Male Female Language: With a Comprehensive Bibliography (2nd ed)

cover

title: author: publisher: isbn10 | asin: print isbn13: ebook isbn13: language: subject publication date: lcc: ddc: subject:

next page >

Male/female Language : With a Comprehensive Bibliography Key, Mary Ritchie. Scarecrow Press 0810830833 9780810830837 9780585053677 English Language and languages--Sex differences, Sex (Psychology) 1996 P120.S48K49 1996eb 306.4/4 Language and languages--Sex differences, Sex (Psychology)

cover If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

cover-0

next page >

Male/Female Language With a Comprehensive Bibliography Second Edition Mary Ritchie Key The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Lanham, Md., & London

< previous page

cover-0 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

cover-1

next page >

SCARECROW PRESS, INC. Published in the United States of America by Scarecrow Press, Inc. 4720 Boston Way Lanham, Maryland 20706 4 Pleydell Gardens, Folkestone Kent CT20 2DN, England Copyright © 1996 by Mary Ritchie Key All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. British Cataloguing-in-Publication Information Available Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Key, Mary Ritchie Male/female language: with a comprehensive bibliography / by Mary Ritchie Key 2nd ed. p. cm. Expansion of a paper delivered by the author at the American Dialect Society in New York in 1970. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Language and languagessex differences. 2. Sex (Psychology) I. Title. P120.S48K49 1996 306.4'4dc20 95-36089 CIP ISBN 0-8108-3083-3 (cloth: alk. paper) The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information SciencesPermanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. Manufactured in the United States of America.

< previous page

cover-1 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

cover-2

next page >

cover-2

next page >

For my grandchildren and for their college peers

< previous page

If you like this book, buy it!

< previous page

next page >

page_v

Page v Table of Contents Preface

vii

Introduction to the Second Edition

xi xiv

The Power Dynamic of Male and Female xvi Categories Again xviii The Reasonable Person and the Language of Law xxiii "It's the economy, Stupid!" xxiv The Male/Female Verbal Environment and the "Politically Correct" xxv The Nature of a PersonThe Whole Person xxvi The Sun Darkens the Moon xxix The Still Silent Woman and The Resulting Silence of Others xxix The Asymmetry of Nudity xxx The Queen Bee Is Alive and Well or The Power of the Powerless xxxi The Dinosaur Syndrome and Still to Come xxxiii Acknowledgments: Give Credit Where Credit Is Due xxxiii Conclusion I In the Beginning: Male and Female Differentiation

1

II Social Structures: Masculinity and Femininity

14

III Social Dialect Differences: Dialogues and Styles of Speech

23

IV Gingerbread Men and Gingerbread Girls: Labels and Descriptors

31

V Titles, Names, and Greetings

38

< previous page

page_v If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_vi

Page vi VI Discrimination Against Males, Taboos, and the Double Standard

47

VII Early Education and Language Ability

52

VIII Subjects, Not Objects: Linguistic Structures

61

IX Speaking in Reference to Male and Female

79

X Status and Standard/Nonstandard Language

96

XI Nonverbal, Extra-Linguistic Messages

101

XII Male and Female Authors

112

XIII The Silent Woman: Tyranny in Language

122

XIV Language Change and Bilingualism

131

XV An Androgynous LanguageThe Future Tense: Language Planning

136

Chapter Notes

145

Appendix A: Guidelines

171

Appendix B: MLA Female Studies [1970 course outline]

176

Bibliography

181

Name Index

308

General Index

316

About the Author

324

< previous page

page_vi If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_vii

next page > Page vii

Preface Not another book on women! The difference today is that now the books about women are being written by women. This should enhance the information and perspectives on the problems of human relationships. Here we might recall the old fable about the lion and the painting. The story goes that a lion was looking at a painting of a hunter slaying a lion, and he commented, "Yes, but who painted the picture? A lion might have done it differently." As I researched the linguistic studies on "women's language," it became abundantly clear that men were left out. Note the many titles in the bibliography that refer only to women's language. Often the studies simply reiterated the old saw that women were peculiar and their speech types ''abnormal" or "cute" or somehow less than normal. Equally balanced studies of female and male differences and varieties are needed in order to understand the whole. This book is an expansion of a paper I delivered at the American Dialect Society in New York in 1970. I first became aware of male/female differences in language when I heard them many years ago in a South American Indian language located in the rainforest of the great Amazon region. I became seriously involved in observing male/female differences several years ago when I initiated a course on male/female language at the University of California. It may have been the first course on this subject ever taught. From that course I prepared an outline and bibliography that were included in Female Studies: No. 2, published by the Modem Language Association, and which have been used extensively. I am writing at a time when male and female usage is very much in a state of transition. What is said today must be revised tomorrow. Some of the examples will seem out of date; others will be ahead of their time. Three persons have influenced my thinking in immeasurable ways. Margaret Mead's work has changed the attitude and thinking regarding

< previous page

page_vii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_viii

next page > Page viii

male and female behavior in all aspects of life, and the impact of her analyses continues throughout academia. Two others' works I first read many years ago when I was in the process of developing the course on male/female linguistic behavior are Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex and Virginia Woolf's A Room of One's Own. I believe the ideas from these three persons are landmarks in a world of changing human relations and I perpetuated their ideas with grateful abandon. I felt especially the influence of Virginia Woolf as I wrote the last chapter. While the courses I have taught were academically oriented in linguistics, I have tried to write this book, in addition, for the general reader. Chapters VIII and IX are most central to my field and may seem very technical, but the general reader can walk around them and continue with material that is of interest to all human beings in whatever vocation. I have rigorously included documentation and a bibliography, which should be helpful to the researcher. After many years of collecting material, I believe that the bibliography is the most complete list on male/female linguistic behavior in print. In the last chapter I suggest some areas of research that would be useful to investigate in the future for a better understanding of these sociolinguistic events. Also in the last chapter I point toward a future that could be rewarding to both male and female of whatever life style. The inextricable relationship of living and language is a commonplace, and the dignity and well-being of all human beings oblige the development of an androgynous language. A good example of the androgynous ideas that I speak of in the last chapter is the journalist's write-up of the Bobby Riggs and Margaret Court tennis match this year, when it was said that the match "was a triumph for Riggs' softly feminine style over Court's manly athletic game . . ." (Newsweek, May 28, 1973, p. 77). My list of credits, besides the bibliography, sounds more like my course list of students, and my address book. I have learned so much from a great many people who were generous in responding, in bringing me examples, and giving their own observations. To my former students, I want to express my indebtedness for their interest and enthusiastic projects and papers. Writing this book has opened up new adventures for me. One of the ones I least expected, but found most enlightening, worthwhile, stimulating, and enjoyable, was the correspondence with cartoonists as I arranged for publication. They really do have good humor! And they

< previous page

page_viii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_ix

next page > Page ix

are most generous. One, in the course of arriving at a fair fee for reproducing his work, noted "How sad that the only currency for communication is currency." Another cartoonist sent along a quote from Baudelaire: "Each of us is a man, a woman and a child." I am very pleased to acknowledge my appreciation for them and to them. [The cartoons are not included in the new edition.] A library is a scholar's lifeline, and I want to mention especially my own university library. Though it is small, it is unexcelled in service. My warm and joyous thanks go to Janet Eggleston [Easley] and her staff for scouring the country for interlibrary loans and to Margaret Kahn and her staff for references. The Coleridge reference was a real treasure hunt, but Ms. Kahn found it. This little book, then, is a result of several years of teaching sociolinguistics; many years of serious linguistic research; a lifetime of knowing what it is like to be female; and a lifetime of wondering what it is like to be male. Mary Ritchie Key University of California, Irvine August 1973

< previous page

page_ix If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_x

next page > Page x

The truth is, a great mind must be androgynous. Coleridge

< previous page

page_x If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xi

next page > Page xi

Introduction to the Second Edition A generation of young people has been born since I taught a course on Male/Female Language in 1968 at the University of California, Irvine. My granddaughters and their peers had not yet appeared on the scene. Now I return to the subject, to "revise" what I had written in those tumultuous years of changing social systems. My first thought was to do a complete rewriting of the topics covered in the 1975 book that followed the course, but as I read the chapters again, with my notes and the copious examples that I have systematically filed since then, I realized that the original book is part of the History of Ideas. It came at a time of widespread and profound upheavals in the way males and females were viewing each other. Things would never be the same; the perspectives of thinking and caring human beings then were coming from different positions. I refer again to the old fable about the lion and the painting that I included in the Preface to the 1975 edition. Celebrations of the Columbus Quincentennial brought other characters to the fable. i Now it is the world explorer Magellan who is depicted. On the Mactan Island in the Philippines, where Magellan died, a "larger than life bronze statue" of the local chieftain, Lapu-Lapu, holds ferociously but righteously to a spear which is thrust into Magellan lying on the ground. Magellan was not a hero to the people of the island he invaded. So, as we think about the changing perspectives of the last generation, we realize that the views are multidimensional; everyone is involved in some way or other, and it is a propitious time to interweave ethnic- and genderoriented points of view. This is not to say that all individuals have adopted the changes of perspectives. Indeed, there are still some who "don't get it." As recently as April 1993,ii a vacationer used a sentence construction similar to: "I took my wife on a trip down the Rhine . . ." [like a camera or a backpack!]. He might better have said, "My wife and I took a trip; we decided on a cruise down the Rhine this year." If I have any

< previous page

page_xi If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xii

next page > Page xii

message that I would give to men and women, it would be that we should listen to each other and try to discover something of the perspective of the other. Perspective has to do with acknowledging and respecting each others' contributions to making the family and the society. In spite of the people who have seen no need for change (shall we call them Dinosaurs?), there have been remarkable adjustments in social systems around the world. The Rhodes Scholarship Trust reports that 50 percent of the awards in the United States now go to women. Before 1976, the honor to study at Oxford University went only to men. Many countries are recognizing female leadership; this was almost unheard of when I grew up. Perhaps we are coming full circleto the kind of thinking that might have been prevalent in prehistorical times, before organized societies imposed constraints upon females and males that, to some extent, are still imprisoning us today. In any case, my 1975 book documents a point of time in history, with its dated references and illustrations; I decided to maintain the historical integrity. When I wrote the book I saw a need to communicate scholarly findings beyond academia, but I was warned that doing so would damage my reputation as a scholar. And so I wrote a memo to my Chancellor, stating my position that I felt it was important to try to bridge the communities of town and gown in the realms of social systems. (It should be noted that such sanctions were not suggested when the university collaborated in non-academic undertakings such as consulting on wine-making or investigating nuclear power.) Thus, my memo iii dealt with: . . . a basic philosophical question on whether or not the University of California faculty should make their findings available to a larger community, and should they make statements on conditions in society? The male/female book is a departure in style from other items on my bibliography. I have read everything I could get my hands on in Sexism and Language, but nothing was available to the public that was linguistically oriented. Thus many statements were distorted, or shrill in their tone . . . . I would not expect this approach to be appreciated yet by all of the academic community, but I think it is a question we will have to come to grips with.

< previous page

page_xii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xiii

next page > Page xiii

That statement would not be necessary today, perhaps, because there appears to be a good deal more exchange between faculty and other members of society. The media have aided and emboldened; faculty are prominent today in television appearances and as contributors to articles in newspapers and popular magazines. Yet I note that the scholarly reputation of the academics who have participated has not diminished. A generation ago the University of California did not warmly embrace the idea of having women or people of various shades of skin-color on the faculty. So in the late 1960s, I suggested to administrators that the quality of the faculty would be raised 5 percent if they would consider that faculty members could be women! This would be impelled by dropping half of their male applicants, and receiving the top 5 percent of female applicants. I did not receive any praise for my insight into the problems of quality of the faculty of the university. While working on the bibliography of this updated edition, I remembered the exhilarating times, lively correspondence, exchanging of manuscripts, and arranging of conferences. When I taught the course in 1968, I dittoed [old technology!] the first of hundreds of bibliographies and course outlines which were mailed all over the world. These were used extensively, as, for example, in Bodine 1973. (See also Appendix B.) Today, I note that many of the people involved a generation ago are nowhere to be seen. Whatever has happened to some of those who spoke so boldly, when we were heady with the mood that swept over the country? Some who were so zealous in their statements are no longer making any kind of contribution to solving the problems of stereotypes and discrimination. But those exciting times have also resulted in turmoil from the rapid rate of change. We are in a state of transition. In the confusion and ambivalence, we ask: What brought about this social upheaval? It is doubtful that it came about either because of female assertiveness and ingenuity or because of male generosity. More likely, technology and medicine have driven human beings to reconsider social roles. Men, for example, have a different attitude toward war in this atomic and napalm century. Men are more apt to define themselves as less aggressive. Women are defining themselves as self-reliant. People are living beyond the child rearing stage and beyond retirement age. Furthermore, within the last century, education has become commonplace for the masses, at least in some countries. Since the land grant institutions emerged in 1870 in the United States, higher education has been increasingly available to women and men of all classes. Whatever its

< previous page

page_xiii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xiv

next page > Page xiv

cause, the redefining of male and female roles in the world today may be one of the most significant changes in the twentieth century, and this redefinition is certainly having its impact on language. This new edition of Male/Female Language is updated with this chapter of Introduction; with Further Study comments following the chapters reprinted from the 1975 edition; with Guidelines added in an Appendix; and with additions to the Bibliography. The 1975 bibliography had about 240 entries; the present bibliography contains some 1200. A few changes were made in the original text having to do with clarifications, corrections, and stylistic changes to conform to computer technology. This updated version, then, is for you who were born since its beginnings. The older, reprinted portion will give a sense of history and allow you to reflect upon the settings of your parents and grandparents; the newer portions provide material and ideas from the last two decades, to strengthen your future. The Power Dynamic of Male and Female The major difference in my own thinking over the last generation is the recognition that power holds a more important place in the analysis of male/female behavior than I gave it in the first edition. The men and boys to whom I have carefully listened have shifted my thinking, as I have heard repeatedly, "But that's the way I get treated!" Male and female behavior can only be understood within the matrix of the power structure of the total society. This can be illustrated by visiting the office furniture section of a store. Size and price dominate: the 'Executive high-back chair' is more than twice the price of the 'Office chair', which is also labeled 'Secretary'. She may have a "Deluxe" model, at half the price of the Executive. One can immediately see a problem of size: larger, heavier people need a more substantial piece of furniture. And small men find themselves, again, in the category of powerless or less weighty people. Weight leads one to the concept of strength; strong words belong to men. Our language contains expressions that recognize power in the physical proportions of size and height: "look up to." We can also compare physical size

< previous page

page_xiv If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xv

next page > Page xv

with vocal powermale voices tend to be louder than female voices. It is not only in prison that "the big eat the little." Power has to do with shattering any other point of view. Not because the other cause or point of view is unworthy, but because it contains control. Again, using the metaphor of the physical to examine the abstract, we can recognize that there is a new kind of POWER that came into our midst this century and forced us into new ways of thinking. Albert Einstein said it simply and effectively: The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything, except our thinking. Thus we are drifting towards a catastrophe beyond comparison. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive. iv How then does a society find an equilibrium in the power dynamic so that all persons are not automatically relegated to certain possibilities for a lifetime, according to the physical characteristics they inherited from birth? There is, of course, an enormous and unending inventory of books on powerhow it works in human societies and how to get it. Although one should know how societies function, I have misgivings about concentrating on the "How To . . ." books as guides to move from the powerless category. Rather, we might rethink other kinds of power with which we can connect. D. H. Lawrence suggested two kinds of power (discussed in Chapter XV): the power to dominate others and the power to fulfill oneself. With the latter we can experience power as competence. We can see it as taking control of our self-image and not accepting the definition of ourselves and the value of ourselves from another. The latter would permit the concept of friendship. In interactions among peers and colleagues, one difference between the responses of males and females is in situations of bonding. Males will appear to be friends with each other in certain conditions on the job or at the club, and thus they get their business done. Females, on the other hand, want to be "honest" in their relationships, and they do not readily accept unwanteds with equanimity and casualness in order to do business. In this system of human relationships, two definitions of "friend" result: femalea confidant; malea contact. I wrote in Chapter XV about what I considered the most urgent problem of human beingsthe friendship of male and female: "Personal satisfaction and fulfillment might preclude the 'need' to wage

< previous page

page_xv If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xvi

next page > Page xvi

war and contaminate the environment. Overpopulation and war are results of more profound problems." And as I read the daily paper reporting unbelievable violence between individuals and warring destruction in various countries, I return to those precepts today. Categories Again The chicken and the egg dilemma continues to be an unsettled question for linguists who struggle with the relationships of language and culture, as well as language and thought. The problem revolves around the idea of whether language locks people into certain behavioral patterns or whether language simply reflects what the behavioral patterns are. The term grammatical categories v as used toward the end of the last century, and in 1911 anthropologist Franz Boas again used the term to refer to those groupings that are manifested in syntactic structures.V Recent discussions may use the label "the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis" to refer to this correlation between linguistic groupings (or sets) and behavior. I consider these notions to be of supreme importance in trying to understand male/female behavior, and responses to that behavior (Key 1972). I dealt with such classifications and groupings in Chapters I and VIII, but I was disappointed that these notions were not sufficiently attended to in the reviews of and reactions to the book. Misunderstandings and feuds among people continue to be based on wrong perceptions that emanate from permitted groupings. Grammatical categories are an outgrowth of the human being's concept of reality and the attempt to cope with it. "Reality" is not what is out there, but rather one's conception of what is out there. To get a feeling for how these categories became a part of our thinking and speaking, one can attempt in one's imagination to reconstruct the emergence of humankind from the cave (to use a metaphor). How did language get started? What made these classifications get worked into language? Imagine the first human beings looking out of the cave and putting labels on the elements of the environment and on the other creatures in it. They would see something move and they would have to classify whether it was dangerous or benign: was it the leaves of a tree being blown by the wind, or was it an animal that might attack? The first humans very quickly categorized what was edible and non-edible. They soon discovered that some things felt good and comfortable to touch: a piece of moss, a flower petal. Some things felt

