This paper focuses on language change based on shifting social norms, in particular with regard to the debate on language and gender. It is a recurring argument in this debate that language develops "naturally" and that "severe interventions" - such as gender-inclusive language is often claimed to be - in the allegedly "organic" language system are inappropriate and even "dangerous". Such interventions are, however, not unprecedented. Socially motivated processes of language change are neither unusual nor new. We focus in our contribution on one important political-social space in Germany, the German Bundestag. Taking other struggles about language and gender in the plenaries of the Bundestag as a starting point, our article illustrates that language and gender has been a recurring issue in the German Bundestag since the 1980s. We demonstrate how this is reflected in linguistic practices of the Bundestag, by the use of a) designations for gays and lesbians; b) pair forms such as B\"urgerinnen und B\"urger (female and male citizens); and c) female forms of addresses and personal nouns ('Pr\"asidentin' in addition to 'Pr\"asident'). Lastly, we will discuss implications of these earlier language battles for the currently very heated debate about gender-inclusive language, especially regarding new forms with gender symbols like the asterisk or the colon (Lehrer*innen, Lehrer:innen; male*female teachers) which are intended to encompass all gender identities.

翻译：本文聚焦于基于社会规范变迁的语言演变，特别关注语言与性别辩论领域。该辩论中反复出现一个论点：语言具有"自然"演变特性，而所谓对"有机"语言系统实施的"强力干预"——例如常被宣称的性别包容性语言——既不合时宜且具有"危险性"。然而此类干预并非史无前例。社会动机驱动的语言演变过程既非异常现象，亦非新生事物。本研究聚焦德国重要的政治社会空间——德国联邦议院，以联邦议院全体会议中关于语言与性别的其他论争为切入点，阐明自20世纪80年代以来，语言与性别议题在德国联邦议院中始终是反复出现的争议焦点。文章通过三项指标论证该议题在联邦议院语言实践中的具象化表现：a) 对男女同性恋者的称谓方式；b) 成对形式（如Bürgerinnen und Bürger——女性与男性公民）；c) 女性称谓形式及人称名词（在"Präsident"之外增设"Präsidentin"）。最后，本文将探讨早期语言论战对当前激烈辩论的性别包容性语言（尤其是采用星号或冒号等性别符号的新形式，如Lehrer*innen/Lehrer:innen旨在涵盖所有性别认同）的启示意义。