BENEVOLENT SEXIST TENDENCIES IN GENDER ASSESSMENT IN THE ENGLISH TERM OF ENDEARMENT “BABY” AND ITS VARIATIONS
Keywords:
language and gender, terms of address, terms of endearment, sexismAbstract
The present article aims to analyze benevolent sexist tendencies in the process of gender assessment in the English term of endearment “baby” and its variations. Representing the social, cultural and psychological aspects of a particular linguistic community, studying address terms closely, terms of endearment among them, can reveal much about language and people. The data for the study is retrieved from the online surveys specifically made for the research about the relationship between this aspect of language and gender. The results align with the theories of benevolent and indirect sexism, as well as with the results of other studies about gender and language conducted by scholars interested in this topic.
Full Text (PDF)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. Endearment, respect, and disdain through linguistic gender. ReVEL, edição especial, v. 17, n. 16, 2019. [http://www.revel.inf.br]
Biber, D., et al. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Ltd.
Boasso, A., Covert, S., & Ruscher, J. B. (2012). Benevolent sexist beliefs predict perceptions of speakers and recipients of a term of endearment. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(5), 533-546. doi:10.1080/00224545.2011.650236
Brown, R. and Gilman, A. 1960. The Pronouns of Power and Solidarity. In Sebeok, T. A. (ed.), Style in Language, 253-276. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Carstens, W. A. (1989). Grammatical gender in AFRIKAANS simplification in action. Retrieved April 9, 2021, from https://www.ds.uzh.ch/dam
Desai, Sonalde, Amaresh Dubey, and Reeve Vanneman, “India Human Development SurveyII (IHDSII),” University of Maryland and National Council of Applied Economic Research, New Delhi 2015. distributed by: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research,
Ann Arbor, MI. Fasold, R. (1990). Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Gal, S. (1991). BETWEEN SPEECH AND SILENCE: The problematics of research on language and gender. Retrieved April 9, 2021, from https://benjamins.com/catalog/iprapip. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/iprapip
Greville G. Corbett, G. Greville. (2013). Number of Genders. In: Dryer, Matthew S. & Haspelmath,
Martin (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at http://wals.info/chapter/30, Accessed on 2021-05-10.)
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). a., The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). b., An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2), 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109
Gygax, P. M., Elmiger, D., Zufferey, S., Garnham, A., Sczesny, S., Von Stockhausen, L., Oakhill, J. (2019). A language index of grammatical gender dimensions to study the impact of grammatical gender on the way we perceive women and men. Frontiers in Psychology, 10.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01604
Kiesling, S. (2007). Men, masculinities, and language. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(6), 653–673. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00035.x [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
LAKOFF, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. Harper and Row Publishers
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Online Journal of Humanities ETAGTSU
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