< previous page

page_xvi If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xvii

next page > Page xvii

uncomfortable: a prickly cactus, or rubbing fish scales the wrong way. Then they would label each other: the hunters and the non-hunters; the gatherers and the non-gatherers; those who could walk and those who could not walk. As humans were adapting to the environment by labeling and categorizing things in it, verily they were building these categories into the structure of language. I wonder at what point humans discovered that there were two classes: males and females. I doubt that grasshoppers think about the problem of being sexual creatures. Probably in pristine times, when people were groveling for something to eat and looking for ways to protect themselves from the elements and from predators, it really did not matter whether one was male or female. What did matter was who could catch the most fish, or who was the best at digging edible insects to eat, or who was the best at constructing shelters. There are various ways to classify the inventories of one's experiences. Languages exhibit such groupings in their form classes, and these linguistic classifications may be true to the facts of nature, or they may be invented artifacts. Categories may be logical or not logical. Physical characteristics are used to classify such things as gases, liquids, solids, colors, shapes, and sizes. Functional behavior is used to classify occupations, supernatural beings, instruments, transportation crafts, and men and women. Categories may overlap and intersect; men and women may be classified by their physical characteristics as well as by their functional behavior. Categories are not always equatable across cultures. For example, the category of ''edible" would or would not include snails, ancient eggs, truffles, and horse meat, according to the particular people involved. Categories are used and understood to include and exclude. He drew a circle that shut me out Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout. But Love and I had the wit to win: We drew a circle that took him in. Outwitted, Edwin Markham [1852-1940] vi As a result of social upheavals of people reexamining their perspectives, I focused on the referents and groupings that comprise males and females; and I included many examples of actual language use in natural (not contrived) situations (Key 1972). Present-day examples give some indication of whether or not attitudes and reactions to the

< previous page

page_xvii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xviii

next page > Page xviii

powerless have changed in the last generation. No doubt there is considerable sensitivity demonstrated by some speakers and writers, though not all. A recent headline above an article in The Wall Street Journal vii read: "Justices to rule on sex bias and garbage." I assumed that only two topics were on the agenda of the high court, but further down in the article other issues were listed, concerning workers, consumers, and business. One wonders if the juxtaposition in the headline was intentional or out-of-awareness. In either case, the cunning editorial decision continues to demean females. It is reminiscent of the brouhaha a generation ago documented in Chapter IV, when trash barrels in a California institution were labeled with female names. Females have not been included in the categories of humans who function as "thinkers" until relatively recent times. Fewer than a hundred years ago it was believed, at least by some scholars, that genius could only be a masculine trait (see the discussion of "genius" in Chapter I). At that time there were also beliefs that women did not have souls. These behavioral constructs are still very powerful regulators of human affairs but amidst much disagreement and dissatisfaction. Note, for example, the difficulties in arriving at an agreement of which items make up a list in the category of "non-soul" things/beings: "tables, giraffes, Indians, trees, pets, fetuses, insects, women'' (Chapter I). We could add the deaf to the list, remembering that at one time they were considered in the non-soul category. Perhaps most people would agree that tables, giraffes, and insects do not have souls, but people do not agree on whether or not fetuses have souls. Some people believe that pets have souls. During the time of the conquistadors, the Spanish-speaking conquerors did not believe that Indians had souls. Therefore, it was possible within the law to deal with the Indian in a different way than with other human beings. In a similar way, remnants of former beliefs (semantic categories) still pervade the treatment of women and girls in societyand in law. The Reasonable Person and the Language of Law The definition of "reasonable" is drawn from grammatical categories, as I have suggested in the groupings illustrated in Chapter VIII, and further

< previous page

page_xviii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xix

next page > Page xix

discussed above. The types of humans who can be included in the legal framework of The Reasonable Person have to do with the functions permitted human beings, either by the laws of nature (childbirth or suckling an infant, for example), or by the rules of the society. Collins (1977) provided the first study that I know of that treats the concept of "The Reasonable Man" in dealing with the implications of laws for women. This article is of value to the law profession because of its linguistic content; and it is of value to linguists because it comes from inside the mind and thinking of those dealing with the language of law. Collins shows (p. 10) that at one time a woman's conduct need "not come up to the standard required of a reasonable man; her conduct was only what was to be expected of a woman, as such." Before recent changes in law, contract law listed the parties who were not legally competent: minors, the mentally incapacitated, and sometimes special groups such as married women, convicts, and aliens (see Chapter VIII). These groupings are of long standing. Parturier (1974: 8-10) notes that similar ideas were codified in the period of the French Revolution. Legislative committees gave legal backing to the grouping of women: "Children, lunatics, minors, women, those convicted of odious crimes . . . shall not be considered as citizens." The Napoleonic Code supported such patriarchal laws. Modifying the inventory of items within a category is an enormously complex matter, for it involves resultant changes in behavior for the item/person which is moving from one category to another. Since nothing acts in isolation, the other members of the list are also affected. With regard to females and the categories in law, this inevitably results in a confrontation of responsibilities and rights. Certain protections that females had when they were classed with the legally incompetent are being changed as the inventories of the categories change. When women are reclassified with other adults, they have to take on adult behavior. These categories and groupings must be reconsidered and adjusted to accord with modern education, where women are taught to think, and with the not surprising discovery that females may also be logical, at times, even as males are logical, at times. These changes should be embraced as improvements in the working arrangements of society. Actually, the classifications of females with children and other legally incompetent members of society such as convicts and idiots are fairly recent in the history of human beings. Removing females from the categories of legally incompetent persons,

< previous page

page_xix If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xx

next page > Page xx

and moving them into the category of the "Reasonable Person" would be a step toward recognizing their value as a contributing and responsible members of society. In the mid-eighties the California Judicial Council began an investigation that would expand into a wide-ranging inquiry into sex discrimination in the California court system (Hager 1989). Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird appointed the first committee to examine gender-bias. It was noted that certain areas of the law, such as family law and juvenile justice, were sorely neglected and underfunded. As one Superior Court Judge noted, these areas were regarded as "women's work" and were not seen as important as "real law" that dealt with corporate or antitrust law. A series of hearings took place during the years that followed; other states had begun inquiries and it was not long before half of the states were studying the problems. Resnik (1988) cites other studies from across the nation. The language of law was being re-written. At the beginning of the 1990s, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court started its own inquiry into sex discrimination with a task force that was headed up by United States District Judge John C. Coughenour. The final report was released in 1993, and the impact of that study will extend into the next millennium. The report is impressive, and every institution of society that holds a potential of discrimination problems will have to deal with the findings. I will mention some highlights from the report that document the uneven treatment of groups of people. (Page numbers in the following comments are from Coughenour et al. 1993.) The investigation dealt with the roles of women and men; the appointments, hiring, and promotion practices; the courtroom interaction; the federal courts; employment law; gender and bankruptcy; federal Indian law; and the criminal justice system. The Appendices include useful information on activities across the nation; canons of ethics and guidelines; a bibliography; and tables of cases. An enlightening feature in the report is the inclusion of "asides" and informal marginal comments that give life to the report and graphically display its human content. One participant was recorded as saying: "I have never witnessed nor heard of a single incident of gender bias" (p. 192). These are real people reacting and responding to words and ideas that they had not yet grappled with in their legal careers, with an intent to find solutions. Specific linguistic behavior was brought to the surface: how women are addressed, the language that male legals

< previous page

page_xx If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxi

next page > Page xxi

use in speaking to or about female legals. Women attorneys objected to being called "dear," "honey," or "young lady" (p. 51). One respondent to the inquiry wrote: "Even flattering remarks, if made in front of clients or juries, divert attention away from argument"; and committee members noted the distinction between polite conversation and meaningful commentary, and the effect on a counsel's credibility (p. 54). The report dealt with the problem of credibility, noting that research indicates a tendency to doubt the testimony of female victims, who may actually get blamed for their predicaments (p. 152). The findings showed that a woman's testimony may "be disbelieved or discounted as complaints about life rather than as providing evidence of legally cognizable harms" (p. 197; also p. 238). During a certain trial, a woman witness was described as a "lovely girl" (Appendix C-4). The report concludes that, "Gender can have an effect on one as litigant, witness, lawyer, employee, or judge, both with regard to process and with regard to substantive outcome" (p. 191). The study observed that women are interrupted more often than men (p. 224). Yes, gender counts. The words "perspective" and "perception" are sprinkled throughout the report, indicating the need to see and hear varying positions. Resnik (1988) had previously discussed the arguable "assumption" of anyone claiming not to have a [biased] perspective. Is it possible to have a perspective without any preconceived notion about an issue? In the final analysis, the argument would have it that it is better to have a sense of obligation and responsibility, by admitting that it is human to have perspectives. Responsibility obligates one to recognize the perspectives of others. (See also Gilligan 1982; and Menkel-Meadow 1992.) The concluding chapter of the Ninth Circuit study includes a section called "Towards Transformation," and the report ends with: . . . Our project is committed not only to understanding how gender affects the business of the federal courts but also, having documented some of the harms, to considering how to transform the courts . . . . when women and men of all colors are accorded equal treatment and respect, the world may well look different than it does now. Our commitment is to transformation. (p. 239)

< previous page

page_xxi If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxii

next page > Page xxii

The examination of bias extends to jurors. During the early 1980s, in a California courtroom (Hager 1983), prospective jurors were asked about their marital status if they were female; male jurors were not asked the question. One prospective juror, who was a lawyer, refused to answer. The Appellate Justice who wrote the court's lead opinion recalled a case in the South where a Black witness refused to respond to questions when she was addressed by her first name, in a setting when white women were addressed by title and last name. Law schools report a significant increase of women students in this generation; and today it is not at all unusual to see women lawyers functioning in the courts along with male colleagues. Conferences on Women, Language, and the Law may contain sessions that deal with the necessity of linguistic change, as well as with changes in the laws that deal with the powerless (see Veach 1980). Linguistic inroads are now seen in journals and magazines aimed at the legal community; for example, the American Bar Association published some editing guidelines in Romm (1985). Though the definition of a Reasonable Person was available at least since Collins (1977), it took some time for the extension of "reasonable" to incorporate a female's perception of harassment. The Ninth Circuit report dealt with the topic of harassment (p. 130), and cited the 1991 case that motivated changes. (See also Pristin 1991.) In the lawsuit, the STANDARD of what would be perceived as sexual harassment by a "reasonable woman" was adopted after an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Circuit held that in cases of harassment, the proper inquiry must be conducted from the victim's perspective (p. 130): "This shift in viewpoint recognizes . . . that limited vantage point may reinforce existing discriminatory stereotypes." It is essential that female perspectives be considered in the revisions of laws concerning child welfare, rape, battery against women, family law, and community property. Female clients and scholars can substantially add to the definition and understanding of such matters that eventually touch every citizen. Reasonable male legal professionals will most certainly support the changes needed that will affect theft mothers, grandmothers, wives, daughters, aunts, and nieces. We could learn from other times and other societies. It has been reiterated often that the most complete set of laws surviving from ancient times was developed during the Sumerian reign of Hammurabi (=Khammurabi) [1792-1750 B.C.] in Babylon. The Code of

< previous page

page_xxii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxiii

next page > Page xxiii

Hammurabi granted women considerable independence and high status. The scholar of ancient cultures E.A. Wallis Budge notes that "during the time that the Code was observed a woman could travel unmolested from Babylon to the Mediterranean Sea." viii For further study of legal issues, see the following entries in the bibliography: McGill Law Journal (special issue) 1975; Babcock 1971, 1975; Bix 1993; Bosmajian 1977; Bysiewicz 1972; Charrow 1982; Collins 1977; Coughenour et al. 1993; Cox 1990; Davidson, Ginsburg, and Kay 1974; Driedger 1976; Epstein 1981; Ginsburg 1974; Gravdal 1991; Hager 1983, 1989; Handelman 1993; Hoff-Wilson 1991; Hughes 1971; Karst 1989; Kay 1991, 1992; Kerr 1977; Kurzon 1989; MacKinnon 1979, 1992, 1993; Masters and McGuire 1994; Menkel-Meadow 1987, 1992; Nemeth, Endicott, and Wachtler 1976; O'Barr 1982; O'Barr, and Atkins 1980; O'Donovan 1985; Pristin 1991; Resnik 1988; Ritchie 1975; Romm 1985; Sachs, and Hoff-Wilson 1978; Stannard 1973, 1977; Stix 1980; Stopes 1908; Strodtbeck and Mann 1956; Todd and Fisher 1988; Veach 1980; West (Robin) 1988; Williams (Patricia) 1991. "It's the economy, Stupid!" The phrase that was heard repeatedly in our 1992 presidential campaign aptly fits the economic situation of women, who often have the responsibility of balancing the budget at home. The price tells us the value of a commodity; and we are reminded that females still earn substantially less than males, even when the work is comparable. Chapter I deals with women and the exchange of goods, or the language of economics. Undoubtedly it is a fact that there never was a time in the history of human beings that all healthy adult members of society did not actively work and contribute toward the provision of food, clothing, and shelter. There is simply too much work involved to allow a large category of adults such "protection" that they are shunted to the sidelines along with the minors and the feeble. The industrial society redefined "work" and wrote the laws that govern work by its own definition to suit industry. This fact has obscured the reality that females have never stopped contributing toward the provision of food, clothing, and shelter. It is "work" whether the woman plants beans in the garden or works in an office and receives a paycheck to buy the

< previous page

page_xxiii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxiv

next page > Page xxiv

beans at the market. She may weave the cloth, or she may teach, in order to buy ready-made garments; she provides the work of entertaining her husband's colleagues and clients, to further him in his position. Make no mistake: This is WORK! John O'Neill ix (1985) has commented on the household economy and the fact that economists seldom give recognition to the contributions of women: Galbraith is virtually alone among economists in noticing the reality of the household economy and in particular the tasks of women, hitherto ignored by classical economics. (p. 104) A refreshing change of perspective is suggested by an anthropologist who looks at other cultures to throw light on our own. Weiner (1992: ix, 17) suggests "a new way to conceptualize exchange processes and values which accommodates the place of gender in social theory and leads to a reconceptualization of how difference is transformed into rank and hierarchy." She calls her approach "an experiment." It is not important to uncover a mistake in some detail of this pioneering study; it is important that a new vision has opened up a way of thinking about the artifacts of societiespossessions that have been fabricated by womenand the place of women's contributions to the economics of each society. In order to evaluate properly the worth of females, and the awful and awesome complications that obscure the topic, one must consider the language of money, the language of power, and the language of sex, as these are used by both male and female to gain from the other. They are all inextricably connected. The Male/Female Verbal Environment and the "Politically Correct" In 1977, Professor James R. Kerr dealt with the problem of an all-male Supreme Court of the United States, and wrote a reasoned affirmative conclusion: "Why we need a woman on the Supreme Court." The fast appointment finally came, in 1981, with the appointment of Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, and it was followed in 1993 by the second. During the hearings on Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg (now Justice Ginsburg), the verbal environment was not always compatible

< previous page

page_xxiv If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxv

next page > Page xxv

with which the advances of unbiased language that linguists have been concerned. For the most part, the appointment went smoothly enough, and the hearings were enlightening discussions and clarifications of law, with a good deal of exploration concerning the interpretation of laws that concern women and children and other powerless categories. Most of the testimony in the hearings for Judge Ginsburg referred to her properly by her earned title. There were few witnesses against her appointment. It was particularly salient, then, that a witness against the appointment consistently referred to her as "Mrs. Ginsburg" (July 23, 1993), stripping her of the proper title, denying recognition of her qualifications (see Chapter V on titles). Further, the opposing testimonies also referred to Women's Libbers" in a deprecatory way. The Nature of a PersonThe Whole Person Human behavior results from both nature and nurture and the interaction between inheritance and environment. Since Classical times, people have struggled for an apt and accurate description of a human being. Essayists still cite the cardinal virtuesfour of them "natural" and three of them "theological." The principles of morality list: (1) prudence/wisdom, (2) temperance, (3) fortitude/courage, (4) justice; and these are followed by (5) faith, (6) hope, and (7) love. Theologians also brought in the "dark side" and became concerned with the "seven deadly sins": (1) vainglory/pride, (2) covetousness, (3) lust, (4) envy, (5) gluttony (including drunkenness), (6) anger, and (7) sloth. Whatever the final decisions about such descriptions of the unfathomable human nature, it is abundantly clear that these virtues and sins are equally distributed among males and females. The restrictions are laid out by the rules of society. Women are supposed to be ''nice" and men are supposed to be "strong." Men and women must be empowered with more choices in their lives, and in their languagespoken or written. Both must be permitted the whole range of emotions, with considerations of appropriateness. The emotional and attitudinal concomitants of language are often manifested as features of paralanguage. x These are easily heard in spoken language, as tone of voice or quality of vocalization. I believe that it is this aspect of the linguistic description of language that is least represented and least understood, when writing replaces face-to-face spoken language. Thus, our understanding of

< previous page

page_xxv If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxvi

next page > Page xxvi

meaning in spoken language and the mis-match with written language is still in the Dark Ages. How does one convey the tone of voice in: surprise, indignity, resentment, joy? How does one write to indicate the delicacy of vocal exchange for envy, appreciation, tenderness, humility? How does one shout, show outrage, anger, or warning, in a written message? Punctuation has been put forth as a means of conveying the indispensable paralinguistic modifications of actual speech, when the speaker and the receiver are separated by time and space. Punctuation came after writing, when it was realized that sequences of letters without punctuation resulted in misunderstandings and ambiguities. Unfortunately, some wrong ideas about punctuation have become attributed to male/female differences. Handelman (1993: 46) cites an article published in 1923 on punctuation in legal writing. "The author characterized the dash as the most 'feminine' form of punctuation, reflecting capriciousness and undisciplined thinking." Consider another example of punctuation, the exclamation mark. Note how this useful orthographical device conveys paralinguistic nuances of vocal quality on a flat piece of paper. The exclamation mark brings to mind the quality of voice that expresses an assortment of attitudes and feelings. But it has been deleted from scores of manuscripts, on the basis that handbooks forbid its use. One writer's guide xi explains: . . . in some newspaper offices the exclamation mark is known as a screamerand that its overuse is a mark of nervousness or of schoolgirl style. (p. 523) In the same guide, the "Schoolgirl style" is defined as one that is: . . . characterized by sentimental . . . words (lovely, cute), by exaggeration, and by reliance on all sorts of mechanical forms of emphasisexclamation marks, dashes, capitals, one, two, and even three underlinings. These serve as satisfying muscular release to the writer and may add a sort of glow to a letter, but they should not be transferred to the printed page, and any suggestion of the style should be avoided, except to help portray a character. (p. 685) Thus, we are not able to express vocal quality (paralanguage). Male authors are told again, in writer's handbooks, that they must not

