System: You are a JSON assistant. You only reply in valid JSON and never in normal text. Asigne un nivel de dificultad a la informaci�n del video proporcionada a continuaci�n. La salida debe ser una �nica propiedad llamada "result" con un valor de punto flotante entre 0 y 1. Los niveles de dificultad se categorizan de la siguiente manera: 
0.0 - Completo Principiante: Este nivel incluye vocabulario muy b�sico y frases simples, acompa�adas de visuales y contexto claros, lo que lo hace adecuado para individuos sin conocimientos previos del idioma objetivo. 
0.3 - Principiante: Este nivel presenta oraciones simples y vocabulario de uso com�n. El video puede proporcionar algunos recursos visuales y contexto para ayudar con la comprensi�n. 
0.5 - Intermedio: Este nivel presenta oraciones m�s complejas y un rango de vocabulario m�s amplio. Puede incluir algunas expresiones idiom�ticas que requieren conocimientos adicionales de fondo. 
0.6 - Intermedio Superior: Este nivel incluye vocabulario especializado y conceptos relevantes para campos espec�ficos. Los espectadores deben tener una competencia razonable en el idioma objetivo para una comprensi�n completa. 
0.8 - Avanzado: Este nivel utiliza vocabulario avanzado y estructuras de oraciones intrincadas, potencialmente involucrando discusiones matizadas que requieren un fuerte dominio del idioma. 
1 - Muy Avanzado: Este nivel est� dirigido a hablantes fluidos, incorporando terminolog�a y conceptos especializados que pueden no ser familiares para todos los hablantes nativos.
User: Caption: Vamos a hablar del lenguaje inclusivo...


Se acabó el reembolso del 100%, pero prepárate para algo aún mejor: ¡más clases gratuitas para celebrar tus logros! 🌟
Completa el Sprint normal, asiste a 30 clases en 2 meses y consigue 40 clases gratis como recompensa. Opta por el Super Sprint, completa 60 clases y desbloquea 75 lecciones gratuitas 🥇🏆
https://try.lingoda.com/Linguriosa_SprintChallenge

Bibliografía:

http://linguisticaenprimerapersona.blogspot.com/2022/02/el-traductor-el-linguista-y-el-filologo.html

🥕Mi Newsletter (más contenido gratuito):  https://bit.ly/newsletter-linguriosa

👇👇Si quieres y puedes apoyar este PROYECTO
https://www.patreon.com/linguriosa
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/linguriosaES

🔴LINGUCOMUNIDAD:
https://discord.gg/3kYuqAbzC4

🎁WEB:
https://www.linguriosa.com/

INSTAGRAM:
https://www.instagram.com/_linguriosa_/

FACEBOOK:
https://www.facebook.com/Linguriosa-106220947464950

🎵Música de mis vídeos: https://www.epidemicsound.com/referral/bxtod9/

Dorotea (Patreon):


