He and She--Changing Language to Fit a Changing World.

Content Provider	Semantic Scholar
Author	Johnson, Carole Schulte Kelly, Inga Kromann
Copyright Year	1978
Abstract	RECENT Washington, B.C., social news column featured a woman ap pointed to a high level government position. The columnist did not overlook the oppor tunity to point out that "She . . . doesn't go in for that chairperson-instead-of-chairman nonsense." But is it nonsense? Is the question of language usage simply one of individual preference, or are there implications, beyond mere preference, which ought to be taken seriously by educators? How do children react to certain aspects of traditional lan guage? What are implications of current research findings? Are we aware of what is happening in the "real world" with respect to language changes? As a framework for considering this matter, we propose an analogy. Suppose as a medical doctor you have the choice of pre scribing Drug A or Drug B for a given ail ment. Both drugs have the same probability of curing or relieving the ailment, but Drug A has the possibility of causing negative side effects for some people, while Drug B does not. As a doctor, which drug are you going to prescribe? Recognizing that life is seldom so clear-cut, we suggest that Drug A is analogous to traditional language. It does have the possibility of causing or contribut ing negative side effects for certain groups of people, while language of the Drug B type eliminates this possibility. Using the lan guage analogy, Drug A would be labeled exclusionary language; Drug B, inclusionary language. Exclusionary language functions in two ways. First, its traditional usage excludes females in effect if not by intent, because
File Format	PDF HTM / HTML
Alternate Webpage(s)	http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_197505_johnson.pdf
Language	English
Access Restriction	Open
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article