< previous page

page_xxvi If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxvii

next page > Page xxvii

be emotional; they must perform in a manly fashion. In order for paralinguistic necessities to be effectively displayed in writing, styles can be modified, with variations updated in the manuals of style. My colleague, the late Donald Heiney, wrote fiction under the name of MacDonald Harris. Heiney gave an interview early in 1993, xii in which he talked about his newfound sense of freedom as a writer after he retired. It caught my attention because he and I had discussed male/female differences in dialogue and language and we had pondered on how authors could successfully write out of the heart and mind of the "other." One of Don's final remarks in the interview was, "I'm putting in more exclamation points." The Sun Darkens the Moon We sometimes gain insight into our own behavior by looking at the behavior of others. This can be particularly enlightening as we analyze the structures of other societies and their belief systems. For a focus on gender, I bring to attention a recent study of the cosmology of the Inca empire of South America. Before the European migration, the Inca civilization had developed an extraordinary culture, with accomplishments in pre-technological times that are astounding, and to this day have not all been explained. Classenxiii unfolds the Inca belief systems by studying the folklore and texts of the ancient people whose descendants still live in the highlands of the Andes mountains. The Inca beliefs about creation begin with Viracocha, who was called Viracocha Pachayachachi, "Creator of All Things." Viracocha was considered to contain aspects of both male and female, in a way similar to the Classical Aztec empire, as noted in my Chapter I. In the cosmology of the Inca, however, Viracocha is said to have a male form, which is depicted in a temple as "a standing man, his right arm raised, like a person who was commanding." The association of a male Viracocha is consonant with the political structure of the Incas, where most of the positions of power were held by men. Classen suggests: There is a strong indication in the cosmogony, however, that femininity was not originally intended to be subordinate to masculinity. Viracocha creates the Moon, the classic Andean symbol of femininity, with more light than the Sun, the symbol of masculinity. The Sun

< previous page

page_xxvii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxviii

next page > Page xxviii

darkens the Moon out of envy so as to be the brighter of the pair. (p. 29) The Sun does this by throwing a handful of ashes in the Moon's face, thus darkening it. Classen interprets this to suggest that the Incas perhaps considered women to be naturally more powerful than men, and by male stratagems, kept them in an inferior position. In another study, "Man-Woman dualism in the Andean world," xiv complementarity is emphasized in the explanation of the harmony of opposites: Complementary because the harmony of one with the other is necessary for the 'progress' of each; contradictory because even when harmonized, neither is reduced to (becomes) the other. Each keeps its own identity, which is needed for development. The Andean authors see this as contrasting with Western thought, which leads to compartmentalization and hierarchical ordering. In the Inca civilization, they suggest, women complemented men and assumed half of the responsibilities in social, economic, political, and ritual activity. There is a double authority: Jilaqata (or Tara Mallku) [male] and Mama Talla [female]. Andean teachings incorporate the physical surroundings into the foundation of their belief system: the hills and mountains are masculine; and the valleys are feminine. Such a penetrating look at the belief systems and cosmologies of other cultures brings one to question the foundations of our own mythologies. Again and again we hear repeated that the law of polarity governs everything: the sacred and the profane; the right and the left; and, of course, the strong and active male and the weak and passive female. O'Neill deals with this pervasive dualist symbolism, and finally, argues for balance: . . . the injustice in these attributions lies not in the impositions of one side upon the other; each is unthinkable without the other. Justice lies in the complementarity of the gendered parts . . . (p. 50) We can think again about the linguistic genders of the heavenly bodies, and the possible link to our own beliefs inherited from antiquity. Note the curious examples of gender flip-flop among related languages. The Indo-European family of languages presents well-

< previous page

page_xxviii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxix

next page > Page xxix

known examples of the Sun and Moon exchanging genders: Spanish has a feminine Moon (la luna) and a masculine Sun (el sol); and German has a masculine Moon (der Mond) and a feminine Sun (die Sonne). Some South American Indian languages also illustrate the flip-flop of gender between the Sun and the Moon. See further examples in Chapter VIII, and problems of translation in Chapter IX. Seiler (1987) contributes useful comments on Roman Jakobson's treatment of gender and carries the discussion further into the purpose of indexing and the matter of the correspondence of gender to sex. The Still Silent Woman and The Resulting Silence of Others Some things make people speechless (see Chapter XIII). It is possible to think that women began to be eclipsed when people took "work" away from the living center. In an important study of the mismeasuring of particular groups of human beings, Stephen Jay Gould xv speaks of the "stunting of life." This is a "limit imposed from without, but falsely identified as lying within." Carol Tavris (1992) extends his phrasing to The Mismeasure of Woman. I dealt with the matter of genius and the former belief that women could not be geniuses in Chapter I. To the society of that day, it was a given that women were not capable of creating master works of literature or the arts. An aspect that has not been dealt with sufficiently is the matter of the response of others, when, for example, a woman does write, paint, throw a softball, or design a building. I have never come across an analysis of reviews and commentaries that deals with the acceptance or non-acceptance of the performance. Often the response is simply no response. She is ignored. And one wonders if that is less painful than being attacked. The Asymmetry of Nudity In 1989 the author of a professional book started the prologue with a discussion of herself taking a bath! Conjuring up the images of a naked woman in this seductive opener, the author may not have realized the

< previous page

page_xxix If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxx

next page > Page xxx

long-term impact that her opening would leave on the image of females. Nor did she measure the impact that it might have on the consideration of her acceptance in the professional academic community. Women must examine the characteristics of nudity and the social implications. In prehistorical communities where nudity or partial nudity is the norm, the responses to lack of clothing are different from the responses in societies that sell clothing at a market or down the street in department stores. Flugel's study, The Psychology of Clothes should be considered again: ". . . nakedness is often a sign of inferior social status, subserviency, or submission; while there tends to be a positive correspondence between social rank and the quantity of garments worn" (p. 56). Denuding is to become powerless; conversely, perhaps Simone de Beauvoir's insights should be recalled here: ". . . she makes her weakness the instrumentality of her power . . ." (1953: 335). The rationale for my comments lies in the problem of asymmetry (see Chapter XI). The Language of Sex speaks loudly. The Queen Bee Is Alive and Well or The Power of the Powerless Activity of the last generation has shown unquestionably that the attributes of the "power personality" are evidenced in females as well as in males. Just in case anyone might have believed that the world would be made better if women were put in places of management, the Queen Bee syndrome shatters that argument. A woman with power in her possession can be just as unfair as a man; indeed, again we see the dark side of human nature, as females as well as males may abuse their power. When traditionally powerless females attempt to manifest power-plays, the complexities are compounded. A variety of behaviors are available to the powerlessfrom active, destructive rebellion to acquiescence. This is an area of discomforting relationships, and the manifestations may be subtle, so as to be almost unrecognized. Over the past generation, as I have wondered about the lack of female and ethnic participation in high places, I have also noted recurring patterns of behavior in the profile of the Queen Bee.

< previous page

page_xxx If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxxi

next page > Page xxxi

The Queen Bee wears a mask; she must appear with an emotionless facial expression, so that observers cannot make a judgment on her loyalties. She assumes a neutral posture and facial control. She exhibits few spontaneous expressions of attitudes or emotion. She is affable to other women and may reach out to them, even in social relationships. But one notes that she does not readily acknowledge the accomplishments of other women, except in exceptional cases, such as a reference to Golda Meir or to Madame Curie. If she does, it is with condescension. She tries to appear to women as part of the Sisterhood. But if looked at closely, one can read between the lines that the grudging recognition of others is given with subtle "put downs" and lacks conviction. The Queen Bee is apt not to use the titles of other women. She does not recognize the positions and qualifications of other women. By silence or default, she demotes and diminishes them. Because she stands out alone, she loses her bearings with her own kind; her views are warped in isolation. To achieve her goals, the Queen Bee often uses strategies that go with bonding for transactionson whichever side. On evaluation committees, she may unfairly vote against other women. Since these meetings are secret and private, she is able to do this to demonstrate to other committee members that she is not a "Women's Libber." She sides with the established management in other matters to show her solidarity with them. It is probable that at least some of this is out-of-awareness. The struggle has been so hard for women. The vantage point of a Queen Bee gives her the illusion of being superior to other women. The Dinosaur Syndrome and Still to Come "When I say 'he,' I mean both sexes." The Dinosaur is still vocalizing such feeble explanations for his or her reluctance to give thought to careful editing of language. Dinosaurs come in both shapes. A few continue to claim that 'he' is a generic that includes both male and female, even though studies show that in import t instances it excludes females.

< previous page

page_xxxi If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxxii

next page > Page xxxii

This is not to say that all linguistic problems have a reasonable solution to replace discriminatory expressions. There remain baffling needs that defy intelligent and fair resolutions. Some terms need repair, such as: spokesperson, and 'significant other'. It is still not comfortable to write the salutation for a business letter. I received one with "Dear Y'all," from someone who had apparently given up on trying to find a business-like expression. The terms chairwoman and spokeswoman are not felicitous choices, since the terms would never be used for men, thus continuing the separation of women. It is significant that from the most prestigious offices, from the White House and high government offices, from universities, from giant corporations, from imposing businesses, a "spokeswoman" is sent out to meet the press for announcements, which very often carry bad news. These articulate women announce hard-ball decisions that their bosses and corporate boards have made; it is doubtful that the speakers have been privy to the decision-making process. But the voice of a person of the softer sex softens the announcement and protects the voices of power behind the scene. The human organism is so complex that no one discipline will be able to discover its workings. To understand human behavior and human language, all the disciplines that deal with human beings must contribute their perspectives. Those who do not want to be labeled as Dinosaurs must listen to others across disciplines and across social lines, in a cooperative atmosphere. As I think about the preceding generation, a dominant theme rises in my mind: that of multiple participation. When I entered the discipline of linguistics, we were assigned works by a few "great" personages. At conferences, one would expect to sit in meetings "at the feet of" a few big names. In contrast, today there are many voices which may be interpreted either as an undesirable cacophony or a magnificent symphony of many instruments. I prefer the latter interpretation. While females and persons of darker skin color have not yet reached parity, there is reason to believe that it is possible. The latter interpretation is the more difficult one, because it is agonizing to reorder one's perspectives. It is threatening to recognize our own errors or wrong positions. It is demeaning to admit our own mistakes. Or is it? Perhaps, we could realize that it is noble. And it is courageous to change our position, which demands a modification of our responses to

< previous page

page_xxxii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxxiii

next page > Page xxxiii

others. Perhaps Queen Victoria [1819-1901] said it best: "Change must be accepted . . . when it can no longer be resisted." Acknowledgments: Give Credit Where Credit Is Due Many people have contributed to a constructive understanding of the vagaries of human behavior, and in particular, the linguistic and nonverbal differences in male/female behavior. The large number of authors in the bibliography to this book attests to that. Some of the most cogent observations go back several centuries; and these have been validated in modern studies. Older references are historically relevant and can be noted in the bibliography. We are reminded of the ancient maxim which has been traced back to John Donne [1572-1631]: Though there were many giants of old . . ., yet I say with Didacus Stella: a dwarf standing on the shoulder of a giant may see farther than the giant himself. xvi Conclusion Well, after a generation of thinking about these things, I observe that there are indeed, widespread changes in perspectives, but we are still grappling with "truth." Illustrative of this, an incident took place on my campus of the University of California. In May 1968, the year that I first taught a course on Male/Female Language, a time-capsule was buried near the Administration Building, with directions that it should be opened up after 25 years. And so it was, in May 1993. This was planned with happy anticipation, and programmed along with celebrations to follow the joyful inauguration of our new Chancellor.xvii Alas, the time-capsule defied shadowy TRUTH again, as it contained a newspaper dated February 28, 1969! Mary Ritchie Key University of California, Irvine June 1994

< previous page

page_xxxiii If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxxiv

next page > Page xxxiv

i Letters to the editor, Smithsonian 22.3 (June 1991): 14, 16. ii Letters to the editor, Los Angeles Times, April 25, 1993. iii Mary Ritchie Key, "Report of Sabbatical Leave," April 13, 1974. iv Albert Einsten, quoted in Arnold A. Hutschnecker, The drive for power (New York: M. Evans, 1974) p. v. v Franz Boas, 1911. "On grammatical categories," introduction to Handbook of American Indian Languages. Washington, D. C.: Bureau of American Ethnology-B 40, Smithsonian Institution. vi Bergen Evans, [1968] 1978. Dictionary of quotations. New York: Avenel Books, p. 107. vii Paul M. Barrett, "Justices to rule on sex bias and garbage," Wall Street Journal, September 28, 1993. viii E. A. Wallis Budge, 1992. Babylonian life and history, 2d. ed. (New York: Dorset Press) p. 122. ix John O'Neill, 1985. Five bodies: the human shape of modern society. (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press) 181 pages. x Mary Ritchie Key, 1975. Paralanguage and kinesics (nonverbal communication): with a bibliography. (Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press) 246 pages. xi Porter G. Perrin, [1939] 1959. Writer' s guide and index to English. (Chicago, Illinois: Scott, Foresman) 816 pages. xii Dennis McLellan, "Novel has an English 'Eyre' about it," Los Angeles Times, April 1, 1993. Donald Heiney was a founder of the acclaimed writing program at the University of California, Irvine.

< previous page

page_xxxiv If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_xxxv

next page > Page xxxv

xiii Constance Classen, 1993. Inca cosmology and the human body, especially pp. 26-31. (Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press) 214 pages. xiv Eugenia Condori Mita, Jacqueline Michaux de Portugal, and Roxana Montecinos, ''Man-woman dualism in the Andean world," summary translation by Lucy T. Briggs of "Dualismo hombre-mujer en el mundo andino," p. 3, The Newsletter of the Aymara Foundation, Inc. (Autumn 1992). From La mujer en el mundo andino, La Paz, Bolivia: Ediciones Chitakolla, 1986. xv Stephen Jay Gould, 1981. The mismeasure of man. (New York: W.W. Norton) pp. 28-29. xvi Page 229 in Marcel C. LaFollette, 1992. Stealing into print: fraud, plagiarism, and misconduct in scientific publishing. (Berkeley: University of California Press) 293 pages. LaFollette gives credit for the quotation to Alexander Lindey, 1952, Plagiarism and originality. (New York: Harper and Brothers) p. 236. xvii Bill Billiter, "Inaugural day at UCI," Los Angeles Times, October 22, 1993.

< previous page

page_xxxv If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Chapter I In the Beginning: Male and Female Differentiation There is a good principle, which has created order, light, and man; and a bad principle, which has created chaos, darkness, and woman. attrib. to Pythagoras 1 The separation of the roles of male and female undoubtedly goes back to the beginnings of the history of human beings for very obvious reasons: child-bearing functions. It is a safe assumption that differences in the language of male and female also go back to the beginning of language, though we have to realize that much of history is lost in this aspect of human affairs, as well as in all other facets of human conduct. Language is in a constant state of flux; today the focus is upon changes in the area of male and female linguistic behavior. People are taking a second look at language forms that they have been using automatically all their lives. What was always there is now being examined carefully with pink and blue glasses. A great deal of experimentation is taking place during these transitional stages and while some of what is being tried today will remain in common usage, other forms will be dropped along the way. What is happening today is a general liberation of the language. All of this is rather fascinating and frightening; nevertheless, it is spiced with humor. The purported "phallacies about the movement" are being avidly discussed and there was a long and tense argument about "pronoun envy"2 at one of our prestigious institutions. A radio newscaster reported that a suit was being filed on the basis of sex discrimination because a woman was turned down for a job as Santa Claus. He quipped that, "In order to go HO, HO, HO, it is not necessary to be a HE, HE, HE!" A recent stage production was named Adam and Even. A prominent feminist published Quotations from Charwoman Me.3

< previous page

page_1 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_2

next page > Page 2

Humor is a non-threatening way that human beings have to deal with the world about them. It functions as a safety valve for situations too difficult to trust oneself with. Magnificent puns and plays on words have emanated from this focus upon male/female problems which all students of language will appreciate. In any case, it is quite apparent that in these times, a woman is not apt to take a "broad" view of things, and many hope that fewer men do. The first time that I became aware of male/female differences in languages, I was in Bolivia as a linguistic consultant visiting different villages studying the various Indian languages spoken. I landed at a little village, which probably isn't on your map, where the Ignaciano Indians have been living for centuries. Up until that time not much was known about their language, and I was to verify some of the linguistic data that had been collected. The linguist who had written down this material was a male, and I was reading from his field notes. I sat down on a tree stump surrounded by large pottery vessels and chickens and children, and I read off the phonetically transcribed vocabulary items. My informant was an affable woman who was bilingual and could tell me in Spanish what the words meant. When I came to a certain form, she started laughing, and I thought she was going to fall off her stool from amusement! We soon discovered that the word I had read was from the vocabulary of mena word that females never articulated. It was several years later, when I began teaching a course on varieties of language, that I began to focus again on the differences between male and female linguistic behavior. It soon became apparent to me that this distinction in language is a certain universal just as the sex role is universal, and that linguistic sex distinctions undoubtedly occur in every language of the world. Interestingly enough, however, they have not been reported upon widely. Of the some four to five thousand languages of the world, I can find linguistic statements about sex distinctions in fewer than a hundred. Societies cannot exist without language. Yet in spite of this universality, and even though Plato and Aristotle and other great minds throughout the centuries have commented on language, the science of language, or linguistics, is a fairly recent discipline. Only in the last century or two has linguistics (previously philology) been accepted as a discipline in its own right on university campuses. But the differentiated use of language by male and female is more than just a matter of linguistic forms; it is the use of these forms in society. It is

< previous page

page_2 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_3

next page > Page 3

the sociological choice and function of these forms. In the early development of linguistics, scholars were so busy trying to find symbols for the sounds they found in languages and to define subjects and predicates that they did not have time to become involved in the interdisciplinary efforts necessary to systematically describe the sociologically important male and female differences. In addition, the differences that occur are often very subtle and abstract, and though everyone responds to them, they are not readily identified. If you ask your friend, "How do men and women talk differently?" the answer is likely to be something vague: "Well, I don't know . . . do they? . . . Why, I suppose they do!" Although extensive systematic studies on male/female linguistic distinctions were not made until this century, some language studies from very early times did, however, make brief mention of sex differences. 4 Mulcaster in 1582 commented on the different pronunciation by male and female and related these differences to refined and vulgar language. It is probably not an unrelated fact in Mulcaster's life that he also advocated education for girls.5 Writers on the French language in 1688 and around 1700 made similar observations about female pronunciation. The volubility attributed to women speakers was noted by Swift in 1735, and a generation later Lord Chesterfield commented on women's fondness for hyperbole: a very small gold snuff-box was "vastly pretty, because it was so vastly little." Oscar Wilde continued the observations on women's speech: "Women are a decorative sex. They never have anything to say, but they say it charmingly." Sometimes it is easier to observe differences objectively when the subject matter is not our own. This seems to be the case in linguistic studies of male/female language, because the first statement I find with substantial data about these differences is on the American Indian languages, Carib and Arawak (see Chapter XIV for description), recorded by Raymond Breton in Dictionaire Caraibe-François [sic] in 1665. Throughout the nineteenth century, descriptions are largely on "the women's language" of these exotic, aboriginal peoples. Travelers, historians, philologists, and naturalists such as Humboldt6 enjoyed commenting on these esoteric tribes where the men and women had different languages! It has never been true that males and females had completely different languages, for the societies could not have existed as such.