Los Señores de la RAE (Patreon):
Title: Que DEFIENDAS tú eso, siendo LINGÜISTA...
Description: How can you defend that aberration that is inclusive language?
This is the "criticism" that I have received the most lately
due to the videos I have uploaded about inclusive language
(I take this opportunity to clarify that the ending in -e
is not inclusive language, but non-binary).
But hey, today we are going to answer three important questions:
am I a linguist?
Have I really stood up for inclusive or non-binary language?
And...
what is the difference between a person who has studied philology,
translation and interpretation and linguistics?
Hello, good afternoon.
I think that the popular image that people have
of anyone whose specialty is language
is that of someone who has an impeccable writing style,
who does not make spelling mistakes,
who speaks many languages ​​and who has impeccable diction.
This language professional needs, imperatively,
to correct all the misspellings against the standard
that he finds wherever he goes
and instruct everyone around him in how to speak well.
Luckily, it seems to me that this specimen is less and less abundant
(I have to clarify that I was this specimen until recently
and I am much happier...).
In fact, we will see that some language or language specialists
could not be further from the clichés
that society has about them.
If you study philology,
it is very likely that the older generations
have once made this comment to you:
"oops, languages, with that you go wherever you want".
We will leave the work connotation aside,
since today, speaking several languages
​​is far from something extraordinary.
What is relevant to today's topic
is that people think that studying philology is studying languages.
And study translation and interpretation too.
So what is the difference between one and the other?
And what about linguistics?
I believe that in order to fully understand what each one does, it
is necessary to differentiate between what it is to know a language, that is, to speak it,
and what it is to know a language, that is, to know things about it
(grammar, history, origin of its lexicon). , syntax...).
You will see that this difference is very important.
What do I say "important"? It is SUPER IMPORTANT.
But I want to tell you something very quickly before going into it:
If you really want to know a language and get to know
it (a little about its grammar, its syntax),
but very focused on communication, you
can start the year off with a course on English, French, German or Spanish
on Lingoda!
At the end of the video I tell you how you can also do it for free.
[Dorothea] Come on, what is a philologist?
He knows about languages, that is, he knows languages,
and he also speaks them, although maybe not at the same level as a translator,
we'll see about that.
The concept of philology has changed throughout history.
Let's see, first, its most classical meaning.
Here philology could be understood as the study of a culture,
a people, a community or human group
through its texts.
The meaning is vast.
Unlike a historian,
who can take videos or recordings as sources for his study,
for example, if he studies the 20th century,
the philologist relies solely and exclusively on texts.
It could be the case that a philologist
listened to a radio program from the beginning of the 20th century
to study some phonetics,
but in this case they would already be working more as a linguist
(the division between one branch and another, as sometimes happens,
is quite diffuse).
In philology, the study of culture and texts
could sometimes be understood as synonyms,
because the text itself acquires
almost the same value as the information it provides.
This is, for example, a big difference with the historian.
[Dorothea] What?
Well, for historians, normally,
what is put in the text is more important than the text itself.
The philologist appears before the text
and tries to extract its meaning, always valuing
the cultural aspects present at the time
and in the place that it was written.
It is, in part, something akin to hermeneutics.
[Dorothea] Huh?
The interpretation of the texts, sacred, philosophical...
[Dorotea] Okay okay.
And this relates the discipline to literature,
which is the branch that attracts the majority of philology students.
Philologists classify themselves like this:
either you are more into language or you are more into literature.
And, without anyone finding out, they get along badly with each other...
Noooo! It's a joke.
(well, those jokes are not jokes, you know what I mean).
The text is obviously encoded in a language.
So the philologist must know the language in which the text is written
in order to carry out his work.
This implies that if the text is in English,
the philologist has to know English.
But if you are a Spanish speaker and the text is in Spanish,
you can be a wonderful philologist without knowing more languages
​​than the one you learned at home.
This need for the language
made philologists become language experts.
And, well, in fact,
philologists have traditionally been language teachers,
both native and non-native.
They studied grammar, vocabulary, semantics, phonetics, phonology...
And, for this reason, philology, in its most modern meaning,
is related to any study of language and language in general
and in a vague way.
In short, a person who has studied philology
is a student of the texts and the languages ​​in which they are written.
We can leave it there.
[Dorotea] Okay, and what about those who study translation?
A person who has studied Translation and Interpreting (like me)
is, as you might suspect,
a person who has an excellent command of two or more languages,
that is, he speaks languages, knows languages,
but neither knows about them nor knows them properly. deep.
He doesn't know linguistics.
[Dorothea] So this is a scam!
Wait until I talk about linguistics...
Because I haven't studied just that...
I've always heard one thing
(it's not proven, but I think it's equally useful
to understand the difference),
I've heard that the Translation and Interpreting degree
was born to replace the deficiency that the philologists had.
And it seems to me very understandable and possible.
The translator needs and depends a lot on the standard language
(all that the RAE tells us with its rules)
because it will be their main means of work.
The career also mentions the interpreters
(translation and interpretation).
And I'm not going to do it for them either because, in fact,
I only had two subjects in the entire degree,
