到底用mankind还是peoplekind? 加拿大总理也开始“咬文嚼字”
近日,加拿大总理特鲁多就此前的用词风波道歉。特鲁多曾纠正一名女性的用词,称应该用“peoplekind”替代“mankind”表示人类,以体现包容性,但他却遭到外界嘲讽,被指纯属“男性说教”,过分追求“政治正确”。 His original comment came during a town hall meeting in Edmonton on Friday, at the conclusion of a longwinded question from an audience member. The questioner ended by asking Trudeau to look at laws surrounding the charitable status of religious organizations, saying: “Maternal love is the love that’s going to change the future of mankind”. To which Trudeau replied “We like to say ‘peoplekind’, not necessarily ‘mankind’, because it’s more inclusive.” Many in the audience applauded or laughed, including the question-asker. 虽然特鲁多的话在现场获得好评,但在社交媒体上却遭到众人批评。 不少保守派人士也批评他过分追求“政治正确”。 The Australian conservative commentator Rita Panahi said Trudeau’s use of “peoplekind” was an attempt to “appease those desperate to find offence where none exists”. British commentator Piers Morgan accused Trudeau of "virtue-signaling" — the act of showing off one's own moral virtue to impress others — his feminist beliefs in an opinion piece for the British Daily Mail. Christina Sommers from the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, said in a post on Twitter that using the word "mankind" was fine, but the prime minister "publicly embarrassing someone for using it" was not. 那么如果非要较真儿的话,“mankind”究竟有没有性别歧视色彩,“peoplekind”真的更合适吗? 加拿大国家邮报网站对这两个单词进行了分析: There is a substantial amount of literature on the use of “mankind,” some of which argues the term should be fine for continued usage even in these more-inclusive times, since it originally derives from the Old English word “mann,” which generally meant all people, not just men. But given the easy alternatives that don’t have male-centric connotations, the consensus among modern style guides is there’s no good reason to use “mankind.” Most of these guides suggest going with “humankind” or “humanity” as the best options. The word “personkind” is less commonplace, but still used occasionally. But “peoplekind”? Nobody says that. “Peoplekind” is not recognized by Merriam-Webster, the Oxford English Dictionary, or the Cambridge Dictionary. 2月7日,特鲁多对此事进行了回应,称自己只是开了一个愚蠢的玩笑。 “I made a dumb joke a few days ago that seems to have gone a little viral. It played well in the room and in context. Out of context it doesn’t play so well and it’s a little reminder to me that I shouldn’t be making jokes even when I think they’re funny.” 事实上,特鲁多领导的自由党政府上台后一直在呼吁性改革与性平等。有人认为加拿大在推动性别平等的道路上迈出了关键一步,但也有人认为政府或国会的某些决定太过追求“政治正确”,缺乏立场和观点。 例如,特鲁多上任之后所任命的内阁便是男女均分,男性成员15人,女性成员15人。当被问及为什么男女均分时,特鲁多回答:“因为现在已经是2015年了”。这句话一时间成了流行语。 当时,这一举措在获得一片欢呼喝彩的同时也受到了质疑:内阁成员应该根据他们的资历和能力来选择。难道单纯的为了保证男女平等,就必须要男女各半? 而就在前不久,加拿大参议院刚刚通过“国歌性别中立”法案,只待总督签署后正式生效成为法律。届时,《哦!加拿大》歌词中的“统领着所有儿孙”(in all thy sons command),就会被改成“统领着我们所有人”(in all of us command)。 其实在1906年版国歌中,原歌词是"thou dost in us command",但1913年,因为第一次世界大战加拿大参战,而参战的士兵绝大部分是男性,为了激励这些士兵,国歌的歌词便被改成了“in all thy sons command”。从这个角度讲,歌词中的son并不是单指男人,而是指那些为国捐躯的士兵,有其特殊的历史意义。 |