< previous page

page_3 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_4

next page > Page 4

In this century, language scholars, notably the famous Danish scholar, Otto Jespersen, and the great linguist, Edward Sapir, began more extensive studies of male and female language differences. These scholars, however, were bound by their cultural preconceptions and distortions, as all human beings are, and this is reflected in their otherwise scholarly treatments of "women's language." Jespersen spoke of feminine weaknesses and Sapir included women's speech in his study of "abnormal types of speech." Greenough and Kittredge, highly respected English scholars, spoke of "feminine peculiarities." In discussions of the German language, it was said that, "Women naturally have certain peculiarities in their German as in other languages . . . .'' 7 It was shortly before this time that some scholars had come to the conclusion that genius could only be a masculine trait. This was "documented" by Weininger, along with his other ideas that women did not have souls and that they were incapable of true love.8 Not all great thinkers were hospitable to the idea that women did not have souls; for example, George Bernard Shaw: "Men are waking up to the perception that in killing women's souls they have killed their own."9 To be fair, one should say that Jespersen tried to have a more balanced perspective about geniusand he pointed out that "idiocy is more common among men,"10 another myth that he would have been unable to prove. Nevertheless, these ideas about intellectual potential influenced the statements about language and promulgated weird conclusions: the vocabulary of a woman is smaller; male language is more constructive, useful, and abstract; male language has more complex, embedded constructions, while female language is simpleminded with much emotional emphasis. It should be remembered here that these distorted and stereotyped judgments were not restricted to sex differences. Varieties of languages had not yet been studied scientifically and the anthropologically- and sociologicallyoriented recognition of differences, without value judgments of good/bad and normal/peculiar, was only beginning to be established in the study of human beings and their behavior. When Sapir published his study of abnormal speech types of the Nootka language in 1915, he included fat people, dwarfs, hunchbacks, lame people, left-handed people, circumcised males, cowards, baby talk, and women's speech. No one questioned that some of these categories are not abnormal. (I have to admit that I didn't immediately see the incongruity of including women's speech in abnormal types!) An enlightened awareness will challenge that kind of classification.

< previous page

page_4 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_5

next page > Page 5

Analogous to this is a recent study on mental health that showed double standards being applied in judging for male and female what is normal, healthy behavior. 11 This orientation of looking at language variation as different cultural and sociological types, and the development of linguistics in its maturing stages, has led to the establishing of a subdiscipline in linguistics called sociolinguistics. This branch of linguistics studies the infinite varieties of language within language: age differences, cultural differences, occupational vocabulary, slang, styles of speech and writing, and many others, but including, of course, sex differences in language. Before the development of sociolinguistics, linguists were not truly ready to talk about male/female differences because none of these differences operates alone and without intricate connections to other variables. The little girl rolling her eyes and inveigling an ice cream cone from a tall adult male is, indeed, using female language, but she is also using pre-school language, familial language (he is her father), and dramatic language (the scene occurs in public). Now that linguists are more sophisticated in methodology and evaluations, we can look forward to enlightened language descriptions in the future. Besides these obvious state-of-the-art reasons that we do not have much information on actual male/female differences in language, there are other realisms we have to face. Scientists are human beings and they sometimes bury ideas they cannot cope with. A case in point is the study of sex origin and development in the fetus. Recent information leads to the conclusion that all human fetuses are originally female but that upon some of them an active organizer substance called androgen operates to cause the development of a male.12 In fact, a rather good case could be made that mankind's first speech, "Madam, I'm Adam," is, indeed backwards, in more ways than are apparent at the surface structure.13 I will refer to this again when the matter of gender/sex analysis is discussed under linguistic structures. Another area that is difficult or impossible to cope with is the collection of discomforting vocabularies in linguistic behavior. A real investigation of the linguistic behavior of male and female would treat areas of tyranny, discrimination and power displays, and involve some usage which is very distasteful to certain people. One has to have a pretty strong stomach to read through the vocabulary collected on females as sex objects.14 It would appear that philologists and linguists through the years, keen enough to have observed these offensive distinctions, might have avoided further investigation as an

< previous page

page_5 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_6

next page > Page 6

area they could not cope with for the same reasons that prison language had not been documented in earlier years. A further difficulty in research and understanding of the phenomenon of human behavior is the climate of the society around the research institutions. The other day on the radio a news commentator spoke about the recently published love letters of Winston Churchill. He was extolling the life-long love affair of the Churchills, but lamented that, among other things, the rivalry between male and female today is destroying the beautiful love relationships of male and female! This kind of distorted logic fortifies and perpetuates the myths and scares off timid researchers. What isn't recognized in that kind of sentimental propaganda is that it is the myths/misconceptions and untruths that separate male and female and inhibit communion and understanding. Human beings are always interested in explanations of the phenomena that exist and move around us. From the time youngsters learn to speak, they start asking, "Why?" Scientists continue the tradition and work to find theoretical explanations for the data they observe. Explanations for sex roles are glibly passed off as child bearing or at least related to child bearing and nurturing. Linguistic differences are not so easily explained away by innate sexual differences. That is, linguistic differences cannot be explained as physiological. There are perhaps some differences in the brain which are not yet understood (I will discuss this later). The only physiological difference in the actual speech apparatus is the size and length of the vocal folds (vocal cords), which control pitch and quality of voice. This does not account for the fact that some women speak lower than some men and male/female linguistic behavior can still be distinguished. Most of the differences noted have to do with vocabulary choice and grammatical devices, neither of which has anything to do with the physiology of speech mechanisms. One phonetician 15 found in his studies of the vocal apparatus a performance behavior that remains curiously unexplained. More men than women can roll up the edges of the tongue! This articulatory virtuosity, however, never occurs in language sounds, and one might conclude that the advantages are dubious, since there doesn't seem to be much demand for people who can curl up the edges of the tongue. If, then, the physiological differences are minimal, why are the culturally learned differences so ubiquitous? Scholars have attempted to explain "women's language" in various ways, such as historical, sociological, psychological, and religious. Sir James Frazer, at the beginning of this century, attempted to explain the

< previous page

page_6 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_7

next page > Page 7

origin of gender in language. Kraus, a psychoanalyst, spent considerable effort in compiling the hypotheses of various writers up to 1924 concerning the phenomena of male/female differences in languages. Then she proceeds, as expected out of Vienna, to give the "real" reason!the psychoanalytic explanation. Royen later criticized Freud for his exaggerated sexualistic doctrines in relation to the science of language. 16 Probably, most of the differences can be explained on the basis of role expectancies and beliefs (myths?) of society: Man Does, Woman Is.17 Throughout the millennia women have accepted this with the dignity of futility. In truth, explanations must go far beyond our present imaginations into the beginnings of relationships between human beings. People have had to eat to survive. Hunting at times took the males away from the camp fire and the family circlehowever that family might have been constituted at that time. Hunting language would soon have been distinguished as one aspect, and a male one, of the material culture of the people. After a time it would result that the entire economic system of the society would similarly find its own language. Thus, economics in language would have been an early important association. Whatever was barterable was the precursor of money, in itself a special kind of communication. The exchange of goods soon incorporated females and all of this involvement of economics, kinship and marriage, and communication or language is undoubtedly the foundation of other varieties in language based on status and sex.18 It is significant that a recent book on marriage is entitled Pigs, Pearlshells, and Women.19 Robert Graves succinctly observed: "Marriage, like money, is still with us; and, like money, progressively devalued. The ties between these two male inventions get closer and closer."20 George Bernard Shaw also commented on the "commercial interpretation of marriage" and, further, noted that a "marked difference is made in price between a new article and a secondhand one"the "damaged goods'' syndrome.21 This is paralleled in linguistic terms for women who are not virgins. While the development of economics and all that is entailed was essential for the survival of the human race, supernatural or religious beliefs quickly followed. Basic distinctions in belief systems have to do with living and nonliving beings and things, and their interdependency. At this point it looks simple enough: we think we know what is living and what isn't. But it is not that easy; societiesand languagesclassify the parts of the world differently. Most of the

< previous page

page_7 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_8

next page > Page 8

time they overlap, but it is the grey areas of non-agreement in the thinking of human beings which cause us to ponder. For example, a moldy fungus would be a living organism to a scientist, but not to a rubber hunter in the Amazon jungle. However, the large tree standing near the third bend of the river is a supernatural "living" being to the rubber hunter but is not a living being to sophisticated scientists. Male human beings have souls, but, variouslydepending upon the group making the judgmenttables, giraffes, Indians, trees, pets, fetuses, insects, and women don't have souls. Thus, categories are supremely important in controlling the behavior of human beings. In subtle, at times almost imperceptible ways, classificatory systems correlate with language structures and control the syntax of language as they control other behavior of people. In languages, there is a very close relationship between genders and animate/inanimate distinctions. Compare the two diagrams presented here.

Which represents more closely the facts of the universe? Which is the more basic category: human-beings/animals or male/female? It should be noted that these diagrams are not necessarily correct for all languages. They are based on English categories and language. 22 To show how these concepts can be completely misunderstood even by highly intelligent people, I quote a renowned scholar of the last century. In discussing the Arawak language of Guiana, he noted two genders, which he called masculine and neuter. This kind of linguistic

< previous page

page_8 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_9

next page > Page 9

gender classification has nothing to do with diminishing females. Nevertheless, he mistakenly observed: A peculiarity . . . is that [Arawak] only has two genders . . . masculine and neuter. Man or nothing was the motto of these barbarians. Regarded as an index of their mental and social condition, this is an ominous fact. It hints how utterly destitute they are of those high, chivalric feelings, which with us centre around women. 23 All of the Indo-European languages except Armenian and Persian# have masculine and feminine grammatical categories of gender in their linguistic systems. In some, as we will see later, the gender system is very predominant: every tree, table, chair, and stone has either a masculine, feminine, or neuter assigned to it. In others, such as English, the gender system is evident only in a few pronouns: she and he, his and her. In order to grasp the significance of gender-consciousness in our world view, it is useful to go outside of the Indo-European languages and see how other people and languages deal with gender. This also we will discuss later, but here I want to deal with this aspect of language and the origins of human beings. The Aztec language is a good example, because we know something of their ancient beliefs and it is a language that does not have masculine and feminine gender in the grammatical system. The singular pronouns are: nejwa, tejwa, and yejwa, meaning, respectively, first person singular (or I), second person singular (you), and third person singular.24 This last pronoun cannot be translated into English. It may refer to 'he, she, it'. I believe that this is relevant to the concepts that the Aztecs devised for the explanation. of their origins.25 They believed that the origin of the world and all human beings was one single principle with a dual # Gender is not thought to be a feature of the Persian language, according to some interpretations, which Windfuhr explains. Arabic loans have provided some rules which may be described as a "productive sub-part of Persian grammar." Thus, the borrowed gender may appear to be a feminine category, which is morphologically marked, following the rules of Arabic grammar. This information is from: Gernot L. Windfuhr, 1979, Persian grammar: history and state of its study. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 82-83.

< previous page

page_9 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_10

next page > Page 10

nature. This supreme being had a male and female countenancea dual god who conceived the universe, sustains it, and creates life. This god had the regenerating ability of both male and female. This dual deity, Ometeotl, had two different aspects of a single supreme being. Ome = 'two' and teotl = 'god.' The dynamic essence of this divine being was the feminine and masculine naturea whole god. Ometeotl dwelt in a place called Omeyocan: "the mansion of duality, the source of generation and life, the ultimate or metaphysical region, the primordial dwelling place . . . ." This god is spoken of in the singular grammatical form. There is a plural form in Aztec, if the ancients had wanted to use it, but they referred to this god in the singular. At the same time, this singular divine being is described as having a partner, which means 'equal' or 'a thing which fits or adjusts with some other thing' or 'that which improves a thing or makes it more complete'. Besides the gender difficulty in rendering these ideas into English, there is the difficulty of the multitudes of gods being one god. Do we use 'is' or 'are'? Note that I have not used either pronoun referent 'he' or 'she' so far, in reference to this Aztec god. There is nothing in the Aztec language to indicate which gender should be used, and there is simply no way to translate this into English. Nevertheless it is significant that the eminent authorities who discuss Aztec religion all use the pronoun 'he' in the discussions. There is no more reason to use the male referent than to use 'she'. We can substitute the female referent just as correctly: "She is Queen, she is Lord, above the twelve heavens . . . she exercises power over all things. She is Lord and she rules." Also in the translations, the words 'wife' and 'consort' are used to designate the counterpart, the partner. Again, there is no word in English, unless we use the term 'Siamese twin' to refer to this single dual being. This Siamese twin god was referred to as in Tonan, in Tota, Huehueteotl, 'the Mother, the Father, the old god'. In fact, this divine being had many titles: Thus the tlamatinime [the sages], anxious to give greater vitality and richness to their concept of the supreme being, gave [the god] many names, laying the foundation for a comprehensive vision of the dual and ubiquitous divinity. And they did this through 'flower and song.' 26

< previous page

page_10 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_11

next page > Page 11

Thus, attempts at explanations and theoretical discussions continueand will continue as long as human beings like to talk with each other and ask questions. In reality, what we must deal with now, whether or not we know the explanation, is that for whatever the reasons, male and female linguistic behavior differs one from the other. In the atmosphere of today's thinking in terms of Human Liberation, surely the greatest and most profound of all revolutions, we arc even now witnessing linguistic change of male and female behavior. For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. The last generation has experienced a significant change in the area of humor, both in the nature of jokes, and in the producers of comedy. It is not unusual now to see female comedians on the stage. Indiana University Press considered a book of feminist humor worthy of including in its list of publications: Gloria Kaufman and Mary Kay Blakely 1980. On the matter of genius, J.B.S. Haldane may have had it right when he speculated that "Probably some later genius discovered how to kindle a fire by rubbing sticks together, and I like to imagine that it was a woman who first presented her astonished but delighted husband with a cooked meal." (1985, On being the right size: and other essays, New York: Oxford University Press, p. 81). The late Bette Davis was the first woman to be honored with the Life Achievement Award by the American Film Institute in 1977. The head of AFI acknowledged her great worth, but went on to note that "It is less difficult for a woman to be celebrated for her genius than to be forgiven for it." (Los Angeles Times, March 3, 1977, Part IV, p.1.) His remark resonates with the experiences of women in the 20th century. According to historians, beliefs about both genius and soul are related to sex. The matter of soul has to do with how people are dealt with: rules of behavior are distinguished when they have to do with a non-soul creature vs. a human creature. Weston La Barre (1984:72) traces the notion that "a woman has no soul" back to classical times, which, he states, formed the foundation of the widely held belief. In

< previous page

page_11 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_12

next page > Page 12

thinking about these concepts, one is reminded of the linguistic categories of animate and inanimate. Nowadays anthropologists don't assume that the hunter was always a male figure. In many contemporary societies it is the women who do the fishing. Gathering has provided a substantial part of the food and artifact resources, and often this was and is still done by women. Badinter (1989); Ehrenberg (1989); Tanner (1981); and Zihlman (1989) discuss the role of women in pristine times. Regarding the origins of gods and humans, see Callaghan (1979). Growth in research in the biological basis of behavior has been phenomenal in the latter half of this century. The general interest of nature vs. nurture is enough of a challenge. The focus of male/female differences is an obligatory dimension, as scientists have explored the chromosome combinations of Xs and Ys. Some of the articles, not surprisingly, began with George Bernard Shaw's famous line: "Why can't a womanbe more like a man?" and the question has driven the research during the last two decades. A sampling of recent scientific and mainstream publications shows the developments: Frederick Naftolin, and Eleanore Butz, eds. 1981. "Sexual dimorphism," Science 211.4488 (March 20): 1263-1324. L A. Miller, 1985. "Common ground for X, Y chromosomes," Science News 127.24 (June 15): 374. Rick Weiss, 1989. "A genetic gender gap: scientists discover that not all genes are created equal," Science News 135.20 (May 20): 312-315. Meredith F. Small, 1992. "Female choice in mating: the evolutionary significance of female choice depends on why the female chooses her reproductive partner," American Scientist 80.2 (March-April): 142-151. Paul Hoffman, ed. 1992. "The science of sex," Special Issue, Discover 13.6 (June): 28-93. Chandler Burr, 1993, "Homosexuality and biology," The Atlantic 271.3 (March): 47-65.

< previous page

page_12 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_13

next page > Page 13

John Rennie, 1993. "Spot marks the X: in females, one chromosome may lock itself inside an RNA," Scientific American (April): 29-30. William F. Allman, 1993. "The mating game: modem sexual strategies are shaped by Stone Age psychology," U. S. News & World Report 115.3 (July 19): 56-63. John Maddox, 1993. "Wilful public misunderstanding of genetics," Nature 364 (July 22): 281. Mary-Claire King, 1993, "Sexual orientation and the X," Nature 364 (July 22): 288-289. Roy Porter, 1993. "The fairer science," review of Nature's body, by Londa Schieblinger. Nature 366 (November 25): 387. See also Hubbard et al. (1979); Ridley (1993); and Symons (1979). Inevitably, the political complexities of the scientific research of sex have been admitted, and a recent headline of The Wall Street Journal (August 12, 1993) lengthened into a lament: "Science Besieged: Studying the Biology Of Sexual Orientation Has Political Fallout. Researchers Find Their Labs Turn Into Battlegrounds For Opposing Viewpoints. 'This Could End Your Career'." It was more heartening to read the final lines of William F. Allman (see above, p. 63), who echoed the findings of studies in evolutionary psychology: ". . . the essence of the mating game is compromise, not victory . . . . It is no accident that consistently, the top two mating preferences . . . expressed equally by males and females worldwidewere not great looks, fame, youth, wealth or status, but kindness and intelligence."