but they are the ones that "translate" orally
(let's see, I entered the degree wanting to do that
because they told me to I earned a lot of money
- "Women don't cry anymore, women earn bills."
And when I had to do the first simultaneous interpretation in a booth,
it almost gave me a short circuit.
You're listening to someone speaking in another language
and you have to go translating what what he says
while you keep paying attention
because then you're going to have to translate what he's saying again
and of course, when I started to talk I stopped hearing what he was saying
because I could only hear...
my sweet voice
(no, my trick was turn up the volume of the headphones,
speak more softly and thus not hear myself,
but of course, precisely for this reason, sometimes I stammered
and said things that did not make any sense.
A drama, come on,
although I have to say that there are many types of interpretation
and, with practice, I think the simultaneous is the easiest).
[Dorotea] But, let's see, now seriously, you speak a few languages,
[Dorotea] but you don't have C2 in any...
Dorotea...
Let's see, I studied several languages ​​during my translation degree:
English, German and Chinese
(you didn't come here for this, eh.
I studied it for two years).
However, from my point of view,
it was one more learning of the language itself,
focused on being able to translate it and not so much on communicating with it.
What I learned the most in the translation course was Spanish
and, above all, the standard of Spanish (the one from the RAE).
I wanted to be a letter from the RAE...
[Dorotea] Well, what do linguists do?
She is specialized in linguistic theory,
that is to say: syntax, morphology, phonetics...
but not of a language, but in general,
and also on some practical issues
such as computer science, programming, natural language, language teaching...
[Dorotea] Ah...
This is an expert person in linguistic science.
You don't have to speak any language other than your own.
It is convenient for you to speak English
because most of the texts on linguistics are in English,
but it is that practically any professional should speak English,
precisely for this reason.
A linguist is basically a scientist,
that is, the person who approaches knowledge
using the scientific method.
Work with data,
because they are the basis on which to make hypotheses
based on experience and observation.
Based on these data, he will draw reasoned conclusions.
We can give the classic example of the linguist
who records a conversation to draw conclusions
about the local speech of any place.
With a huge amount of recorded conversations,
he arrives at his office
(well, or his living room-dining room-kitchen),
listens to them, analyzes them,
writes down the data he deems necessary,
compares them and draws conclusions.
His conclusions are based on experience and observation.
Now imagine two botanists discussing the beauty of plants.
Both of you may have their respective beauty concepts
which may be different.
Talking about the beauty of one plant or another
is just an opinion,
even coming from a plant expert.
The discussion may be heated
and both argue exceptionally,
but beauty cannot be measured objectively,
through analysis, data collection and experience
(well, maybe yes,
but it will be more the work of a sociologist or a philosopher).
However, these two professionals
will agree on the processes of photosynthesis.
And if they are not,
they will use arguments based on observation and results,
and not on personal taste.
A zoologist will be able to say that nature is wild
because lions fight to the death.
Another will say that it is just a matter of survival.
Their value judgments may be different,
but their study of the facts, based on an empirical analysis,
will be similar.
And if not, then we are going to have again a discussion
based on facts
with the most objective character possible.
What about a surveyor?
This example is a classic for linguists: you
are walking through the forest with your map
and suddenly you find a river that is not reflected on the map.
- Oh…
what is moving?
We are in the river!
If she said "this river does not exist"
we would all think that she is wrong,
because the river is, in itself, the evidence of its existence.
What is wrong is the map,
which has not accurately captured the abundance of geographical elements
in the environment
(you already know where I am going, right?).
It is important to differentiate between what is linguistic as an adjective
and linguistics, as a noun.
Saying "this word does not exist" is linguistic,
because it refers to language.
This use is the majority and the one that all the speakers do.
We could call it popular or colloquial.
This sentence, however, is not linguistic,
it does not refer to the science of linguistics,
because its scientificity is more than questionable.
Remember the map and the river.
The simple use of a word evidences its existence,
even if it does not appear in a dictionary.
From my point of view,
when a linguist practices as a linguist, they
must have a scientific attitude.
Value judgments such as "vulgar" or "incorrect"
Value judgments such as "vulgar" or "incorrect"
do not respond to realities protected by a method of observation,
but to social conceptions of language.
Be careful, I do not want to say with this
that we do not have to give our opinion on the language,
the language belongs absolutely to all the speakers
and each one is free to use it and think about it as they want,
to issue their value judgments
and to consider correct or incorrect whatever pleases you according to your logic.
But the linguist can (if he wants) aspire to more.
After studying Translation and Interpreting,
I did a Master's in Teaching Spanish as a Foreign Language,
that is, in Applied Linguistics,
which directly gives me the C2 certificate in Linguistics.
One of my professors on the master's degree, Jairo García Sánchez,
is a specialist in toponymy (that is, the names of places)
and in an interview they did to him in the digital medium Geography Infinite,
they asked him what he thought about the changes in place names
that have been taking place in recent years
in many parts of Spain.
And his answer perfectly sums up what I mean:
"I am an observer of reality and I analyze why these changes occur,
but it is not my intention to value them."
[Dorothea] Wait wait. What name changes have there been?
Well, for example, in the province of Burgos,
Castrillo Matajudíos is now Castrillo Mota de Judíos
(for obvious reasons).
