quote:

For all their fine talk, the woke are not above cultural imperialism. And like all imperialists throughout history, they have only the best of motives for the natives. Just ask them.

But the woke constantly inveigh again evil neo-colonialism ...

This is what was taught to us in college level Spanish back in the mid-1980s when I took it: “Latina” refers to a female. “Latino” refers to a male. “Latinas” refers to a group of females. “Latinos” refers to a group of males or a mixed group consisting of both males and females. “Latinx” hadn’t been coined yet in the mid-1980s.

If Anglophiles use “Latinx” instead of “Latino”, I’m wondering about the vice versa situation: do Hispanophones say “Blancx” instead of “Blancos” (Whites), “Asiaticx” instead of Asiaticos (Asians), etc.? I tried to contact a former neighbor of mine who would know. She's a native Spanish speaker from Spain and teaches ESL in a school. I couldn’t reach her though.

Let’s see if “Latinx” catches on and survives in the long run. A college Spanish professor of mine once said that with languages, whatever usage form is the most popular over time is what survives.

Well this is a top-down imposition, not an organic change, so that means it’s less likely to catch on.

On the other hand, high-status institutions have adopted it and sometimes that trickles down.

It’s hard to imagine it generalizing among real-live Latinos though, it ‘solves’ a problem they don’t have and is also really hard to say.

Spending lots of time in New Mexico has taught me that adopting the language of my sensitive, high-income, well educated peers often just gets me a pat on the head or a sneer.

I have stopped using "native American" out there since most, ah, native people you meet in the public square, so to speak, call themselves Indians. Say "native American" to them and you're signaling to them things you probably don't want to signal.

When I know a tribal affiliation--Chickasaw, Osage, and so on--I use that. It's accurate and not as fraught as other options.

Even within that, there's complexity. "Creek" was the name given to the Muscogee people by Europeans, but it's often what they call themselves. The official names of the tribe here in Oklahoma is The Muscogee (Creek) Nation, but you can't hear the parentheses when someone says "Muscogee Creek."

quote:

you can't hear the parentheses

Unless you're Victor Borge...

quote:

Originally posted by jon-nyc:
Well this is a top-down imposition, not an organic change, so that means it’s less likely to catch on.

On the other hand, high-status institutions have adopted it and sometimes that trickles down.

It’s hard to imagine it generalizing among real-live Latinos though, it ‘solves’ a problem they don’t have and is also really hard to say.

I was thinking about this and how it contrasts with ‘Ms.’, which was also an activist driven change quickly adopted by elite institutions.

It eventually swept, or nearly so, because it solved an actual problem. For sure many people didn’t like to have to divide women up by marital status, but even if you had no philosophical problem with it, you couldn’t always pull it off. And it might be awkward to try.

Thus ‘Ms.’ was useful.


‘Latinx’ solves no such problem. Any more than ‘folx’ or ‘womxn’. It’s purely performative.

Jon, do you speak Spanish?

Yes. And Portuguese. I lived in both Mexico and Brazil.

Ahh. Now that you mention it, I probably should have remembered that.

quote:

Originally posted by jon-nyc:
Yes. And Portuguese. I lived in both Mexico and Brazil.

Do you get verbal whiplash going back and forth between the two? What do you have to do to your mouth to make a consistent switch from one to the other?

Not too much, they are very similar And my Spanish is much better than my Portugese. Often if I don’t know a Portugese word I use the Spanish and change the pronunciation as appropriate. Most of the time it works. It’s humorous when it doesn’t.

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:
Spending lots of time in New Mexico has taught me that adopting the language of my sensitive, high-income, well educated peers often just gets me a pat on the head or a sneer.

I have stopped using "native American" out there since most, ah, native people you meet in the public square, so to speak, call themselves Indians. Say "native American" to them and you're signaling to them things you probably don't want to signal.

Yeah, I remember piqué mentioned this. Changed my mind about using the word- Indian.

quote:

Originally posted by jon-nyc:

quote:

Originally posted by jon-nyc:
Well this is a top-down imposition, not an organic change, so that means it’s less likely to catch on.

On the other hand, high-status institutions have adopted it and sometimes that trickles down.

It’s hard to imagine it generalizing among real-live Latinos though, it ‘solves’ a problem they don’t have and is also really hard to say.

I was thinking about this and how it contrasts with ‘Ms.’, which was also an activist driven change quickly adopted by elite institutions.

It eventually swept, or nearly so, because it solved an actual problem. For sure many people didn’t like to have to divide women up by marital status, but even if you had no philosophical problem with it, you couldn’t always pull it off. And it might be awkward to try.

Thus ‘Ms.’ was useful.


‘Latinx’ solves no such problem. Any more than ‘folx’ or ‘womxn’. It’s purely performative.

Well, I agree.

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:

quote:

For all their fine talk, the woke are not above cultural imperialism. And like all imperialists throughout history, they have only the best of motives for the natives. Just ask them.

But the woke constantly inveigh again evil neo-colonialism ...

Omg. This woke thing. Again. (Nothing personal).

I actually wrote a rant about this word- woke last night and accidentally deleted it.

I might try again.

(It's so frustrating when you write a post on a phone and accidentally hit the back button. Gah.)