< previous page

page_13 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_14

next page > Page 14

Chapter II Social Structures: Masculinity and Femininity There are many beliefs in human societies that are accepted as facts even though there may be no proofs to substantiate the arguments. The beliefs about masculinity and femininity are as fascinating as they are confusing, and there is probably no area in the study of human behavior that is more fraught with myths and superstitions, and unproved "conclusions." Even so, masculinity and femininity are behavioral constructs that are powerful regulators of human affairs. Margaret Mead's classic studies on the male and female are basic for any attempts at understanding the social structures of "masculinity" and "femininity." There are widespread beliefs in our own society that certain attributes of male and female are based on physiological differences, and yet few of the so-called scientific studies can hold up to careful scrutiny that considers the complex variables of learned behavior. It is not easy to set up experiments to learn about human behavior, for ethical reasons as well as for the difficulties of learned interference and distracting variables. Although the study of animal behavior has added an enormous amount of information about living beings, it can be treacherous when its findings are extrapolated wholesale to human beings. After a point, comparisons between animals and humans are simply not valid. For example, the employment of birth control among humans makes the matter of male/female behavior hardly comparable with that of other animals in dealing with sex differences. Those who advocate that human male dominance is in the "natural" order of things, often cite examples from the chimpanzee community but regrettably, they fail to complete the picture: the female chimpanzee, when she is "in the pink," is capable of attracting males from far and near. She apportions her pleasures with uninhibited generosity. 27 How many human males would stand by and

< previous page

page_14 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_15

next page > Page 15

share their wives with all the males in the neighborhood? Comparison of human and animal behavior must be done judiciously. There are, indeed, certain basic physical differences between men and women that are accepted among scientists without contradiction. Some of these include: (a)

Females have less muscle and more fat.

(b)

Females have less muscular strength.

(c)

Females weigh less.

(d)

Females tend to be less well coordinated, except for fine hand movement.

(e)

Females mature physically more rapidly.

(f)

Females live longer. 28

These differences are acknowledged when convenient. Insurance companies charge different rates on the basis of the longer life of females. But these differences are not acknowledged when role stereotypes are to be perpetuated. The medical profession does not seek out women to be surgeons and dentists, even though female ability in fine hand movement exceeds the male's. No one has suggested that women be put in charge of the office of Secretary of State, even though we hear suggestions these days that aggressive behavior is an innate male characteristic. The fact that more males stutter doesn't keep males from making speeches. In investigating physiological differences, the brain is one central area of interest with regard to male/female differences. Here we look for patterns that emerge with regard to language or communication, since the brain is the seat of the origins of language. It is said that the acquisition of one's own native language is a human counterpart to imprinting in animals, as is the acquisition of a gender role and psychosexual identity.29 We will see latex that the sex differences in learned behavior begin very early in language. Are there differences in innate capacity? One scientist who has made recent discoveries about the brain has encountered sex differences: In right-hemisphere tasks males tend to have a greater left-visual-field superiority for dot location and dot enumeration than females. We also know that males are superior to females in certain visual-spatial tasks. It may be that right-hemisphere specialization is more pronounced in males than in females . . . . In contrast, females tend to have greater verbal fluency than males. There is no evidence, however, that

< previous page

page_15 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_16

next page > Page 16

adult females are more asymmetrical in speech lateralization than males. Dichotic studies nonetheless suggest that speech lateralization may develop earlier in girls than in boys. It appears that for some intellectual functions the brains of males and females may be differently organized. Most of human evolution must have taken place under conditions where for the male hunting members of society accurate information about both the immediate and the distant environment was of paramount importance. For the females, who presumably stayed closer to home with other nonhunting members of the group, similar selection processes may not have operated. It will be interesting to discover whether or not the sex differences in verbal and nonverbal asymmetries we have uncovered with our relatively, simple techniques hold true for other cultures. 30 We need to know more about the physiological differences of the brain of male and female in order to understand how the different sex patterns are "set" into the thinking and behavior of human beings in such pervasive and irreversible ways. Even assuming that there are, in fact, basic physical differences between males and females, it is immediately evident that these differences do not apply equally to all males and females. Some females have more muscle than some males. Some females weigh more than some males, and some males have finer hand movement than some females. We could chart the extremes and the overlapping on a scale:

Considering, then, the "all or none" and "some" variations of human behavior, one has to come to the conclusion that classifying occupations and behavior on sexual distinctions has little relevance to the realities of life. The only application that can be made of this scale to society is the use of the "only" designated areas of difference. Such

< previous page

page_16 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_17

next page > Page 17

functions as child-bearing and acting as wet nurse will never be performed by males. These concepts can be handled better as a continuum rather than as a dichotomy. Different cultures handle these physical differences in different ways. In our culture the males will carry heavy packages, whereas in a hunting culture, the male must be free to use the bow and arrow when a game animal is suddenly seen, and so the females carry the heavy packages. In our culture the female precedes the male in a single-file walking pattern; in the jungle cultures, the male, larger and more muscular, precedes the female for very practical reasons: he has to be alert to danger and protect the smaller persons. In a society such as ours, where mechanization and technology have superseded pristine muscular activities, our beliefs have lagged far behind our actual situation. The matter of psychological differences is infinitely more complex, and these concepts also underlie the beliefs about masculinity and femininity. One way to evaluate these differences is to note what occurs in other societies with regard to male and female roles. Without exception all cultures recognize different roles for male and female. It is significant, however, that the rules for this role behavior differ from culture to culture. What is considered female behavior in one culture may be male behavior in another. 31 In the Amazon rainforest, men make the pottery in one village, and a few hours away by canoe, in another village, the women make the pottery. In Western cultures, the females knit, but in the Andes the males are seen knitting as they walk along the stone-laid roads of the incomparable Inca Empire. In the Near East, men cry without shame and are expected to express their emotions in this way. Men of Western cultures are not permitted this outlet. Sir Walter Scott summed it up: A child will weep at a bramble's smart, A maid to see her sparrow part, A stripling for a woman's heart; But woe awaits a country when She sees the tears of bearded men. Marmion Canto Fifth In our society, the psychological characteristics of males are said to be: aggressive, assertive, authoritative, competitive, courageous, daring, decisive, domineering, independent, innovative, self-reliant, and vigorous, as well as blunt, boastful, bull-headed, combative,

< previous page

page_17 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_18

next page > Page 18

presumptuous, pugnacious, sadistic and violent. Females are said to be affectionate, demure, dependent, emotional, excitable, gentle, illogical, indecisive, intuitive, passive, sensitive, submissive, tender, and unambitious, as well as bitchy, fickle, saccharine, secretive, superficial, undependable, vacillating, whiny, and wily. A recent textbook in gynecology noted that, ''The traits that compose the core of the female personality are feminine narcissism, masochism and passivity." 32 It is difficult to separate out those qualities that are desirable in a human way from those qualities that are negative and destructive to the development of both male and female as a human being. One gets mixed up with sex roles interfering with one's thinking. Likewise it is almost impossible, at this stage of our knowledge, to separate those differences that are actual. Real and imputed differences will have to be sorted out before the final verdict. The ideas of femininity and masculinity are based on very old beliefs that were formulated to try to explain the world as it was known to mankind then. The principle of opposites underlies Western history: energy and inertia, active and passive, heaven and earth, Lord and flesh, with, of course, the male and female identification pervading these polar concepts. Our scientific tradition is based on the paternal principle of potency and even today this attitude is reflected in theoretical discussions: In view of the obstinate preoccupation of the human mind with the theme of the potent, activeI would almost say masculineprinciple, before and quite apart from any science of dynamics (and also with its opposite, the passive, persisting principle on which it acts), it is difficult to imagine any science in which there would not exist a conception of force (and of its opposite, inertia).33 La Barre artfully noted that Western society became burdened with false gender and that we falsely impute human sexual dimorphism to nature. He went on to say, . . . nature is itself, and is neither she nor hebut a self-identity which we dichotomize as motion or Energy (male) and substance or Mass (female) . . . . . . . man now knows that E quite demonstrably and indubitably equals mc2; i.e., matter and energy are the same thing under a different guise, or the same fundamental reality in a different phase or state of being.34

< previous page

page_18 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_19

next page > Page 19

Robert Graves, another sensitive observer of the female dilemma, also referred to the basic nature: Goethe prophesied the eventual rejuvenation of our world by a going-back to Nature. If, however, he was right, 'Nature' must be interpreted not as natura naturata, 'Nature as scientifically observed', but as natura naturans, 'creative Nature', which implies the power of love. Nor must love be read as grand-scale international philanthropy; but as a personal understanding between Barak, the male mind, and Deborah, the female mind. This alone can lift humanity out of the morass where intellectual arrogance has sunk it and develop the so-called supernatural powers of which both sexes are capable. 35 Our obsession with relegating almost everything to the male/female dichotomy may even have influenced our interpretation of other philosophies. The Chinese principles of yang and yin were originally conceived of forces that were symbolized by light and dark, firm and yielding, positive and negative. The ancient Chinese believed that the world of being arises out of the change and interplay of these forces. As these ideas were translated into Western societies, masculinity and femininity were introduced. An early translator of the I Ching (or Book of Changes) notes that some of these ideas are foreign to the original thought of the I Ching.36 Subsequently, Western thinking added what it wanted, and even uses the ideas to sell pop jewelry with the appeal: "Yin and Yang pendantsYin symbolizes femininity, darkness, coolness . . . Yang is the symbol of virility, light, warmth." It should be noted that the concepts of "masculinity" and "femininity" do not occupy so much attention in other cultures and languages of the world. There are languages where the terms do not occur, though all languages have some way of indicating male and female. This is not to say that there is less sexual activity in those societies; on the contrary, a case might be made that sexual activity occurs in inverse proportion to the amount of attention given to masculinity and femininity in advertising and dialogue. In the frenetic quest for femininity and masculinity in our society, both sexes project those qualities they admire and desire on the opposite sex. In denying themselves the qualities that are said to belong to the opposite sex, people glorify these qualities in the opposite sex out of proportion. Men deny themselves sensitivity and gentleness, but desire these

< previous page

page_19 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_20

next page > Page 20

qualities in their women. Women deny themselves assertive and authoritative behavior, and demand these qualities of their men. If the partners can conform to these stereotypes, then, well and good. But if the partners cannot sustain these ideals, then there is conflict, confusion, and disappointment. Today, the concepts of masculinity and femininity are being challenged and, in many cases, are being rejected as unworkable and destructive. Many people of this generation don't know if they are men or women because they have rejected the definitions of previous millennia. There is growing recognition that not all people favor the life styles that once were thought to be the only way, and that the "family" is not necessarily composed of the much-cherished nuclear structure, found in children's books and romantic tales, but not necessarily in real life: father, mother, son, and daughter. People are re-evaluating what is "right" and "good" in practical terms of what is real. Adjustments to new positions must take place. For the human race to survive, males will have to define themselves as less aggressive, and in order for womenkind to lift themselves out of their depression, females will have to define themselves as more aggressive. What has all this to do with language? Superficially, perhaps nothing. In profound and basic ways, however, these concepts underlie what it is thought proper for females to say and hear, and what it is thought possible for females to create, in the way of great literature and ideas. For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. The reevaluation and reorganization of the concepts of femininity and masculinity have impacted many areas of human societies today. The whole matter of mental well-being and healthy personality is being reexamined. We are seeing that females are not as nice as we thought the feminine attributes obliged; we are seeing that males are crying publicly. (In some societies, remember, this was accepted behavior.) Things are topsy-turvy, and now the newspapers report that psychologists and psychiatrists are seeing more "sad" and "depressed" males and more "angry" and "violent" women. Now the "mid-life crisis" may refer to men. The "sweet" and "strong" stereotypes didn't

< previous page

page_20 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_21

next page > Page 21

work, after all. What may have been thought to be pathological in previous generations, may actually be a sane reaction to unfair and unreal stereotypes. Ambition in a female was once thought to be indicative of mental illness; lack of ambition in a male caused him to be labeled a bum. All this questioning and reexamining is probably indicative of beret times to come, when males and females will be freer to be just themselvesto be what they were born to be. As I was writing the first edition of this book, Title IX was entered into the books as a federal law that barred sex discrimination in schools that received federal monies. It has taken about a generation for people to get serious about applying Title IX. Increasingly, in the arena, females are reputed to be going for performance in the main event; and they are rejecting the supportive role of cheerleading. For at least some women, the cheerleading squad is not as attractive as the center ring. Females have shown that they can be winners, and they can also be feminineor does it matter? Inevitably, coaches and players will face new behaviors and they will have to learn new rules. In sports, touching/tactile behavior has to be approached in a disciplined way, without sex on the mind. In the past, announcers and sportscasters referred to male competitors as men and female competitors as girls. Strong talk and rough talk will settle into a kind of sports lingo in which both males and females can participate. Athletic budgets will be challenged if they are out of balance. Will the next Olympics exhibit a more level playing field? Fair play means fair play. The military establishment is another national preoccupation that has given way to new roles. Now we hear new terms, such as the "woman warrior." Male pilots are making adjustments to female colleagues, and uniforms come in various shapes. Values are being reassessed. I have never understood the platitudes that I have heard in my lifetime about the experiences of immediate members of my family in four wars. Only men went to war; usually they were boys who became "men" upon dressing in the uniform. They went to protect the women and children of their families. Presumably, the males were expendable and females were valued highly. I always wondered about the double standard. As I kiss the medals and service-ribbons of my late soldier-son, who gave too much and died too soon, do I love him any less than I love my daughter? Death does not discriminate; why do we? The military double standard exists in other ways. Some military men are still objecting to homosexuals being permitted in the service of

< previous page

page_21 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_22

next page > Page 22

their country. A man may object because of his fear of being ogled in the shower, but the same man does not object if a woman is ogled in his office. Social structures are being readjusted, and new language is part of the accommodation. Learning another way to communicate does not have to be a confrontational experience; it can be a new adventure that carries with it a good deal of satisfaction. It is up to the participants.

< previous page

page_22 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_23

next page > Page 23

Chapter III Social Dialect Differences: Dialogues and Styles of Speech Human beings all over the world, in every language, have uncounted varieties of language to use in different social and cultural situations. People have used and responded to social differences since the beginning of time, but only recently have these varieties come to be studied in a scientific way in a relatively new branch of linguistics called sociolinguistics. This branch of study entails looking at various dimensions of language use in various situations. There are, for example, differences in language that are based on geographical dimensions. Southerners talk differently from northerners; people in Great Britain talk differently from people in the United States; Australians sound different from speakers of English in South Africa. There are also differences based on temporal dimensions. Grandfathers talk differently from grandsons; people talked differently a century ago from the way they do now. The language used three or four hundred years ago when the King James Bible was translated and Shakespeare wrote his plays is even a little difficult to understand today because of the temporal dimensions. Going back another two hundred years or so to the times when Chaucer wrote, one finds the language even more difficult to understand. Besides these spatial and temporal dimensions, there is a highly complex array of social and cultural dimensions that every human being has to learn from birth. There are age and sex and status dimensions that are inherent in every dialogue situation. There are language varieties as a result of bilingual or other language influence. In California the vocabulary is enriched by Spanish loan words such as tamale, taco, and olla. In Pennsylvania one hears expressions and folk songs influenced by the German language, like "Throw Mama from the train, a kiss, a kiss!" Occupational milieu certainly affects the use of

< previous page

page_23 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_24

next page > Page 24

language. Campus lingo is not always understood by parents when the student returns home; the space age added new expressions and vocabulary to the language. Surfers, tramps, beauticians, criminals, politicians, and all groups of people have their own style of language, which shows who is "in" and who is not. In addition to these many varieties of use of language, there are other conditions that influence the choice of forms and vocabulary. Following an old scholar from another century, I am calling this the context of situation. 37 It comprises, briefly, the how, when, and where, the who with, the what, and under what circumstances. The choice of the variety of language depends on how the communication is to be conveyed: by telephone, by signals, or by shouting. When the message is produced also dictates the choice: before breakfast or after. Further, where the participants are located spatiallyin the office, at the park, in a night clubhas an influence. The description and relationship of the speaker-hearer determines the expressions used and the nonparticipants, or the audience, affect language behavior. The physical condition of the surroundings, that is, the amount of light, noise, silence, and artifacts, change the language behavior. The mood of the society itself subtly permits and prohibits certain language forms. Individual behavior and condition of health make their impact on the use of language in the dialogue. Finally, the style of communication in the medium and the genre used are important considerations. With all of these complexities implicit in language behavior, it is a miracle that human beings understand each other at all. After some thought and study about language, one sees that none of these situations can occur without involvement from other dimensions. Wrong conclusions can be drawn if all of these factors are not considered in the discussions of human language. Specifically, it would be a mistake to try to consider male/female language in isolation from the matrix in which it functions. As an illustration of the many varieties, consider the different ways one might make an invitation for lunch. For a business acquaintance: "Mrs. Smith would like to invite you and Mrs. Jones to lunch next week." To one's parents: "Say, folks, can you come on up for lunch next week?" To a friend of the same sex: "How about let's meet for lunch next week?" To one's children: "Get in here for lunch now!" To a foreigner: "Would you be free to join us for lunch next week?" To a potential sex partner: "Well, ummm, I was just wondering . . . could you come over for a little lunch this weekend?"

< previous page

page_24 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_25

next page > Page 25

Changes in society cause certain behavioral patterns to come under the light of scrutiny. When society is experiencing earthquakes of change, it is tempting to make statements and draw conclusions that are distorted and out of focus. Thus, when a social awareness points to the poor, or to Black people, or to women, or to criminals, or to communists, it is inevitable that these groups, which may have been long out of focus and in an unbalanced relationship, now become spotlighted out of proportion. We must constantly remind ourselves that we must not look at male/female behavior in isolation. Doing so leads to hysterical and extreme observations. For example, recently I came across a statement about the Aztec language 38 in a women's liberation journal. It said, in effect, that in the Aztec language 'to take a prisoner', 'to bear a child', 'to be sacrificed as a prisoner', and 'to die in childbed' are the same word.39 The implications are horrendous! It caught my attention because my first linguistic experiences were with the modern Aztec language in Mexico and consequently I knew many Aztec families. I had never received the impression that Aztec mothers ever had the feeling they were being sacrificed as prisoners. In calmer retrospect, one can find a more rational, scholarly explanation of the Aztec situation that led to this wrong conclusion. In the old Aztec religion there were several heavens, or after-abodes for departed souls. The most elevated and honored heaven with the highest rank and most pleasant circumstances was reserved for men who died in battle, prisoners who were sacrificed to the gods, and women who died in childbirth. This most glorious of all heavens was a happy prospect and instilled courage into the hearts of soldiers and women facing peril in childbirth.40 The misinterpretation and misunderstanding of this Aztec belief is possible when the customs and words are lifted out of context. Because the study of male/female behavior patterns has the potential of highly emotionally charged reactions, it is absolutely necessary to keep the discussions integrated in an overall concept of human linguistic and other behavior. In examining the vocabulary and styles of speech in dialogue and conversation, one must note (1) the sex of the speaker, (2) the sex of the hearer, (3) the sex of the person referred to or spoken of, and (4) the sexes of the audience. The forms of language used and the vocabulary permitted and prohibited have to do with the answers to these questions. One way to look at general usage in language is to think of a continuum with rather mild, unobtrusive items on one end and ranging

< previous page

page_25 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_26

next page > Page 26

toward strong, trauma-producing expressions at the other end. The extremes of the continuum are correlated with male and female usage. The following chart illustrates this.