Come on, a linguist can give an opinion on inclusive language,
on saying "I've dropped it",
on leísmo, on laísmo, on lisping,
it's perfectly legitimate
and, in my opinion, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it,
but they are linguistic attitudes (as an adjective)
that are not linguistic science.
For this very reason, and as my teacher did,
I defend that all linguistic phenomena must be analyzed
from a scientific point of view,
but I am not going to tell you that they are good or bad,
they are simply objects of study for me.
Therefore, even though I, as an individual,
have opinions about it,
I am not going to give it to you nor do I base it on them
(well, maybe I will give it to you, but always as a personal opinion).
I don't think there is any linguistic phenomenon
that deserves contempt for science,
they all deserve to be studied at the same level.
And for this reason, without ever having defended the use of non-binary language,
I believe that it is a fact that deserves to be studied
at the same level as the loss of the Latin declension
or the loss of the verb to be as an auxiliary in Spanish verbs.
Just as a biologist has no authority over the beauty of plants
or the kindness of a lion,
a linguist has no authority over the appropriateness of inclusive language
or the other topics.
This depends on social considerations,
yes, some opinions may have more foundation or logic than others,
but they are still opinions.
The adequacy of saying "I said it", "I have dropped it" or "everyone"
falls on society as a whole,
on its use and whether it survives or not,
depends equally on specialists and non-specialists.
[Dorothea] Let's see, let's see, let me clarify myself.
[Dorotea] So, we could say that a translator
[Dorotea] is a person who speaks languages ​​very well,
[Dorotea] but has no idea about how languages ​​work or “the guts”.
[Dorothea] A philologist is an expert in the interpretation of texts,
[Dorothea] which may be a literary or linguistic interpretation.
Yes, the linguistics that a philologist studies,
although it does not deal exclusively with it,
is very focused on the history of the language.
[Dorothea] Okay.
[Dorothea] And, finally, a linguist is a scientist
[Dorothea] who studies language experimentally and empirically.
That is, but I always refer, in a standardized way,
to a person who only has knowledge acquired
through training.
We can find translators with a strong interest in linguistics.
We can also find philologists who have no idea of ​​literature
(like Berni, the documentalist and reviewer for this channel)
and super polyglot linguists.
The interest and will of each individual is, many times,
more important than what they have studied,
although what they have studied a long time ago.
From personal experience, which may differ from others,
any of the professionals I have mentioned
has wide deficiencies in the other's skills.
And lastly, if you've made it this far,
I really appreciate it
and it shows you're interested in what I'm saying on this channel,
so I want to clarify what it is and what it isn't.
This channel is not a channel for speaking "well"
or "learning correct Spanish",
I am sure that there are many channels like these out there
and that they are super interesting.
Because the standard is super interesting
(obviously these are topics that I deal with many times,
like the video about "only without accentuation" or the one about the accentuation rules,
but it's not my main objective).
What I intend to do on this channel is to do something very different:
to spread the word that there is Spanish far beyond what we think
is our language,
that there is much more apart from the RAE and its standard,
and that there are other ways of seeing, think, analyze and reason the language.
And I am going to continue doing that,
analyzing the changes that arise and that have arisen throughout history
from a scientific point of view
and in the most objective way possible
(and sticking so close to the camera that you find it uncomfortable!) ,
and avoiding positioning myself, as much as possible,
outside the linguistic perspective.
And, be careful, it's great that you don't agree with me
and that you leave your opinions in the comments.
It is wonderful that debate is created and that points of view are exchanged,
as I told you, 2 years ago I was totally different from how I am now,
and I hope to continue learning new things and changing my opinion.
But, that yes, debating and giving opinions without falling into contempt,
neither of the phenomena that we treat
nor of the people who think something different from what we think.
Please, less viscerality, and more rationality.
Unless you study Spanish, English, French or German
with Lingoda!
Where the teachers put their whole hearts into their classes.
How well spun, huh!
Let's see, it can't be that you still don't know what Lingoda is.
They are language courses,
you can choose the time and day of the week that you want for the class
(seriously, any day and any time),
you do it from your home
(or, well, wherever you want) because it's online .
In addition to group classes, you have individual classes,
but group classes are for a maximum of 5 people
(which, from my point of view, is great to be able to talk to people,
but it's not so many people that it leaves you speechless)
and if you are very motivated, you can learn a language for free.
The classes are focused on communication,
but there are materials that are seen in each class
and then you can review them on your own,
there are even extra exercises for you to practice more.
But how can you get free?
What is it that really interests you?
Well, I have already told you that motivating you a lot.
You sign up for the Super Sprint, which is 60 classes, in 60 days,
that is, you have to do one class a day for 60 days.
If you don't miss any,
you get absolutely everything you paid back.
This is a lot of commitment for a lot of people, I get it.
So there is another option.
You won't get free because it's more flexible,
but you can get half the price of the course back.
As?
Well, just doing the Sprint, without 'Super'.
Now there are 30 classes in 60 days.
That is, the same number of days as with the Super Sprint,
but half the number of classes.
You can do one day yes one day no for two months.
And if you don't miss any class, they give you back half of what you paid.
But it is also that, if you use the code ELENA2023,
they will give you a discount of €20 or $25.
Come on, if you really want to know a language,
sign up for Lingoda…
Assistant: