System: You are a JSON assistant. You only reply in valid JSON and never in normal text. Proporcione una calificaci�n de dificultad para la informaci�n del video que se describe a continuaci�n. Me gustar�a un solo valor de "result" que sea un n�mero flotante entre 0 y 1. A continuaci�n se presentan las categor�as de puntuaci�n de dificultad:
0.0 - Principiante absoluto: El material presenta vocabulario muy b�sico y frases simples, acompa�adas de visuales claras y contexto. Esto es perfecto para alguien sin conocimiento del idioma objetivo.
0.3 - Principiante: El contenido consta de oraciones directas y vocabulario familiar. Puede incluir algo de apoyo visual y contexto para facilitar la comprensi�n.
0.5 - Intermedio: Este nivel presenta oraciones m�s intrincadas y un rango m�s amplio de vocabulario. Es posible que se incluyan algunas frases idiom�ticas que requieran un poco m�s de conocimiento previo.
0.6 - Intermedio superior: El material incorpora vocabulario especializado y conceptos relevantes para campos espec�ficos. Los espectadores deben tener un conocimiento s�lido del idioma objetivo para comprender completamente el contenido.
0.8 - Avanzado: El video emplea vocabulario sofisticado y estructuras de oraci�n complejas. Puede presentar discusiones matizadas que requieren una fuerte competencia en el idioma.
1 - Muy avanzado: El contenido est� dise�ado para hablantes fluidos, contiene t�rminos y conceptos especializados que pueden no ser bien conocidos incluso para todos los hablantes nativos.
Assistant: Leyenda: La RAE no solo tiene cosas buenas...

🥕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

Bibliografía:
- Violenta Demonte *Lengua estándar, norma y normas en la difusión actual de la lengua española*
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/36024582.pdf
- Montserrat Batllori *Origen y estandarización del español* Universitat de Girona
http://habilis.udg.edu/~info/INS/Estandarizaci%C3%B3n.pdf
- Francisco Gimeno Menéndez *A propósito de lengua y dialecto: el estándar* Universidad de Alicante
https://ifc.dpz.es/recursos/publicaciones/26/50/072gimeno.pdf)
- Ángel López García-Molins *Bosquejo de historia de la norma lingüística del español a la luz de la irrupción del español de EE. UU.* Universidad de Valencia
https://glosas.anle.us/site/assets/files/1205/bosquejo_de_historia_de_la_norma.pdf
- Elena Méndez García de Paredes *Modelos idiomáticos y prescriptivismo. El caso del andaluz* Universidad de Sevilla
http://www.lllf.uam.es/clg8/actas/pdf/paperCLG78.pdf

https://www.delcastellano.com/verbo-vale-todo/
https://www.elcastellano.org/el-surgimiento-de-las-academias-americanas
https://www.infobae.com/america/cultura-america/2020/01/29/como-funciona-y-quien-financia-a-la-rae-la-guardiana-de-la-lengua-espanola/
https://cvc.cervantes.es/literatura/aispi/pdf/22/ii_27.pdf
https://www.rae.es/dpd/le%C3%ADsmo#2

🔴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):
Manel F. Martinez-Aroca Marin
Curtis Walker
Oded Lahat Bursztyn
Craig Ludington

Los Señores de la RAE (Patreon):
Franz Pereira
Pierre Laplante
Leo Edermaniger
Begoña
Julia Mc Cray
Javier Álvarez García
Héctor Vilar Górriz 
Jose Hernandez
Ela Valentina
Jonathan Miljus
Victor Sanchez
Kathrin Mendoza
Charles Lee
Steve Groen
Edgar
Billy Billy
Leonor Loução
Sam
Capatapa
David Bissinger
Victor Tavares
José Horacio Cabrera
John Adams
Portuguese With Leo
Gianluca Repossi
Kathy Rugg
Pablo Torres
sergio valdez
Davide Gemello
Jean Pierre Lefebvre 
DonL
Bo Hemphill
Doug Lefler
Ruben Ferreyra
Monika B
EK Powell
Ttulo: ¿La RAE destruye la lengua?
Descripcin: The RAE, angel or devil?