Vocabulary items and expressions that illustrate the "feminine" usage on the left side of the chart are such items as: 'precious, cute, teeny, abdomen, Oh dear! How perfectly sweet!' The continuum moves toward strong or brutish terms, such as 'belly' or 'guts' and finally to obscenities and items that, until recently, rarely found their way into print. If males use language as that defined on the left side of the chart, they are thought to be effeminate; if females use language as that defined on the right side of the chart, they are thought to be coarse. The refreshingly honest use of language by former President Harry Truman was consonant with his character, and he sometimes disregarded the proprieties and exploded his "male usage" in public. The story is told of a conversation of his once with a group of farmers, when he continually used the word "manure." This sounded a bit stilted to one of the audience, who pleaded with his wife, Bess, to get him to say "fertilizer." Patient Bess refused, for, she said, ''It's taken me 30 years to get him to say 'manure'!" Another perspective is offered in the matter of vocabulary domains that show male/female patterns. Language and culture are two inseparable components in the lives of human beings. The roles of male and female define certain areas where participation is exclusive of

< previous page

page_26 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_27

next page > Page 27

the other sex. Lexical domains are reflections of interests and roles and are learned behavior. The domains of women traditionally have been childbirth and child rearing, colors, cooking, and sewing. The domains of men traditionally have been machinery, politics, and war. Note that these are not exclusive. Today as never before we see a crossing over and exchange of domains as roles merge and modify along with varying behavior. The male interior decorator has more vocabulary versatility in colors and fabrics than most females. The male gourmet cook is well-versed in cooking terminology. The female engineer and chemist can handle the technical terms of those domains as well as the males in the profession. The male obstetrician has a larger vocabulary in the domain of childbirth than mothers. The female head of state is conversant in the language of politics and war. Note the difference between linguistic constraints that grammatical rules allow or don't allow, and these co-occurrences that are reflections of socio-cultural structures. Beyond the consideration of vocabulary permitted, there are all sorts of possibilities of attitudes which can be conveyed by choice of vocabulary. An example is seen in the attitude toward moonshine whiskey, in the mountain speech of male and female. The women refer to this "evil" as 'that old whuskey' and the men refer to that which provides a pleasurable pastime as 'liquor'. 41 The set of interjections that male and female use range from dear and precious items such as those found on the left side of the chart to words on the right. The study of conversations or dialogue with regard to male and female participation often reflects the regard that males in our society have for the intelligence and thoughtful intellectual contribution of females. Jonathan Swift, a keen observer of communication on many levels, appreciated the conversation of women immensely, and confessed that he even left the company of men after one dinner party to join the ladies, because, he said, the discourse of the men "degenerated into smart Sayings of their own Invention . . . ." In his essays on conversation he attributed the degeneracy that affected the conversation of the period to "the Custom arisen, for some Years past, of excluding Women from any Share in our Society, farther than in Parties at Play, or Dancing, or in the Pursuit of an Amour."42 In order to understand the dyadic relationship in conversation one might use the analogy of "antiphon" as found in musical composition. There are two voices to carry the melodic line. In a balanced antiphonal composition (or conversation), the two voices carry equal responsibility

< previous page

page_27 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_28

next page > Page 28

for the melody (or message). One musical idea is expressed (a sentence) and then it is answered by another musical idea. Observation of dialogues with male and female participants very often shows there is not an equal amount of participation with each carrying his and her share of the melodic line. Rather, in most cases the males dominate the melodic line, stopping here and there for the accompanying female voices to fill in, ask questions, give assurance, and, in all, to keep the men going. If a woman tries to add some melody (or idea) of her own, often the man's head rams away, or he interrupts (not having heard her) and continues his own theme. The woman's part, then, in many acts of male/female conversation, is to make coffee and further the conversation of men. D. H. Lawrence, a master at reducing spoken language to written language, was aware of this imbalance. In Lady Chatterley's Lover, Connie spent much energy entertaining the many male guests of her husband. Evenings were spent in conversation among the men. Silence fell. The four men smoked. And Connie sat there and put another stitch in her sewing . . . . Yes, she sat there! She had to sit mum. She had to be quiet as a mouse, not to interfere with the immensely important speculations of these highly-mental gentlemen. But she had to be there. They didn't get on so well without her; their ideas didn't flow so freely. After several pages of dialogue, Connie finally speaks: 'There are nice women in the world,' said Connie, lifting her head up and speaking at last. The men resented it . . . she should have pretended to hear nothing. They hated her admitting she had attended so closely to such talk. 43 Through the centuries women have listened silently to the menfolk talk. Men do not sit quietly and listen to women talk. Styles of speech are many and varied throughout conversations. Again, male/female patterns are evident. Baby talk is a style of speech that is used to show a certain relationship or to control another human being. Both male and female use baby talk, but since it is not usual to use this style in public, there is little documentation on actual use. Baby talk also occurs in other languages44 and in general it appears that it is a style of speech that females use more frequently than males. Mothers may use it to sons longer than to their daughters.

< previous page

page_28 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_29

next page > Page 29

Males may use it to their car, or their gunor when they are drunk. Fathers may use it to their small children: 'Is 'er Daddy's 'ittle dirl?' A style of speech that we can simply call patronizing is often heard when those spoken to are children, foreigners, inferiors, the mentally incompetent, hospitalized patients, or females. On radio talk shows, for example, one can often hear this kind of language used with callers, particularly with women. Male newscasters have some difficulty in relating to other newscasters who are not male. On a recent news program the anchorman introduced the next newscaster as "lovely Jane Doe." On another program, after the female reporter completed her part, the anchorman acknowledged it with, "Thank you, dear!" One would not use this lone of voice and style of speech to a professional colleague. Another type of speaking, employed by males to females, is the language of explanations. Males are forever explaining things to women. It is rare that a male will have the patience or desire to listen to explanations from females. Males are the givers of information, not the receivers. The male who uses explanation is not really interested in the female's acquiring more knowledge (Heaven forbid!). Rather, he is showing his superiority. The language of apology belongs predominantly to the female. Women are always being sorry or asking pardon for something. Whether or not they are to blame for something is not the issue. Men also say, "I'm sorry" or "Excuse me" occasionally, but it is a way of life for females. This is undoubtedly related to the submissive gestures and smiling of the female, which will be discussed further in the chapter on nonverbal behavior. Female language demonstrates greater use of hyperbole, accompanied by strong emphasis patterns: 'I'd just die!' 'He'll never forgive me!' 'It was the most extraordinary hat!' The 'cackling hens' effect of women's higher voices and rhythms was superbly stylized in a voice choir performance in The Music Man. In actual practice, when males and females are carrying out their professional or business roles, the style of language is usually much the same. The skillful use of occupational language, at this point, is a higher and more encompassing requirement than maintenance of sex-role language. There is the matter in everyone's life of changing roles, changing clothes, and, for our discussion, changing styles of language to suit the situation. The "tell it like it is" atmosphere of today has fostered the idea that language used in one situation ought to be used in all. There is the fallacy of hypocrisy that believes it is wrong to change styles of

< previous page

page_29 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_30

next page > Page 30

language for different situations. Actually it is not any more hypocritical to choose to wear a bathing suit at the beach and a business suit at the office, than it is to use sexy language in a sex scene and occupational language at work. As a matter of fact, women must learn other styles of language, as they assume other styles of living. People are judged by language. You can dress in an indeterminate way, but once you open your mouth to speak, you have stated who you are and what you want. Remember My Fair Lady. Therefore women will continue to be judged as trite, unauthoritative, dull, insipid, and uninteresting, if they continue to talk that way. Those who insist on sex dichotomy in language use are doomed to limitations and restrictions that are antithetical to creativity. They will be isolated from growth and freedom. For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. The language of apology is a topic for linguists, and a way of life for some females. I never cease to be impressed with how often women say "I'm sorry!" One of the best discussions I have read was not published in a linguistic journal but, rather, in Vogue (O'Reilly 1978). I share her awe when she writes: "My sainted mother has not written me a letter in twenty years without apologizing for the weather . . . 'I'm sorry it has been so cold (or hot) in New York'." The reasons for the apologies of women are attributed to fear of success, undeserved guilt, and low self-esteem.

< previous page

page_30 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_31

next page > Page 31

Chapter IV Gingerbread Men and Gingerbread Girls: Labels and Descriptors It is a commonplace that labels and words that are used to refer to people and to describe others are based on deepseated attitudes toward those particular people or groups of persons. It is also true, however, that these basic and underlying attitudes are not often acknowledged, or even recognized. It is very difficult, for example, for anyone to explain satisfactorily the difference between 'lady' and 'woman'. Yet these terms are used among the population in very orderly and systematic patterns that express attitudes toward females or toward a particular female. The difference, perhaps, can be illustrated by two expressions: "The women, God help us!" and "The ladies, God bless them!" 45 'Lady' is deceptively used, at times, as a form of flattery, supposedly to exalt the person and lift her above the ordinary. Every woman has been told at some time in her life that she shouldn't want to be equal with men because she is already superior! In fact, the result is to put her aside on the pedestal and not have to deal with her. Business and government cannot be run by committees and executive positions staffed with pedestal-ladies. These jobs have to be done by people whose feet are on the ground! The etymology, or the history of the meanings of a word, is sometimes, and wrongly, used to control the dimensions of conduct permitted persons referred to by that word. For example, the origin of 'woman' goes back to 'wifman' or 'wifeman'pointing toward the belief that a woman has no being apart from a husband. Sometimes we refer to the past to try to justify our own beliefs. Quite apart from being unfair, this use of the history of words is linguistically unsound. The word 'silly', for example, used to have a meaning 'blessed', and still does in some cases in German. Today, in English, however, it would be difficult to foist the concept of blessedness on a silly fool!

< previous page

page_31 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_32

next page > Page 32

Likewise, to try to bring the meanings of long-ago into the words, 'woman' or 'lady' or 'mistress,' and direct the status of females based upon those meanings, even though historically of interest, is nonsensical. Over-enthusiasts even create fictitious etymologies. It is said that Ruskin often reminded the married women in his audiences that their place was in the home because 'wife' meant 'she who weaves.' 46 Not so. But even if it were, the original meaning of 'lady' was 'bread-kneader'. Would Ruskin send the ladies back to kneading dough? When the labels for male and female are paired, we see other social structures exemplified. The couplet 'man and wife' instead of 'husband and wife' suggests that her existence is in relationship to the man and implies a subordinate positionthe "Other" of which Simone de Beauvoir speaks.47 The words 'man' and 'woman' have their counterparts 'master' and 'mistress' but the respective meanings of these pairs are vastly different. A woman's master is nothing like a man's mistress! One can be effeminate, but one cannot be emasculate. We know what a ladies' man is, but who has heard of a gentlemen's woman? Some words have as yet no counterpart. The term 'housewife' has stood alone for centuries with no 'househusband'. Lately I saw the term 'house-husband' in an article that had to do with shopping for nourishing food. This makes sense when one notes the growing number of male shoppers in the supermarket. The word 'housewife' is often used with modifiers which must be considered in the total meaning of the term. Recently, in the letters to the editor column of a newspaper, a writer referred to herself as: "a young housewife" "a dumb housewife" and "just a housewife.'' If the English language begins to embrace the concept and term for 'house-husband', it is likely that these modifying elements will change to something like a hypothetical: 'a vigorous house-husband/wife' or 'an intelligent house-husband/wife' or 'a distinguished house-husband/wife'. That kind of language change will come with social change. The counterparts in couplets can also designate distinct status relationships. In the military, where status is a welldefined concept by rank, one refers to 'officers and their ladies' and 'enlisted men and their wives'. Linguistic labels in the matter of marital status reflect the attitudes of society toward male and female. A previously married man is a 'bachelor'; a previously-married woman is a 'divorcée', with the

< previous page

page_32 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_33

next page > Page 33

implications being that a bachelor has a future, and a divorcee has had a past. A baffling lack in the matter of labels is that there is no way for persons "over thirty" to refer to their constant companion of the opposite sex. 'Boyfriend' or 'girlfriend' sounds so teen-agish and 'lover' doesn't seem to be a discreet way to talk about someone in a general context. Language again reflects the Puritanical tradition of obliterating any possible male/female relationship except man and wife. Another lack in English that is devastating and inhibiting is the deficiency in our language for warm and respectable terms to refer to the sex act. 48 How pathetic it is that the only way we can discuss this function is to use scientific Latin words or "obscenities." Other languages are richer in their paradigms for making love. Adult females often are labeled 'girl' and 'baby' even though they may be perfectly responsible members of society. Only recently a newscaster announced that "a California girl" had assumed command of the WAVES. This officer had the rank of Commander, a very distinguished rank in the Navy, and was later promoted to Captain. The parallel construction is conspicuously absent: "A California boy just assumed the position of Secretary of HEW." Labels for females range from these mild forms that reflect social structures to insulting terms that reflect individual attitudes. In a society that claims to have the highest regard for women in the Christian tradition, it is indeed shocking to discover that our state and government leaders can still use offensive vocabulary in reference to females in public offices. A generation ago an important dictionary maker noted that "Over the years many terms for the word woman have become degraded."49 Apparently discrimination against women is still socially acceptable. Two illustrations will suffice. In a discussion of committees during the last national election, one of our U.S. Senators prescribed that no women would be permitted on a certain committee. He simply declared, "No broads!" and would discuss the issue no more. This is analogous to using such words as 'wop, greaser, hunky, coon, or nigger' but almost no public official would dare use those words these days. This acceptance of insulting language can go to the extreme. Recently the trash barrels at the California Institution for Men, a corrective place, were painted with the silhouette of a woman, with a girl's name, and the words, "Use me." One of the barrels had a silhouette that was obviously pregnant, with the accompanying words, "I've been used." A complaint was made to the official in charge that

< previous page

page_33 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_34

next page > Page 34

this was inappropriate in a public institution using tax funds, but he defended the practice as "simply a take-off on current advertising of a well-known airline." Only when extensive pressure was brought to bear were the barrels repainted. It should be pointed out here that these examples are not drawn from a limited and special segment of the population. These were not hide-out criminals negotiating in a back room, nor trash containers in an off-beat bawdy house; rather these examples concern tax-supported public offices. The most notable thing about such linguistic behavior is how widely it is tolerated. Does this say something about masochistic/sadistic tendencies in human beings? Do human beings need to insult and to be insulted to survive? Bias in the language eventually gets caught in the trap of the ludicrous or the incongruous. A book advertisement said that Elizabeth I matured into a "true prince." Pearl Bailey and Hazel Kohring each received a "Man of the Year" award. A female opera singer who had a great voice was called a ''Caruso in petticoats." And we learn that "menstrual pain accounts for an enormous loss of man-hours of work." The column "Men and Events" often has newsworthy items about females. One can be appalled at the unthinking, uncreative, and limited use of language in these instances. A study of the descriptions of females who are in public or professional positions provides other examples of the actual values put on females in society. The following are illustrations I have collected from magazines and newspapers. The women described are not women who won the lottery, but are women who have positions entailing a good deal of training and expertise. The women were variously described as: "a serene, delicately formed woman" (referring to an executive chairperson); "a brown-eyed cutie" (referring to an athlete); "[she] speaks softly . . . blushes and laughs . . ." (referring to a commanding officer); "a very feminine woman" (referring to a chief of a Flight Service Station). A pilot was headlined as "Woman flier . . . ." A member of a commission was designated a "mother." A book that received considerable attention was written by a "housewife with an Oxford degree in English." Apparently an attempt is being made to assure women they can still remain sexually attractive even if professionally competent. I have not found similar examples for males of equal professional status. The focus on description for this caliber of occupation, one would expect, should be on qualifications for the job

< previous page

page_34 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_35

next page > Page 35

not physical or emotional attributes. These illustrations indicate something of the immaturity of society in relating to females. Careful observation of all kinds of written materials produces illustrations of prejudice that we all passed over unthinkingly until recently: "A cry or a scream of a monkey, like that produced by a frightened woman . . . ."; "A woman from the East Coast, nearly in tears . . . ."; "[the accent or dialect] of Kentucky and Tennessee . . . its feminine shrillness . . . ." The honored and prestigious Encyclopædia Britannica speaks, in regard to Catherine of Aragon, of her "failure to produce a male to the throne . . . .'' It wasn't Henry's syphilis, but Catherine's failure! In a discussion of the development of Pennsylvania, an historian says, "The new constitution . . . remedied all the injustices . . . providing for equality of representation . . . and for universal male suffrage. Pennsylvania had now become a genuine democracy." 50 An advertisement to attract young women to a training program promised the candidates that they would be trained in "qualities every man seeks in a wife." Bets were taken on the Miss World contest in London's gambling circles, and the bookmakers admitted that the talk about the "favorites" did make the girls sound like racehorses. The matter of order is of concern to scientists who study behavioral events. There are hierarchies and values seen in whether elements in the study come first or last, or which come before others. For example, in the wills filed in the vital statistics, it was common practice in the old days to list the children of the deceased with the sons listed before the daughters, if the daughters were named at all. This precedent of order preference still holds in the thinking of some people today, During the recent [1972] presidential campaign a popular magazine printed a picture of Eleanor and George McGovern with their five children.

