- In Dutch, the infinitive of substantive verb is „zijn” (English equivalent „to be”). The possessive pronoun in the male third person is „zijn” (English equivalent „his”). What can be the messages of these identical forms?
Does it suggest that existance is subject to human possession? Do our males claim a right on any formations on the world? This approach suggests the unquestionable superiority of our species. This attitude justifies all the invasions and abuses committed by humanity throughout history. For this kind of wiring is it so hard to act consciously and to consider the external effects of our deeds?
It might also mean that the aim of a man’s life is to win, gain or earn as much as possible. Would the poverty-sticken be actually non-existant whose opinions can be neglected? This conception underpins the old-world and prevalent social structures where the mightly have had actual political power.
- In Dutch, „zij” is the form of female singular third person (English equivalent “she”) and the plural third form (English equivalent „they”). This structure suggests a sort of inherent distance among the speakers (I do, or we do) and the women (they do).
Were women not involved in the structuring of the language? Did women and men act so separately and differently that no common personal pronouns were needed? Could women speak at all?
Nowadays, we are struggling to observe the rights of all living beings by curbing human greed and agression. We seem to be fighting a combat with our very inner selves reflected by these basic languistic structures.
Can such a war be victorious? Can a soul be peaceful once defeated its own defective nature?