The RAE is in charge
of the standard language.
It is very important to understand 
this before watching this video.
If you haven't seen the first part,
 I'll leave it here
and it's really quite important that 
you see that one before this one.
And now, let's first see what's good about the RAE
(and then, the bad... If it has something...).
Hello, good afternoon.
Let's see, the Royal Spanish Academy
 was founded in Madrid in 1713,
(1713...
let's remember that Romance languages, 
such as Spanish,
arose between the VII-VIII centuries,
that is, the RAE has been alive for a short time
compared to the existence of Spanish,
and I assure you that people
 before it existed,
spoke and understood each other).
The initiative for its creation was
 from Juan Manuel Fernández Pacheco y Zúñiga,
this gentleman with that hairy hair from Turkey
who was born in Navarra and
 who was neither more nor less
than the Marquis of Villena.
And what inspired him to create the RAE?
Well, in the French Academy, 
which was founded in 1635.
When they created the RAE, they thought that 
the best thing was to put a motto on it,
because of marketing, of course,
 so important in the 18th century
(that later you wouldn't get it...),
so they put "clean, fixed and gives splendor."
Let's see, at that time, it can be understood
why linguistics as we know it today did not exist,
but three centuries later (3 centuries!!)
well... we still have the same motto.
Vintage marketing, I think it's called...
Its first big goal was 
to create a huge dictionary
in which a brutal number
 of words in Spanish were reflected.
At this time, the word “almóndiga” was included,
which arouses so many passions,
and which today is marked as a word in disuse.
Cocreta, by the way, has never been in the dictionary.
Later it advanced with spelling reforms,
preparation of grammars, 
editions of literary classics...
And who supports the RAE?
Where does he get the money from? 
The government, because it is public, right?
Well no! It is private
and is financed by equally private donations.
And who is among his top patrons?
The Spanish crown and the largest Spanish corporations
and the IBEX 35.
Well, and it is also financed
 by its publications.
Their main objective, currently, is, as they declare,
to ensure that the changes that arise
 in the language do not break its unity.
That is, to keep the language of Spain, 
America and Guinea
(because in the Philippines it has almost disappeared)
together.
And now we are going to what you are waiting for:
what is good about the RAE?
Well, what I am going to tell you now
 I am going to tell you from my humble opinion,
that is, I am not going to give you objective data.
I believe that in its more than three centuries of existence
the RAE has done things that are very good.
Especially with what is related to spelling.
Spelling before the Royal Academy 
was not like English or French now,
but it could be greatly improved.
[Dorothea] Are you saying that
 the spelling of English and French is crap*?
Man…
(this is a personal opinion, eh)
The spelling of Spanish before the RAE was different.
The letters were not fixed
and, although it is true that
 there were majority uses,
it was normal to see that in some places 
a word was written with b
and in other places, the same word with v,
or with jei,
or that there were digraphs 
that today they do not exist,
such as ph,
or even many interspersed hs
 that we do not have today either
and they were simply by etymology,
that is, because in Latin or Greek,
 they did have them.
Spelling, for example, was written like this:
In my opinion, spelling should
 not be something scholarly,
but something practical, 
understandable and achievable
for as many people as possible.
That is why eliminating letters, 
removing tildes, and simplifying as much as possible
seems to me to be something wonderful.
And it sucks
 because I really love them,
from a purely aesthetic point of view,
hyper-recharged spellings
(like that of French, for example, 
you know how I like French…).
The RAE has managed
 to create a spelling that maintains a
very good balance between etymology and phonetics,
that is, although it respects the past,
 it has a pragmatic philosophy.
It even seems to me that he has been
 quite brave in recent years,
by removing the tilde from the script, just, this, rogue...
even knowing that people don't usually like things that they
already know how they are changed.
[Okay, subsection, I'm recording this on March 3, 2023
(this looks a bit like a diary in a zombie apocalypse, right?
Well, the fact is that when I recorded this video,
the RAE hadn't said
 anything about the tilde solo…
And, of course, it has been a bit bad for the video…
But hey, it is also true 
that I am recording this
before the plenary session
 is held in which
the use or not of the tilde is going to be 
debated in solo and in the other demonstratives.