< previous page

page_35 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_36

next page > Page 36

The seating position of the family by itself indicates no special relationships. The caption under the picture, however, lists the son first, and then returns to the left side of the picture and lists the daughters. This high value put on sons is, of course, of very long standing. Thomas Aquinas instructed his followers that in a fire, a man saves first his sons, then his wife. The terminology that is used in labeling and describing members of society is a subtle (but sometimes not so subtle) reflection of the structures of society in terms of status, quality, permitted performance, and values. For hundreds and thousands of years human beings have used this kind of language mostly without ever recognizing its discriminatory impact and without challenging its continuance. Only recently, with the greater linguistic understanding of use of language in all situations have these biased elements come into focus in observing male and female linguistic behavior. For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. The term 'lady' is still being used to feign respect and admiration for females. Note the strange combination of 'bag lady'. The term 'girl' applies to a female child, and its use for women exemplifies the contradictory concepts that females have for themselves, and others' responses to them. A society that covets youth and tries to extend the attributes of youth far beyond its chronological age, is a society that uses language as a reassurance. If you are 'one of the girls' you are not aging. United Technologies Corporation attempted to move away from demeaning language in one of its ads in 1979: "Let's get rid of 'The Girl'." The ad ended with the advice: "Like you, she has a name. Use it." Guidelines from book publishers and journals have supplied abundant alternatives to replace 'girl', but actual usage stubbornly retains infantilizing linguistic expressions. Child-like, high-pitched voices, with non-authoritative intonation patterns are still heard daily out of the mouths of adult women. Synonymic terms for 'man' make an interesting historical study, in that at times they may refer to any human, and at times they refer only to males. It is noteworthy that in some languages, a word for 'man' (or

< previous page

page_36 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_37

next page > Page 37

was it 'human being'?) is related to 'earth' and thus, 'earthling' is a primitive concept. In the following bibliography, see Luigi Romeo (1979), who produced a lexicon of the word homo.

< previous page

page_37 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_38

next page > Page 38

Chapter V Titles, Names, and Greetings When I was on a research trip in the southern region of the United States during the late 1960s, I met a young man who caused me to think more seriously about rifles, which was apropos of the South, where titles of all kinds are used more than in other places in the United States. The "Colonels" and the "Captains" abound. I had stopped to get gasoline and used my identification and credit cards, which have the "Dr.'' title. The young man attending queried me on it, and added, with a mixture of awe and admiration, "Gawrsh, I've never seen a woman doctor!" He then insisted that I receive as a gift for accomplishment one of the watermelons he had been selling. The charm and candid appreciation, however, were somewhat dimmed as I drove off in contemplation. In the twentieth century, in an "enlightened" nation where all females are "equally" educated, a professional woman is still a rarity or an oddity. Those who study human behavior have observed that titles of address, use of proper names, and greetings reveal something of the structure of the community in question. 51 The use of these means of identification has to do with the role one is carrying out, the response desired, and the relationship between the speakers and the hearers. Status relationships are signaled in very concrete ways by use of rifles and first and last names. But before making particular judgments regarding the observed usage of these tags, one must consider the more general use within the context. Some institutions and organizations are more apt to use high-sounding titles and names. Nicknames would be avoided; 'Dr.' would be preferred to 'Mr.' In institutions of higher education, a reverse snobbery sometimes takes place, where acquired titles such as 'Dr.' are avoided and the more general 'Mr.' 'Mrs.' or 'Miss' are preferred. Use of titles also differs according to geography. In the South of the United States, in Europe, and in Mexico, one is

< previous page

page_38 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_39

next page > Page 39

more likely to hear elaborate use of titles. In Germany, a professor carries three titles: Herr Professor Doktor or Frau Professor Doktor. The use of first names is not common in Europe and Latin American countries. It would be unheard of between strangers. In California, however, it is not unusual to hear a speaker address a stranger by the first name. When I was an advisor to international college students, I learned that these students had their own set of values in the use of first names. To a group from the Sudan (who spoke excellent English), titles meant cold, formal distance. First names meant warmth and friendship. In contrast, in the United States first names are often used to establish an inferior position for Blacks. It was a matter of great adjustment to Americans who wanted to give these foreign Black students proper respect by addressing them by their titles! In similar ways, male and female use of first and last names is delicate and difficult to interpretespecially in these days of changing habits. The interchange of naming is done on a reciprocal or a nonreciprocal basis. This has to do with status relationships. Persons of equal status are more likely to use reciprocal namingeither they both use first names, or they both use titles and last names. When observing the use of rifles between male and female and in male/female usage, it is of concern to note the reciprocal relationships. Do both parties exchange first names, or does one party use first name and the other party use title and last name? It will be seen that males use first names for females more often than females use first names for males. This is not to do with sex or femininity, but rather status distinctions. In these cases males are in a higher position or a position of authority. Even in marriage this nonreciprocal titling used to occur, especially in the Victorian era, when even in intimate situations many wives would address their husbands as 'Mr. Smith' or 'Dr. Smith' instead of using his first name. In recent times, with the concepts of "equal status" and "female status" being brutally examined, some bizarre or at least interesting uses are being tried out in an attempt to find a pattern of naming and titling both useful and respectful to all concerned. Previously the Ph.D. title of a woman was often ignored when her husband also had a Ph.D. For example, one might have read, "This map was prepared by Mrs. John Doe" rather than "by Prof. Jane Doe." Today a great deal of experimentation is going on to find a comfortable way to address them both. "Drs. Jane and John Doe" occurred recently in an advertisement for a book which husband and wife co-authored. Also observed are:

< previous page

page_39 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_40

next page > Page 40

"Dr. John and Dr. Jane Doe;" "Drs. John and Jane Doe;" "Dr. John Doe and Dr. Jane Doe.'' And why not "Drs. Jane Doe," if one doesn't know his first name? Imagine the possibilities! When women continue to function in traditional roles there is no confusion in which title to use or how to address them. With women assuming other roles in society, patterns of behavior have not yet been established. I have received mail with an endless variety of titles acknowledging my several roles, even such conglomerates as: "Dr. and Ms. and Mrs. Mary Key" and "Ms. Ph. D. Mary Key." Some of this is out of humor, but I think based on a straggle to find better ways to relate to females' attainment that has been ignored before. Not all businesses have caught up to the times, however, as evidenced by some of the mail I receive. It is still supposed by some people that when an addressee is listed with the title of "Dr.," that "Dr." must of course be a man! So I am given a wife and the envelope is addressed (by a computer, I'd like to think!) "Dr. and Mrs. Mary Key." Some businesses seem to be seeking a more ambiguous way of directing their communications, and it is not infrequent now to receive mail addressed "For the Family at . . . ." There is also an attempt recently to do away with rifles that reflect status, such as 'Prof.' or 'Dr.' as well as marital status. This puts one in the interesting position of using or not using the first name. So some correspondents are trying the salutation, "Dear Mary Key"a form not heard of until recently. In scholarly articles, reference to the work of male scholars is made by using the last name only. When the reference is to a female, there is a difference in practice, sometimes using the first name also, "Jane Doe" or else a title "Miss Doe". Seldom is the last name used alone, though recent publications show a marked change in practice, now using last name alone for all scholars. The matter of listing people has also been a source of different treatment. In a recent publication reporting a conference for librarians, the women participants were listed by title, either Miss or Mrs., and the men participants were listed with no title. Another practice is to list males with initials and females with first names. I was told once, seriously, to use initials instead of first name in my publications, and it is likely that some woman scholars follow this practice so that they won't be known as women. Later, when we consider the writings of women, we see that this was prompted by the less enthusiastic response to women as writers and scholars., 52

< previous page

page_40 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_41

next page > Page 41

In English-speaking countries, a woman most commonly loses her own name with marriage. On the day of the wedding she becomes "Mrs." Like the slaves of old, she takes the name of the man who "owns" her. This naming system is not found in all areas. In Scotland, a woman does not lose her own name altogether when she marries. Her name is written both ways in legal documents. 53 In the Dutch naming system the woman did not change her name upon marriage.54 In Spanish-speaking countries a woman retains her own name after marriage, adding her husband's surname after her own. Therefore when Julia Martinez marries Juan Gomez, her name is Julia Martinez de Gomez.55 When I was in Mexico I heard the amused, giggling reaction of a young lady who came across the American title, ''Mrs. George Smith." That was the joke of the dayto call a woman by a man's name! It does seem ludicrous, come to think of it, for married women to be known only by men's names. Someday we will realize that it is quite absurd for newspapers to give account of events that take place in the Women's Club and list those who attend as: Mmes. Richard Tucker, Lloyd Wright, Pablo Picasso, and Lawrence Olivier. The whole business of titles and proper names is a problem for divorced women, but not for men, who retain their identity throughout their lifetimes. The legal hassle of getting back a maiden name is costly. In addition, if the woman has established business contacts, or has her silver engraved, or has professional connections and has published, it is awkward to continue using a name that no longer belongs to her. Nowadays, when people are living longer and marrying more often, and if the practice of a woman taking her husband's name continues, it might be necessary to add another identifying feature, such as dates, because "Mrs. John Doe" could be any of several women. We would have then, Mrs. John Doe, 1946; Mrs. John Doe, 1953; Mrs. John Doe, 1963; and Mrs. John Doe, 1971 . . . . The matter of naming the newborn infant is another aspect of our naming system that is coming into question these days. Rousseau [1712-1778], who believed that his children belonged only to him, would not be very popular today. For an infant to take the mother's name would make infinitely more sense, because that is the only certain relationship by blood. Genealogies have been irredeemably altered because of the patriarchal naming system. Throughout the ages women have borne infants who were sired by a secret or unknown father. Historically, this has occurred often among the upper classes, where

< previous page

page_41 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_42

next page > Page 42

divorce was unthinkable but sex was not. Thus, often the name that the child carried for a lifetime was no blood relationship. If every newborn took the mother's name, there would be no question. Anthropologist Margaret Mead has observed that there is a greater tendency to name the son for the father than to name the daughter for the mother. 56 This practice is reinforced because of the complications of having to refer to the mother as "big" or "old," a situation that is acceptable for males: "Big John" or "Old John." Another title has swept the country in the last few years, that is the title 'Ms.' The obligation for females to declare their marital status by title is of long standing. In the early tax records of our country, widows were listed with no personal name of their own: Widow McManemy, Widow Ingman. The title 'Ms.' is a challenge to this practice of women being listed in relationship to their men. Actually the title is not new, though most of us did not realize that it occurred in secretarial handbooks decades ago. A national TV newscaster further noted that it was used by "junk mail" advertisers! This kind of association by juxtaposition has a powerful effect on the thinking of the listeners and how they are to accept this title and the human beings represented by the title. The reactions to the title 'Ms.' have run the full range of human emotions, from wide, joyful acceptance, to outrageous rejection. Nevertheless it has found its way into the dictionary. Delicious jokes and marvelous advertising have resulted from Ms. One company sells a little carry-all bag as a "Ms. Kit." A newspaper headlined the "Ms.-Match" of Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs. The title 'Ms.' has proliferated very fast in professional circles and among young women. Married men are said not to like it.57 Nevertheless, it is being used on official documents and forms published by prestigious businesses and government. A plural form has been generated: 'Mses.' Analogous forms in other languages have started. In Denmark, the form is Fr., which is an abbreviation of both Fru (Mrs.) and Frøken (Miss). In France the equivalent is Mad. In Spanish-speaking countries the form is Sa., the abbreviation of Sra. (Mrs.) and Srta. (Miss). The pronunciation of the title 'Ms.' accommodates very well to the phonological system of the English language, where fast-speech forms are commonly found in natural speech, and sounds are neutralized or less distinct. The result is a telescoped 'Mizz', using only one syllable as in 'Miss' and using the same final 'z' sound of 'Mrs.' This rhymes with other words commonly used in English, such as 'his' (hiz)

< previous page

page_42 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_43

next page > Page 43

and 'whizz'. Actually the pronunciation 'Miz' (and other variants) is already in use for the title 'Mrs.' in some pans of the South and occasionally in New England. 58 It occurs in the speech of cultivated, educated people throughout these areas. The geographical differences of pronunciation are similar to the geographical distribution of /greasy/ and/greazy/. The neutralized pronunciation has the effect of obliterating the contrastive titles 'Mrs.' and 'Miss' and the result is a single pronunciation for both. One could say that the South is ahead of the nation in this respect! A further observation, made some years ago, is that the 'z' pronunciation was gaming usage. It will be interesting to follow the development of the pronunciation of these titles now that the 'Ms.' form is being introduced across the nation. The pronunciation of 'Ms.' has received unkind attacks by some who hear it as a very ugly combination. Interestingly enough these judgments have not been made on the way southerners or New Englanders pronounce "Miss" or "Mrs." Objections made about the pronunciation of Ms., or the outrage of the insecure married man or woman who needs the married title for his or her security blanket are really trivial matters compared with the underlying problems brought to the surface by the attention given to the title 'Ms'. Even if Ms. were widely accepted throughout all of society, the real problem of sex differentiation and discrimination is still there. And this is where the real trouble lies. There have been several suggestions lately that we do away with titles altogether. I think this might be the most unrealistic suggestionwith the givens of human nature. Titles, like all symbols, are important because they are a reminder of what they represent. Besides designating the human condition, titles are useful symbols to establish credentials. We know a person has certain qualifications with respect to occupational demands by means of a title. A person with an M.D. is qualified to treat illness, and this is extremely useful information. In fact, a good case could be made for needing more titles in a burgeoning society. Long ago, in the villages, one knew who was qualified to shoe the horses, because one grew up with this information. Today it is a gamble to find a competent person to tune the piano, to leach dancing lessons, to sell the right size shoe, or to fix the TV. Titles that imply a certain training and expertise would be helpful. Hardly anyone would disagree with the use of titles for this kind of information. The confusion and disagreement come in the area of status and having to declare the state of the human being: sex and marital

< previous page

page_43 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_44

next page > Page 44

condition. With regard to status, all languages of the world have some way of indicating status among human beings. This is done by use of titles, proper names, honorifics on nouns, pronoun use, and many other linguistic forms. This must be mentioned here in this study because of the inextricable relationship of sex distinctions and status values. Many people do not like status distinctions, but they are universalso far no human society has found a way to do away with them. Some have tried. After World War II the Soviet Union tried to do away with titles among the Hungarians, but apparently have given up recently. A language textbook published in 1965 gives the titles "comrade" and "colleague" and then goes on to say, "The courtesy title úr (Mr. or Sir) fell into disuse after 1947, but today it is slowly coming back into the language." 59 Perhaps status, like sex, is an inevitable category that we must learn to cope with rather than do away with. The title 'Mrs.' and the wedding ring are symbols of the human conditionreminders that there is a commitment. The title 'Ms.' has focused attention on the glaring discrepancy that males are not required to wear a symbol of commitmenteither the wedding ring or a title, since 'Mr.' does not reflect marital status. A suggestion has been made that would balance this disequilibrium to some extent: that another title be devised which would indicate whether or not men are married. I think by far, this is the most desirable suggestion and very practical, though I don't see men rushing out to find and adopt such a title! It would be delightfully helpful to women, howeverthey would know with whom to spend their time at conventions and on vacation trips. This suggestion is not new either. In 1941 the journal American Speech published some remarks on the topic following the account of a newspaper that defended the title 'Mk.' which stood for 'Mark', which means 'a mark worth shooting at'. The journal seriously suggested 'Br.' or 'Bch.' for 'bachelor'. Still earlier, a satirist of the turn of the century defined titles in a work he was collecting called The Devil's Dictionary.60 These bits and pieces were published in newspapers and then compiled in a complete work. Under the entry for 'Miss' he offers: A title with which we brand unmarried women to indicate that they are in the market. Miss, (Mrs.) and Mister (Mr.) are the three most distinctly disagreeable words in the language, in sound and sense. Two are corruptions of Mistress, the other of Master. In the

< previous page

page_44 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_45

next page > Page 45

general abolition of social titles in this our country they miraculously escaped to plague us. If we must have them let us be consistent and give one to the unmarried man. I venture to suggest Mush, abbreviated to Mh. Whatever the final outcome is, let us hope that it will be something that will avoid situations such as the following. Before the title 'Ms.' became familiar, a conversation with an airline office took place where the clerk insisted on putting a title before the name of the person buying the ticket. The woman buyer in turn insisted that she did not want to be titled either "Miss" or "Mrs." Thereby the clerk said, "Well, then, I'll have to put Mr." In another conversation on the radio the other day, I heard an interviewer talking to a woman on the telephone. He said, "I don't know if you're 'Miss' or 'Mrs.', so I'll call you Karen." In the meantime, ingenious, creative females are going to find ways to cope. An enterprising young woman on Wall Street found one solution. 61 When she phones to talk with an important head of a company, secretaries, of course, ask who is calling. She simply says, "Tell him it's Mimi." Without delay she gets through to the executive. "It would never work," she explains, "if I said, 'Miss Green'." For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. Men are learning the keyboard again. At the turn of the last century, if a male wanted to "get up in the world," he actually started out at the bottom and worked his way up. He learned typing and shorthand and became the indispensable "secretary" to an important person in the company. When women joined the workforce as secretaries, the potential for advancement was no longer part of the job description. Computer technology has changed the picture for people and titles. Men realize that they can send their own fax messages, without dictating a memo; and women are managing offices with aplomb. But now they are called "managers" and "administrators." It is possible that the job title "secretary'' may be phased out completely. Nowadays married women feel more freedom to choose how to be addressed. In 1974 The Center for a Woman's Own Name published a booklet with information on how to do it (Anon). Also see Marija

< previous page

page_45 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_46

next page > Page 46

Matich Hughes; and Stannard (1973, 1977), for the legal aspects involved. At the beginning of this chapter I mentioned an incident that took place when I was on a research trip for the American Dialect Society. In the example, I used a dialect form coincident with a pronunciation that I learned from my gentle and guileless Grandmother, who never said an unkind word about anyone of any color or class. She used the intrusive /r/in her mid-western dialect, even after she migrated to California, and I have retained that feature of her speech, at least for some words. Perhaps this is a reasonable place to advocate fairness and openness for speech that is different from ours. (This is not to include offensive and damaging speech.) This one example shows that dialects involve a mixture of status, geographical, and social features, all of which make for fascinating and awesome observations. Pathetically, the illustration that I used was abused by an inexperienced reviewer. I make no apology for my Grandmother's speech, and I make no apology for the blue-eyed, blond kid, who also used the intrusive /r/, as he charmed me during the rest stop I made in the South on my research trip. I advocate a tolerance for dialect differences in the speech of those we relate to and, especially, a tolerance for the dialects of males and females that we relate toalong with a gentle nudging toward unbiased speech. Incidentally, the intrusive /r/is not being lost among Californian speakers. The 1994 earthquake demolished a freeway near Washington Boulevard, and the news broadcasters referred to the street hundreds of times in the days that followed with the pronunciation: 'Warshington'.

