The Point of View section is seeing the blossoming of a new branch, Point of Language, with Professor Mireille Elchacar as its guide. During the summer, the Quebec lexicologist will invite you to think about French differently in a one-off format halfway between an essay and popular science.
It is a source of pride for Quebec to have been at the forefront of the feminization of job and function names in French. Inspired by the movement from the United States, Canada and then Quebec followed suit in 1979.
In practice, feminization was well established as early as 1996, according to a study by the co-authors of the dictionary of Quebec French Usito, Hélène Cajolet-Laganière and Pierre Martel. In France, the few circulars on the subject published in the Official Journal as early as 1986 remained dead letters.
The Académie française has long been fiercely opposed to feminization, not only under the leadership of permanent secretary Maurice Druon, but also under that of the first woman to hold this position, Hélène Carrère d’Encausse, who refused to have her title feminized. They were therefore both permanent secretaries. On February 28, 2019, the Académie finally accepted feminization, less out of conviction than because it was becoming inevitable.
Danger
As for the feminization of texts, it is not a done deal. On October 26, 2017, the Academy wrote a statement on “so-called ‘inclusive’ writing”: “faced with this ‘inclusive’ aberration, the French language is now in mortal danger, for which our nation is already accountable to future generations.”
Even though Quebec is, in theory, more open than France on this subject, in reality, it is not so simple. The first step, non-sexist or epicene writing, draws on various processes to make women more visible (doublets, epicene names, neutral formulations, etc.).
Pierrette Vachon-L’Heureux points out that the OQLF published its first opinion on the issue in the Gazette officielle du Québec in 1981. However, for a long time, we were satisfied with the famous explanatory note “the masculine form refers to both women and men” (or a variant) without changing anything else.
Today, we are moving towards inclusive writing, where, rather than making women more visible, we are trying to erase gender markers. According to the OQLF, inclusive writing “allows us to address diverse groups (so that each member feels included), people whose gender is unknown or non-binary people.”
Proliferation
We are currently living in a period of creative abundance. French speakers feel the need to include all people in their writings? They will find a way to do so. Several processes are being tested; some will become part of the language and others, less conclusive, will disappear.
Even though the OQLF offers guidelines, each institution seems to have its own guide and training courses abound. It is not so easy to write inclusively.
Written French is already extremely difficult to master. One of its difficulties lies precisely in the gender and number markers, which do not reflect the real functioning of the language.
The general rule for forming the feminine in French is not the pronunciation of the final “e” in the noun, which has become silent, but of the preceding consonant. This is also reflected in the determiner and the adjective (un petit ami → une petite amie). The fact that several words bear this silent mark of the feminine is a frequent cause of spelling mistakes.
Exclusion
Studies are beginning to appear on inclusive writing. In a master’s thesis submitted in 2024, Gabrielle Girard uses eye tracking to see if the eye is bothered by certain processes. She concludes that there is a “slowdown in the processing of abbreviated doublets compared to the masculine […] which therefore suggests an added difficulty in the reading comprehension processes.” This study does not take into account people with a language disorder. It is reasonable to assume that the situation is even less easy for them.
The Academy persists and in 2019 signed an open letter against inclusive writing, arguing precisely that it increases inequalities for people with language disorders. The French association Femmes pour le dire, femmes pour agir, which fights against discrimination against women with disabilities, responded: ” [nous] We denounce the use of disability to justify anti-inclusive writing positions, by people who are generally neither concerned by sexism nor by ableism.
Without speaking on behalf of people with language disorders or opposing the evolution of the language, like the Académie française, we can want to write in a more inclusive way while taking a critical look at current practices. As long as we are going to adopt a more inclusive writing style, we might as well take advantage of it during its development so as not to exclude anyone.
Modernity
Language disorders aside, with 19% of Quebecers who are illiterate and 34.3% who have great difficulty reading, according to the Literacy Foundation, we are entitled to wonder whether inclusive writing is within everyone’s reach.
Successful inclusive writing goes unnoticed, skillfully uses multiple techniques, does not become impersonal, and is easily read aloud. These complex techniques are added to convoluted spelling. We could start by modulating our expectations: people working in the language field benefit from mastering these techniques, but should we have the same requirements for everyone?
We can’t stop the train: language is evolving to reflect a change in society. What we can do, however, is conduct more research on how to achieve this, so that no one is left behind.
A major clean-up would be needed: ridding spelling of certain vestiges of the past and historical errors, by accepting the proposed reforms, such as the Rectifications of spelling and that of the agreements of the past participle. This would make room for modernity.