His name is Ricardo Soca, and he is the man who defies the Spanish Royal Academy. Diliged for years to analyze Spanish and to show partial definitions of the maximum dictionary, today he accuses Spain of wanting to colonize Latin America through language: “The Academy is a small wheel of the geopolitical gear of Spain.”
Soca says that the RAE obeys economic interests and not the cultivation of the Spanish language. And so begins his difference with the Academy, which ends with what he calls “threatening messages.” The matter is not simple. We know that Soca, editor elcastellano.org , last year wrote an article in which advances published edition 23 of the dictionary (which at that time already appeared on the site of the RAE ) where practically all the changes compared to the definitions. When Soca did his thing, he thought that the definition of Castilian words used by more than 450 million people in the world should be shared for their speakers. Error. “I received threatening messages from the Planeta publishing house, as documented by telephone messages and recordings, ‘on behalf of the Royal Academy’, which never denied it. Friends linked with the director of the Academy, José María Blecua, assured me that if I asked permission to use the contents, it would be granted. The problem is that my position is precisely that it should not be necessary to ask permission to use, without profit, the contents of the Academy.
– You have said in interviews that if the Academy is funded by the exchequer, should make their content accessible to all (at least on its website), what do you think this retaceo obey content? Anything beyond the economic interests of the publishers with whom they work? “I do not know if there will be anything more than the economic interests of publishers. It is enough to remember the time that took in putting in line the Panhispánico dictionary of doubts, allowing time for the paper version to be sold. Or the shameful fact that a multinational publishing company (Grupo Planeta) intends to give orders to the colonies in the name of the learned house. “I hope you do not accuse me for spreading mistakes.” Spain’s desire to master language is no small thing when the Uruguayan journalist points out that in “documents of the Spanish State, which are available online, according to which Spain must promote the sale of its products based on the globalizing nature of the language Spanish. The Academy is a small wheel of the geopolitical gear of Spain, to put their companies in the first line in the lucrative Hispanic American market. “There is a carefully cultivated myth, according to which academies would be necessary to preserve the unity of language.” -I have noticed in his Twitter account that he makes very specific observations about the mistakes of the SAR. I remember, for example, one which questions the definition of Francoism and further question “afraid of the word dictatorship?”. That is to go into marshy grounds with the academy and the Spanish right-wing government itself, (you see how Judge Garzón sat on the bench). Where do you think you can go with this and, above all, what is your goal? -Well, I hope they do not feel me on any bench for spreading the errors of the SAR, especially when in my country (Uruguay) do not govern the laws of the Kingdom. I simply do not understand how a dictionary that pretends to be a model of lexicography, which is almost the same as to say of impartiality, refrain from defining Franco as a dictatorship. Until a few years ago, he defined Marxism as “the doctrine of Karl Marx and his followers.” Recently I published an article in which I analyze the use of embarrassingly partial definitions, such as that qualifies as ” perfidious ” “which lacks faith [Catholic] should” or “fear of God” is defined as ” Reverential and respectful fear that must be had to God “. It is not that they can not say it, since many believe so, but in Lexicography it is demanded that in those cases something like “according to the Catholic Church” is said so that the dictionary does not commit itself to a belief that is not of all. In the end, there are Spanish speakers who are atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims ; There is no reason to impose Catholicism as inherent in the Castilian language … The only thing I intend to do is to expose for as many people as possible the farce represented by the fact that the Academy presents itself as “mere notary of the speakers” When foreseen for the next dictionary invented words, that do not appear even in its own corpus. Invents Academy, manipulates, distorts . It is an entity formed by a small minority of linguists and a large majority of Spaniards (writers, actors, musicians, doctors, economists) who are there to brighten their names, unable to contribute anything, because they know nothing about linguistics, Acknowledged in his speech of entry the academic writer Soledad Puértolas. It is not the first time someone gets in trouble at the Academy and the flame false . Parents of children with autism have a linguistic argument against the dictionary for the current definition of autism as offensive and false: “Childhood syndrome characterized by a congenital inability to establish verbal and affective contact with people and the need to maintain absolutely Stable environment. ” The Academy has come out to inform that it is committed to include a new definition of the symptom for 2014, to be: “developmental disorder that affects communication and social interaction, characterized by restricted, repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior”. – Finally, what does the academy require or what is its recommendation for improving the language and its dissemination? “Language is a product of a human brain capacity called the” function of language. ” It was not created by academies or grammarians, who only try to appropriate it. The child who at three or four years already has mastered the language did not study any grammar, but already knows and applies its rules intuitively, without the need of any academy. We can say that linguistics is a natural science, since it studies an object that arises in nature, in human biology and in man in society. There is a carefully cultivated myth, according to which academies would be necessary to preserve the unity of language. However, let us note the English language, which never had academies nor any normative institute and is the same in the United States, the United Kingdom, India, South Africa or Australia, beyond variants that can be compared with those of Castilian. The need for an institution to maintain the unity of the language is a lie divulged to make money. Linguists like Jose Maria Blecua or Victor Garcia de la Concha should be ashamed to lend themselves to such nonsense