Versión castellana del poema “Crossing Brooklyn Ferry” (1856) de Walt Whitman
English text at http://www.poetryfoundation.org
Spanish Interpretation by JMN
[Translator’s note: The whole of part 8 follows. The poem has 9 parts.]
(8)
Ah, what can ever be more stately and admirable to me than mast-hemm’d Manhattan?
Ah, ¿qué cosa jamás puede ser para mí más imponente y admirable que Manhattan rodeada de mástiles?
River and sunset and scallop-edg’d waves of flood-tide?
¿El río y la puesta del sol y las olas de borde festoneado del pleamar?
The sea-gulls oscillating their bodies, the hay-boat in the twilight, and the belated lighter?
¿Las gaviotas oscilando sus cuerpos, el barco de heno en el crepúsculo, y la gabarra tardía?
What gods can exceed these that clasp me by the hand, and with voices I love call me promptly and loudly by my nighest name as I approach?
¿Qué dioses pueden superar a éstos que me estrechan la mano, y con voces que amo me llaman de inmediato a todo volumen por mi nombre íntimo cuando me acerco?
What is more subtle than this which ties me to the woman or man that looks in my face?
¿Qué cosa es más sutil que esto que me ata a la mujer o al hombre que me mire en la cara?
Which fuses me into you now, and pours my meaning into you?
Lo que me fusiona con vosotros ahora, y os vierte mi significado en las entrañas?
We understand then do we not?
De modo que entendemos, ¿verdad?
What I promis’d without mentioning it, have you not accepted?
Lo que yo prometía sin mencionarlo, ¿no lo habéis aceptado?
What the study could not teach—what the preaching could not accomplish is accomplish’d, is it not?
Lo que no pudo enseñar el estudio — lo que no pudo lograr la predicación, está logrado, ¿no es así?
(c) 2021 JMN — EthicalDative. All rights reserved
EthicalDative 
‘Inclusive Writing’
The French controversy over “inclusive writing” has surfaced.*
Cole Stangler, “France Is Becoming More Like America. It’s Terrible,” NYTimes, 6-2-21.
Annabelle Timsit, “The Push to Make French Gender-Neutral,” http://www.theatlantic.com, 11-24-17.
Here are examples that have been cited:
les musicien·ne·s (the musicians)
les idiot·e·s (the idiots)
This accommodation is meant to overcome a tradition of gendered languages that requires a roomful of musicians or idiots to be lumped into a masculine noun (les musiciens, les idiots) if there’s a single male amongst them. It uses a character variously called the “median-period” or “midpoint” (obtained on my Apple keyboards with shift+option+9) to confer equitable simultaneity upon the gender markers. Purists will still perceive a precedence issue, since the masculine marker comes first in this system.
I’m not sure how inclusive writing is meant to be read aloud, if at all.
Inclusive writing would work thus in Spanish:
lo·a·s músico·a·s (the problem is compounded by the gendered definite article: los, las)
lo·a·s idiotas (“idiots” is conveniently inclusive in Spanish)
English is comparatively ungendered. “Aviatrix” crashed long ago, and “actress” has largely assimilated to “actor.” There’s still a problem: traditional usage prescribes masculine pronouns and qualifiers for generic reference even with mixed assemblages.
Example: Each member of the jury must leave his phone at the door.
Contemporary usage is moving to “Each member of the jury must leave their phone at the door.”
Arguably, coopting the plural qualifier for a singular entity achieves perceived neutrality; however, it introduces (in my view) a potential for ambiguity of reference in other contexts.
Example: One of my friends said they were going to photograph their house. Who is photographing whose house?
I have often used the workaround “his or her,” but it can prove unwieldy in complex sentences:
“Anyone who wishes to raise his or her seatback table to give himself or herself more room may do so provided he or she no longer wants refreshment service.”
(c) 2021 JMN — EthicalDative. All rights reserved