But I am doing it because
the minutes of that plenary session
 are not really going to be public,
so we are going to find out 
what they want us to find out.
I will inform you of everything that is happening
in Instagram and Facebook stories.
But for those of you who do not have these social networks,
I can tell you in advance that the RAE 
has neither recognized its error
nor has it removed the tilde from just,
before they recommended not using it
even in cases where it existed ambiguity,
that is, at no time has he prohibited anything,
and now it seems that he has said
 that it is the writer's decision to use it or not
in the event of ambiguity
(come on, for now,
 everything remains the same)].
But, be careful, I want to clarify 
that being in favor of the RAE's spelling
does not mean being against people
 breaking the spelling rules
when they deem it necessary.
On the other hand, some of the RAE academics
are some of the best linguists in this country,
such as Ignacio Bosque.
There are others who don't seem to
 have much idea of ​​linguistics
and it's a shame
 because they are also
the most famous ones...
And I also have
 to mention especially
the latest grammar of the Spanish language,
because its the most complete version, 
these two pieces of billets,
are a true monument.
They are great work and the best 
reference we have in Spanish
for any query about our language today.
But, let's see... the RAE not only has good things.
I'm going to talk about three things I don't like:
its attempt to monopolize Spanish,
its prescriptive nature (rules rules rules)
and the number of philologists and linguists it has...
[Dorotea] Let's see, why do you say 
it wants to monopolize Spanish? Spanish?
Man, what the RAE says
is what is valid in all Spanish-speaking countries, right?
It seems that it is the only Spanish regulator that exists
when it is not true.
Until recently, the Latin American academies
had less weight than the Spanish one,
and, in a certain way, it seems that it continues to be so
(although it is also true
 that there are clear signs
that the situation is changing),
but very recently, if we go to 
a dictionary of the RAE,
we saw that if a word was only used in Spain
it did not put anything,
that is, it was not marked, 
and it did not say that the word
was only used in Spain,
while if a word was only used
somewhere from America, the Philippines or Guinea,
it was made clear that this word was only used there.
This gave the impression that the RAE only considered
the form of Spain as general,
which, in a certain way, was the "good" form
and what was not of Spain was lateral or special.
But the RAE not only wants to cover 
everything and control everything
from a geographical point of view,
but now it is also getting into Twitter...
But who wants to get into Twitter if it's the jungle?
And when I say 'Twitter', 
I mean the internet in general...
[Dorotea] 
What do you say?
Let's see, Twitter is in itself a kind of corpus
(in other words, like a repository of texts of the language
from which information is obtained),
and it is great, because it allows us to extract a lot of examples
of colloquial or sloppy language
or, at least, an approximation to it
(and, I repeat, I'm talking about Twitter, 
but I mean the entire internet).
This could not be done before.
We do not have so many records 
of how people spoke 10 centuries ago,
but we do have of how they wrote,
we had examples of literary language,
but not so much oral language...
That has changed and it is very strong.
For example, in western Andalusia
 there is a very curious phenomenon,
where the speakers use a qué plural:
"Qués casas más grandes"
(let's see, it is true that pronounced
 in the Andalusian style there are no final -s,
but there is a remainder in the pronunciation
 of the following consonant).
This phenomenon, before the Internet,
 simply did not exist in writing,
and now it can be seen.
[Dorotea]
 But what does this have to do with the RAE?
Well, the RAE has given some indications
of how to write on networks
and I think you have to be brave to know your limits
and recognize how far it is convenient to go
(no matter how much C2 I have in French,
 I am not going to explain it on my channel, right?
Well that…).
Twitter is not a literary work,
it is not the BOE, it is not a speech
 from the Princess of Asturias award.
You don't have to standardize everything.
[Dorotea]
Well, come on, relax.
[Dorotea] 
Let's go to the second point
 of things you don't like.
Pff, this is the worst for me.
Because it is telling us how we have to talk.
When a standard is created,
 there are two tendencies
that are usually in conflict,
although we will see that
 it is possible for them to coexist:
being descriptivist and being prescriptivist.
