编辑观点：在学术写作中使用“人在先”语言可能会加剧污名化。
Editorial Perspective: The use of person-first language in scholarly writing may accentuate stigma.
作者信息
Gernsbacher Morton Ann
机构信息
Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
出版信息
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2017 Jul;58(7):859-861. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.12706.
Numerous style guides, including those issued by the American Psychological and the American Psychiatric Associations, prescribe that writers use only person-first language so that nouns referring to persons (e.g. children) always precede phrases referring to characteristics (e.g. children with typical development). Person-first language is based on the premise that everyone, regardless of whether they have a disability, is a person-first, and therefore everyone should be referred to with person-first language. However, my analysis of scholarly writing suggests that person-first language is used more frequently to refer to children with disabilities than to refer to children without disabilities; person-first language is more frequently used to refer to children with disabilities than adults with disabilities; and person-first language is most frequently used to refer to children with the most stigmatized disabilities. Therefore, the use of person-first language in scholarly writing may actually accentuate stigma rather than attenuate it. Recommendations are forwarded for language use that may reduce stigma.
许多写作风格指南，包括美国心理学会和美国精神病学会发布的指南，都规定作者只能使用以人为主的语言，即指代人的名词（如儿童）总是先于指代特征的短语（如发育正常的儿童）。以人为主的语言基于这样一个前提，即每个人，无论是否有残疾，首先都是一个人，因此每个人都应该用以人为主的语言来称呼。然而，我对学术写作的分析表明，与提及无残疾儿童相比，以人为主的语言在提及残疾儿童时使用得更频繁；与提及成年残疾人相比，以人为主的语言在提及残疾儿童时使用得更频繁；而且以人为主的语言最常被用于提及那些最受污名化的残疾儿童。因此，在学术写作中使用以人为主的语言实际上可能会加剧而不是减轻污名。本文提出了一些关于语言使用的建议，这些建议可能会减少污名。
Zotero 插件