Accademia della Crusca: against linguistic authoritarianism and the forced use of the feminine and asterisks
The Accademia della Crusca opposes the imposition of the use of feminine and asterisks in the Italian language, calling it linguistic authoritarianism
2' min read
Key points
2' min read
Linguistic authoritarianism, whether imposed by supporters of the feminine, masculine or asterisks is the real enemy of the Italian language. This was the reaction of Claudio Marazzini, honorary president of the Accademia della Crusca and professor emeritus of the history of the Italian language at the University of Eastern Piedmont, to the bill - now withdrawn and branded as a personal initiative - that had been presented by the Lega Nord senator Manfredi Potenti ("Disposizioni per la tutela della lingua italiana, rispetto alle differenze di genere") which called for a ban on the written use, in public acts, of words such as "sindaca", "questora", "avvocatessa" and even "rettrice".
The forcings
."Not long ago, a rector officially introduced the over-extended feminine in the regulations of his university: he abolished the masculine 'rector', leaving only 'rector' to survive. It seems to me that no one forced him to correct such a forcing, which deserved at the very least a parliamentary question,' commented Marazzini. 'In many universities, the academic authorities are already forcing lecturers to abandon the unmarked masculine, and demand the mandatory use of asterisks and schwa. No one is moving to stop these impositions (a warning from the ministry would suffice). For Marazzini, it would have been useful - before launching unworkable proposals, as the league exponents themselves had to acknowledge by backtracking - to read the advice of the Accademia della Crusca, in particular that addressed to the Equal Opportunities Committee of the Court of Cassation. For Marazzini, linguistic authoritarianism paves the way for the advocates of the over-extended feminine, the fanatics of schwa and asterisks, who might 'present themselves to the world as the guardians of democratic freedom, while in reality, in turn, they are well inclined to various forms of authoritarianism. And the real enemy is just that: linguistic authoritarianism, of whatever sign'.