In English there is no body or institution
 that regulates the language,
there is no RAE,
but, for example, in England, the universities of Oxford and Cambridge
create grammar and dictionaries,
but these works are much more descriptive
than prescriptive
because they do not They don't tell you how to talk,
they tell you how people talk.
However, the RAE has traditionally been prescriptive,
that is, it told you how you have to speak
and censored the uses that it did not consider correct.
It is true that in recent years it has tried to change
and has become a little more descriptive,
but there are still prescription residues.
Where can you see that waste?
Well, in its close collaboration with the FUNDÉU
(the Fundación del español urgente),
which is clearly prescriptivist,
and even, within the grammar that we discussed earlier,
and which seems to me to be a monumental work,
phrases such as “its use are not recommended”
 are still being read use".
Let's see, I think it's great that the FUNDÉU exists,
I consult it a lot myself,
but I think it would be a great step forward
to stop using phrases like "it's not recommended"
(and that pedantic attitude...)
and be a little more descriptive.
I think it's great that you tell me
that the word that went from French to Spanish is "surreal",
but that it is very interesting to see 
how the alternative "surreal" is being used
because in Spanish there is no prefix "sur-",
but The prefix “sub-” does exist,
although the meaning of these 
two prefixes are totally opposite.
And then, each speaker, 
who decides what they want to use, right?
It is exactly the same thing that we do now
when we look at the history of the language
and how the words have changed.
The ones that have had the most changes,
 such as 'surreal/surreal',
are the ones you like the most,
simply because they have had a much more interesting history
than saying “P becomes B”.
Besides, it gives me the feeling that the RAE
He completely ignores opinions that are not his own
and many times, it is not that it happens,
and many times, it is not that it happens,
but that he directly despises them.
[Dorotea]
 Well… how many philologists
 and linguists are there in the RAE?
Well, let's see, with a quick count on their own page,
they are less than half of the academics.
It is a bit strange, being an institution that goes by language.
It looks like it to me.
And let it be noted that the work done by other professions
should not be underestimated
and it is also important to integrate them to achieve a holistic vision
(that is, the one that focuses on the whole and not on the parts):
it is obvious that a mechanic knows more expressions about mechanics than a linguist,
and working with a mechanic will be necessary
 to know that jargon
or sector of the language.
But that a reference for the study of language is a
(I make it up, I don't want to give specific examples)
physical, well, I don't know,
there are those who call it labor intrusion
and it gives the impression that the RAE
 is not concerned with linguistics.
I think it is not bad per se to have a language regulatory body,
standardization can be very beneficial for different languages
​​(especially for those with few speakers),
and the RAE has done things that seem 
very good for the spelling of Spanish.
However, we do not have to be deceived either:
having an institution like this
does not guarantee having a clear 
and simple spelling,
and we can use French as an example.
Personally,
I would like to have an institution 
that regulates spelling,
only and exclusively spelling,
which I think is the role in which
 it can stand out the most
and in which it can contribute the most.
Telling us how we have to talk, well,
 I don't know, it doesn't convince me.
[Dorotea]
 Well… so, if you had to say
 something to the RAE,
[Dorotea] 
if we impersonated it, what would you say?
Well, to try to avoid linguistic prejudices,
to try to convey to people
that there is no need to discriminate 
against oneself based on place of origin
because there is no one Spanish better than another.
There is nothing wrong with using
 words that are not in the dictionary
if they allow us to fulfill a communicative function
(sometimes, even better than if they appeared...),
that a sound can be pronounced in one way
or another in another place and that it does not happen nothing...
Because right now it seems 
to me that it encourages the opposite:
ablism
(that is, discrimination
 by the way of speaking).
Let's see, really, despite everything I just said,
I don't think the RAE is the devil.
After all, it has its role, 
which we may like more or less,
but which represents a very important part of the speakers,
who defend it and agree with it.
But I think it is very important that we all be aware
that the RAE does not have the absolute truth,
there are many different organizations,
 opinions and ideas about the language,
and they are all equally legitimate
as long as they are part of the speakers.
The RAE, for me, is an opinion like any other
when it comes to socially judging the language.
And you? What do you think?
Assistant: