Citation

Nowak-Michalska J. Int. J. Semiot. Law 2020; 33(3): 559-580.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/s11196-020-09699-5

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Socio-political developments can result in a change of perception of people with disabilities and increase sensitivity towards language, especially legal language, used in relation to them. Some terms perceived as offensive or stigmatising are rejected in favour of more neutral and inclusive ones. Such terms can often be categorised as euphemisms or orthophemisms (Allan and Burridge in Forbidden Words, Taboo, and the Censoring of Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, 2006). With the passage of time, such new words frequently cease to serve their purpose and new ones need to be proposed to refer to a given concept (euphemism treadmill). In order to examine this issue, a number of legal terms denoting persons with disabilities used, currently and historically, in legal regulations in Poland and Spain are discussed. They are analysed in the context of changing the model of perception of people with disabilities (medical model vs. social model). Next, the differentiation between the so-called Identity-First Language (the term denoting disability comes first linearly) and Person-First Language (the term denoting disability comes second linearly, often in the form of a prepositional phrase), advocated by some members of the disability rights movement, is discussed. In this context, important syntactic and morphological differences (word-order, number of the term denoting disability) between English, serving as a model, and Spanish and Polish are focused on.

Language: en