It’s possible that the queer community is claiming “folx” but Lexically speaking, it is no more gender-inclusive than the original word. Just like “white” and “yt” in most American English dialects. Folks and folx are phonetically identical. Hypercorrection is not a new phenomenon, and if you want me to go into it more I can, just remember most of my examples would be about Spanish hahaĭon’t hold me to this, since I haven’t actually done research in this topic, but i think ‘folx’ is probably more similar to ‘yt’ in AAVE written speech than it is to “Latinx”. AUTHOR'S NOTE You will notice I have chosen to use 'folx' instead of 'folks' because it is a gender neutral term created by activist communities and I would. Instead of bringing in unheard of, everyday folks with a dream of making it big. In the case of folx with the argument of inclusivity, this would be a hypercorrection of an already gender-neutral word, by using the current lexical trend. The most voted sentence example for folks is What do your folks think. It means ‘folks who are part of a group I identify with. ‘Folx’ or ‘folkx’ is an incrowd or tribal terms. It has become a trend in gender neutral word creation to replace the last letter (typically a vowel) with an x. Why is folks commonly used as a gender-neutral term for people when people is already gender-neutral The term folks, originally an Old English term used on both sides of the Atlantic, has not seen a recent surge in popularity because it is a better alternative to the gender neutral people, but because it sounds friendlier, and more welcoming than 'people'. Answer (1 of 3): ‘Folx’ is not an alternative spelling for ‘folks’. phat or thicc ), and folx, for folks, seems to follow in this vein. I studied linguistics in college (my focus was in Spanish, but I still think I can weigh in here.) what I think is happening, if we’re arguing that ‘folx’ is used for inclusivity, is hypercorrection. Black slang has a history of alternate spellings (cf.
0 kommentar(er)
