is neutral. Not bevause all girl are secretly enbies or equivalent to possesions, but the diminuitive “-chen” turns things neutral.

              all that to say: “Why dont they do that” can always answered with a resounding “Why dont you have feature x?”. Why doesnt English use eventiality or cases or dual and trial numeri or tones or different conjugations depending on registers? Because the language didnt develope that way.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                In German, “das Mädchen” (the girl) is neutral. Not bevause all girl are secretly enbies or equivalent to possesions, but the diminuitive “-chen” turns things neutral.

                There’s actually a somewhat tongue-in-cheek proposal to solve the “Doctor/Doctress” problem by turning absolutely everything diminutive. Das Präsidentchen, das Bundeskanzlerchen, etc.

                • Belastend@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  there are soooo many proposals, but thats actually one i like. of course, it would render the entire diminuitive meaningless, buuuut its cute uwu

                • Belastend@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  In case of night this might work, but for words like might it doesnt. Might now becomes orthographically indistinguishable from mite. Right and rite also lose their distinction.

            • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              I pronounce epitome as epi-tome and refuse to change it no matter how many times I’m “corrected”

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    But don’t you dare mention the e or @ or heaven forbid the dreaded x, because accomodating identities not traditionally considered in a language’s common form is “white people shit”

    • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because we don’t want non-speakers rewriting the grammar of our language based on sensitivities that are not ours.

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        “non-speakers”, “not ours” as if you have any right to decide or judge.

        Clinging for dear life to “it’s not disgusting bigotry! ItS jUsT oUr CuLtUrE!”, unless you’re out here admitting you have the weakest spine on the planet and immediately turn with the social winds, how other people speak a language ain’t gonna change how you speak it.

        Only way you could ever accuse it of harming latin culture is if you fundamentally believe being inclusive to queer folks is destructive, in which case, you are literally the exact low-down slime I was warning about in this whole thread, and I welcome you to the stage as the freakshow example you deserve to be seen as!

        • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Trying to impose your value judgement on a culture you don’t know or don’t understand. Acting like a true colonizer. I’m a queer Hispanic, I don’t need you carrying out a moral crusade in my name.

          • Shardikprime@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            The thing is they, colonizers, need it. That’s the only way they can justify in their heads how they see us all as uneducated inferiors

    • sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Every single American born person of hispanic heritage, every first gen Spanish speaking immigrant I have ever known or met, as a friend, momentary acquaintance, or as a social worker helping to aid the homeless…

      …every one that I have met in the real world either thinks latinx is laughably stupid (as in they literally laugh when the topic is brought up), or they are visibly confused when they read or hear the term.

      And of friends and acquaintances, I know they ranged all over the political spectrum.

      I wish no ill will on whoever came up with the term, but it just is not sensible to anyone who is not terminally online.

      Hablo un pocquito español, so… as far as I can tell, there is at least existing precedent for the e ending, but I’ll leave it up to the actual members of the language group and its culture to come up with a term (hell, there may be many different local or regional ways to accomplish it, as Spanish varies considerably by region and locale).

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Actual members of the language group and culture did come up with a term, they came up with the x, and the anti-queer-machismo undercurrent in Latine society drove the lot to hysterics about the end of the spanish language and the gringoification of Latine culture.

        Every time I see someone try to excuse this shit they’ll spin some variant of “let them decide what term to use”, and I’m like, why isn’t the same right afforded to the queer folks who came up with those terms?

        What about the greater Latine culture gives them a superior right to the Latine queer community to decide what letter to use? Why is not listening to the language community in question suddenly ok when it means overriding what the Latin Queer community outright told y’all they wanted in favor of appeasing los machismos who are all suddenly heads of the spanish academy and grammar experts as soon as it’s convenient to be so to shout down some gay math nerds who wanted to be clever and punny in their chatspeak representation?

        The Anglosphere didn’t have the right to tell our queer community what they were gonna be called, why should we respect the hispanosphere trying to say they have that right?

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Are you sure it was actually created in the Latin American world by Spanish speakers and not in the USA by English speakers with Mexican ancestors that keep saying they’re Mexican even though they’ve never been to the country, can’t speak the language and the last person in the family to do so was their grandpa?

          Because this seems 100% an American invention by people who can’t speak the language but still need to feel superior by pretending to do “something” for the queer community.

          I don’t think I’ve ever heard any of this outside of English speaking forums comprised mainly of Americans. Not in real life, not in Europe, not in Latin America.

          Do you even speak the language? Because I’d argue that before trying to change something, you first need to have a deep understanding of that thing, especially for languages.