< previous page

page_46 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_47

next page > Page 47

Chapter VI Discrimination Against Males, Taboos, and the Double Standard What are little boys made of? Snakes and snails, and puppy-dogs' tails; And that's what little boys are made of. Attention has been drawn lately to language facts which show that females are discriminated against. It is not difficult to reel off example after example of malicious terms that refer only to females and their lot in life as sex objects. Careful observation, however, will show that males also suffer discrimination in subtle and devastating ways. The verbal environment can be hostile to them. In one of my university classes not long ago, we discussed the honor system and the matter of how to deal with cheating. Several minutes of frank, open discussion went on with illustrations and hypothetical situations honestly discussed. At the end of the discussion, it occurred to us that whenever a "cheater" had been referred to, the pronoun referent was "he" and whenever a noncheater had been referred to, the pronoun referent was ''she." The on-a-pedestal image of women still controls the thinking of this generation! The female is the sinless, untouchable, model of purity, dressed in white and uplifted out of reach. Conversely, the male is the sinful, vulgar model of deceit. Shortly after that incident I heard a newscaster refer to the "enemy" as "he": "The enemy has the capability to launch attacks if he chooses to do so . . . ." Other language expressions come to mind that have been repeated through the generations: "Boys don't cry!" "Boys will be boys!" "No real man would do that!" There is a long list of nouns that embody a male referent: bad boy, bastard, bully, bum, cad, coward, criminal, dare devil, gambler, goblin, good-fornothing, Peeping Tom, rascal, rogue, sissy, sneak thief, thief, tramp, villain. There is a long

< previous page

page_47 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_48

next page > Page 48

list of insulting terms that are highly offensive to males, such as shmuck, borrowed from the Yiddish language. If a male uses tender, expressive, gentle language, he is ridiculed and laughed right out of the locker room. That males should be associated with negative and unpleasant concepts and females with goodness and purity is unreality at its best. And, of course, such an unreal model breaks down with glaring paradoxes as we compare illustrations such as these with the quotation from Pythagoras at the beginning of the book: "good principle = man; evil principle = woman." No wonder, then, that mankind is schizophrenic and irrational about male and female concepts. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about the situation we are in is that it has gone on as long as it has with acceptance. One wonders why human beingsmale and female haven't challenged these limiting value judgments long ago. The taboos of a society revolve around fears and conflicts that the society has difficulties in coping with. This includes such things as sex, death, age, power, money, race, certain gods, certain relationships, and the failure of a space missile. The connection between female language and taboos is unquestionable, 62 though it should be remembered that some taboos restrict the language of males also. Restraints, prohibitions, and forbidden vocabulary items apparently are found in every language of the world. Men's use of taboo expressions among themselves may be restricted in the presence of women and children. In our own culture, taboos involve most acutely the matters of sex, body elimination, and body parts. The prohibited domains are not necessarily the same in other cultures or subcultures. Among the mountain people of the Ozarks the names of male animalsbull, boar, buck, ram, jack, stallionare never spoken in the presence of women.63 Among the Mayo people of northern Mexico, women are not supposed to know many of the words connected with certain rituals.64 Taboo restrictions and control measures have a close relationship in social structures. The Mundurucú of South America have a strongly male-oriented culture. The sacred musical instruments which are used in secret rituals, and are taboo to the sight of the women, have "significance in the rationalization of sex roles and the validation of the superordinate position of the male."65 Unreal and cruel dichotomizing in language behavior inevitably leads to double standards in the treatment of male and female in every aspect of language use. Previously we noted the difference in use of labels, titles, and names (Chapter V). This difference also illustrates a

< previous page

page_48 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_49

next page > Page 49

double standard. One often hears on the news that women are referred to by their first names. We all heard about the activities of "Betty" and "Bess" when referring to the work of Betty Furness and Bess Myerson. But we never hear about "Bobby, John, and Melvin" when the news report concerns Messrs. Finch, Connally, and Laird. Job titles and classifications are different depending upon whether a male or female fills the position. A male is an "assistant manager;" a female is an "administrative assistant." A female professor will be "Mrs. Doe" while her husband (on the same campus!) is ''Prof. Doe." Descriptions of male and female have a different ring to them: an older woman has "wrinkles" but an older man has "deep crevices." Euphemisms are created out of the restrictions of taboos. The matter of handling taboo words is changing fast, however. Dictionaries used to print tabooed sexual and body elimination words with dashes or asterisks representing some lettersleaving enough hints to recognize the forms. The last decade has seen significant changes in the written and spoken use of these forms. The double standard still exists, however. Just within the last two years I was advised not to use the word "Damn" in a linguistic illustration, because it made me sound like a feminist! Linguists and innovators who will not permit the Procrustean bed to be imposed on the language variety of other segments of the population sometimes have difficulty not continuing to hold women in an analogous Procrustean cradle. Female comedians, too, feel a double standard response to their desire to use the full range of language. Their material is restricted as a result and intimidation continues to haunt those who advocate change in language standards. The matter of description of people and the interpretation of human qualities is based for instance on this double standard. A bold man is "courageous" but a bold woman is "aggressive." A student pointed out to me that one can say of a woman who is easy to seduce, "She's easy" but one cannot say "He's easy." A person who is innovative is "pushy" if female, but "original" if male. If insistent, a female is "hysterical," but a male is "persistent." If politically involved, a female is "over-emotional," a male is "committed. 66 Again, the double standard and the Madonna/Whore syndrome prevail in the use of really expressive and angry language ("swear words" and "four-letter words"). Women are permitted only such daring expressions as 'Oh shoot,' 'Oh fudge,' 'Heck,' and 'Golly'. Men are given free reignbut not in front of women and children. It is a gallant but untenable notion that women should be "protected" from

< previous page

page_49 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_50

next page > Page 50

rough language. The vocabulary denied the female has to do with functions she is very much familiar with. One wonders what on earth she is being protected from when, at the same time, she is at the center of action, cleaning up the blood, vomit, and refuse as she nurtures others through birth, sickness, and death. On the other hand, she is denied full language expression to vent her own emotions. Women must not get angry enough to swear! Could it be that this kind of prescriptive restriction results in the depressive behavior so common among females? The illogicality of roles permitted male and female shows up in language. A male is supposed to be "protective" and a real man wouldn't think of permitting a woman to support him. A female is supposed to be the one who "nurtures." Note that the semantic components underlying these words are very much the same. But the words differ in use. The linguistic form 'protecting' is more likely to be used in taking care of countries or borders. It is quite possible that the desire to take care of is a human trait found in all people at the same time that an opposing trait of wanting to be taken care of is also found in all human beings. All human beings, then, are in great need of being liberated from a linguistic confinement contrary to human nature. As males become more aware of the discriminations against them, they will begin to appreciate the changes taking place. I can think of no better way to conclude this section than to quote a fine, sensitive young man who asked me, "How would you feel if you were taught that you were made of snails and puppy-dog tails?" For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. In the early 1990s, a commercial catalog picturing artifacts for the family was delivered to homes in the United States. One of the items for sale was a pair of plaques, with pictures of a little girl dressed in pink on one plaque, and a little boy dressed in blue on the other. The printed captious said: A little girl is love, joy, laughter . . . A little boy is noise with dirt on it! . . .

< previous page

page_50 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_51

next page > Page 51

Language such as this reinforces the stereotype expressed at the beginning of this chapter. One does not require that males deny their natural heritage, but it is unfair to continue the descriptive tradition of "noisy" and "dirty." Dealing with each other fairly and reasonably obviates the need to manipulate. It is not necessary to deny "differences'' in order to be fair. It is well known that male professors have exchanged sex for good grades throughout the university systems. It is not so well known that coeds have used their wiles with cunning manipulation. These are scary women who contribute to the notion that males fear females (Ember 1978). The double standard of values was discussed recently in an article in the Los Angeles Times that dealt with the value of a man's life vs. the lives of a woman or a child (Haederle, 1993). The subtitle pointed out the ambivalence and contradictions in dealing with a category of people that is expendable and disposable: "During times of war or tragedy, why does the safety of women and children come first? History shows it hasn't always been that way." Haederle asks: "Why, when it comes to matters of survival, do we think (and speak) of the need to spare women and children, which in turn devalues the worth of men?" There is a growing bibliography that treats the human liberation movement from the point of view of men. A few of these are represented in the following listings, and one should go beyond this, to hear what men are saying. See, for example, Bly (1990); Brimelow (1994); Warren Farrell (1988, 1993); Gerzon ([1982]1992); Gray (1992); Haederle (1993); Kimmel (1987); Kupers (1993); and Tannen and Bly (1994). Listening is an essential tool in language learning; it is no less important in understanding other communicative behavior.

< previous page

page_51 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_52

next page > Page 52

Chapter VII Early Education and Language Ability At some point in our discussion of male/female differences we have to ask, When does it all begin? Even before a baby is born, it begins to respond to stimuli from the world that it does not yet know. 67 Carefully conducted experiments have shown that movement of a fetus increases in response to sounds made near the abdomen of the mother. This response is clearly established by the eighth month and increases as the time for birth approaches. After birth the infant verily thrives on human contact; indeed, the interrelationship between infant and other humans seems to be as necessary as food itself for growth and maturing. There is some evidence that language progress is impeded without the warm communication of caretaker to infant.68 The caretaker, of course, is the mother in most instances, but other human surrogates can substitute in this communicative relationship. In fact, a warm communicative substitute would be preferable to a cold, noncommunicative mother. It is a commonplace among observers of infant behavior that social behavior and response are well established before the infant is a year old. At what age does imitative behavior, which leads to language learning, begin? Undoubtedly, the fact that there are individual differences has resulted in the various ages cited by investigators. One well-documented case described imitative behavior in a nine-week-old infant.69 Many hints throughout the literature point to an even earlier age. In my own experiences with newborn babes, I have observed responsive behavior much earlier, but exactly when this responsive behavior also becomes imitative is still an open question. The personalities of the newborn and the caretaker are involved. The amount of time that the caretaker has to stimulate and respond to the baby is involved. If there are other children to care for, and if household duties are very demanding, the caretaker, or mother, may not actually

< previous page

page_52 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_53

next page > Page 53

have much time for the "practice sessions" that elicit vocal response. Other children in the surroundings and the interest, or absence, of the father, and others, all contribute to the development of the infant's response to the external world. There are several ways in which a neonate learns to respond to other humans in the course of developing communication systems. First of all, rhythm is established very early, perhaps before birth. A study of biological rhythms speaks of "fetal activity rhythms" and further states that time sense and rhythm develop before language. 70 Wolff, a well-known researcher in infant behavior, has established the stability of rhythm in infant cries during the neonatal period.71 Since rhythm is an important component of language, and differs from language to language, we must assume the importance of vocalizations in this stage of the development of the infant. Pitch differences also occur in the vocal response of the infant very early. These, with various mixes of rhythm, form the basis of intonation patterns later in speech. The intonation features of language are like the melody of a lilting song, complete with rhythm and emphasis. Infant observers have noted pitch response from two months on. A linguist at Stanford University studied recordings of the babblings and gurglings of Chinese, Russian, and American babies.72 At a half-year old, the Chinese babies were producing vocalizations significantly different from those of the babies reared in the other language environments. The utterances of the Chinese babies were usually of the single syllable type with vowel-like sounds dominating and with a great deal of pitch variation over a single "syllable" or vowel sound. This type of pitch variation is typical of the Chinese language. In contrast, the babies in Russian- and English-speaking environments showed little pitch variation over single syllablestypical of the Russian and English languages. Facial expressions also figure in the communicative response of infants at a very early age. It is not clear whether infants respond sooner, and better, to visual or to auditory stimuli. Probably some infants respond slightly better to visual, as do some adults, and some infants respond better to auditory, as do some adults. Or perhaps they vary according to time of day, fatigue, amount of lighti.e., aspects of the context of situation. Movement and touch also figure in the communicative aspects of infant and other human interaction. None of these channels of communicating occurs alone or exclusively. Before an infant learns language, he or she is learning social differences in

< previous page

page_53 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_54

next page > Page 54

expression and response to other humansthat is, the infant not only responds to humans but makes different responses to different categories of persons, depending upon the sex and relationship. The various channels of communication mentioned above are manipulated in various ways to produce different responses. Very few studies have been done with regard to sex differences, but from the evidence available it is obvious that learned sex differences begin very early in life. More research needs to be done to understand at what age the infant learned them, how these differences are conveyed to the infant, and to what extent, and how important they are to the development of the child. Lieberman tells of one such study that is significant. 73 Using the sound spectrograph, the fundamental frequencies, which indicate pitch differences, were measured on the babblings of two infants. Recordings were made of a ten-month-old boy and a thirteen-month-old girl under several different conditions. Of interest to us here are the recordings made while "talking" to the mother and to the father. The babies' fathers used lower average fundamental frequencies, or lower pitch, than their mothers. In imitation the babies responded with lower pitch to the fathers and higher pitch to the mothers. Other important studies have been done recently74 that indicate very definite differences in adult behavior toward male and female infants. The pink and blue blanket are applied from birth on. For example, mothers touch boy babies more than they touch girls. An interpretation of this fact is difficult to make. A biased opinion would be a simple answer: male infants are more valuable. This is too easy. It does not explain why male infants also cry more and are more fretful. Nor does it explain why males are comforted more by touch while female infants may be comforted by voice alone. As the infants develop, differential treatment continues; this perhaps reinforces any physiological differences with which the babies started out. One-year-old girls stay closer to mother with more touching behavior than their oneyear-old brothers. Studies done on the phonetic development of sounds by infants in the process of language learning do not show a significant difference in the ability and development of male and female infants.75 Some studies show slight differences, with sometimes the girls exceeding the boys, and other studies show the boys exceeding the girls. None of the differences is statistically significant, and with the almost infinite range of given variables possible in the experimental set ups, it has never

< previous page

page_54 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_55

next page > Page 55

been established that there is any universal sex difference in performance in gaining control of the sounds of a language. With regard to words and the building up of words, the same conclusions are drawn. 76 Berko studied the language performance of children according to certain morphological rules.77 She made up nonsense "words" and then elicited responses from the children that would indicate their ability to expand the words to make up such linguistic constructions as plurals, past tense, progressive forms, and possessives. For example, to elicit the plural form, she showed the child a picture of a make-believe character, saying, "This is a wug." Then she showed the child a picture with two of these characters, and encouraged the child to finish the sentence, "Now there are two ____." The child added the plural morpheme 'wugs', as was expected. Similarly she elicited verbal forms by showing pictures and saying, "This is a man who knows how to zib. What is he doing? He is ____." In the final analysis, with all things considered, it turned out that the boy and girl performance was practically equal. As far as speech styles are concerned, there are observable differences between boys and girls at a very early age. This can be seen, for example, when youngsters play house, or play store, and they modify their own speech by code switching according to the role they are playing. Again, there is concrete evidence that adults talk differently to male and female children. In an important study done at Harvard,78 tape recordings were made in the homes of five families with several children, to observe speech styles of the very young. The conclusions were that: Fathers and mothers did not talk in exactly the same way to the babies, and there seemed to be some sex differences as well in how the babies were addressed. Some of the boy babies were addressed, especially by their fathers, in a sort of Hail-Baby-Well-Met style: while turning them upside down or engaged in similar play, the fathers said things like 'Come here. you little nut!' or 'Hey fruitcake!' Baby girls were dealt with more gently, both physically and verbally. From the pre-language stages, then, and during early language acquisition, boys and girls advance in language development at generally the same rate; the differences can be attributed to individual performance rather than to sex. Nevertheless, during these periods, the children have plenty of opportunity to establish well-defined sex

< previous page

page_55 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_56

next page > Page 56

differences in language as well as in other behavior. Nursery rhymes and fairy tales reinforce the differences; toys, colors of clothes, and play equipment establish the behavior differences beyond a shadow of a doubt. By the time children enter school, the sex patterns are very well entrenched. School activities in every dimension continue to emphasize the male-female dichotomy. An alphabet-teaching program, for example, was recently introduced to the schools as a bright new way to learn letters. The inflatable, plastic figures represent personalities: the vowels are female characters and the consonants are all males. School-related activities reinforce the separation of the sexes. In 1971, at one elementary school in Los Angeles, no less than twelve organizations that are sex-segregated distributed invitations to the children on the school premises. 79 These cultural differences of sex role and expectations make an effect on the performance of boys and girls during the early school years and continue to mark performance throughout the teens. Studies invariably show that in language skills girls do better than boys in the early years of schooling. Boys constitute 75 to 85 percent of the youngsters who have reading problems or who are in remedial classes. More boys stutter than girls.80 Educational scholars have observed that although children of the same age vary widely in language proficiency, some factors produce differences. Dawson and Newman report that "Retardation in language growth . . . may be due to (1) having unusually low intelligence, (2) being shy . . . (3) being a twin or triplet . . . (4) being a boy . . .(5) coming from a home in which experiences are barren . . . ."81 Maccoby further elaborates in her study of sex differences in intellectual functioning and verbal ability: Through the preschool years and in the early school years, girls exceed boys in most aspects of verbal performance. They say their first word sooner, articulate more clearly and at an earlier age, use longer sentences, and are more fluent. By the beginning of school, however, there are no longer any consistent differences in vocabulary. Girls learn to read sooner, and there are more boys than girls who require special training in remedial reading programs; but by approximately the age of ten, a number of studies show that boys have caught up in their reading skills. Throughout the school years, girls do better on tests of grammar, spelling, and word fluency.82

< previous page

page_56 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_57

next page > Page 57

One explanation for the boy/girl performance is offered by Sexton, who believes that the schools are too feminized: School words tend to be the words of women. They have their own sound and smell, perfumed or antiseptic. Boys usually prefer touch and colorful short wordswhile teachers and girls lean toward longer, more floral, opaque synonyms. School words are clean, refined, idealized and as remote from physical things as the typical schoolmarm from the tough realities of ordinary life. Active word usage, as in speaking, is usually discouraged in school; students are expected to speak only when addressed. Even boys who refuse to read or write usually like to talk, but on their own terms. It is the school's most troublesome job to keep boys quiet and in their seats. 83 Hall offers the suggestion that some grammatical rules came to be linked with sex distinctions; men and boys said "can" and women and girls said "may." "'May' naturally sounded more refined to the women so they insisted on foisting it on the men along with a lot of gobbledygook about possible and not possible."84 Whatever the immediate explanation, it lies in the pattern of cultural factors regarding expectations and roles of male and female. In cultures where the education of girls is not important, the results are different, and boys excel in language skills. Stanchfield points this out in her extensive study of the sexual factor in language development and reading: "Further support for cultural explanation of these differences has been reported by Paul S. Anderson who observed that in Japan, where male children are given preferential attention in both home and school, the language development of boys is more advanced than that of girls."85 At the other end of the school spectrum, girls have to decide when, if, and how much of their skills to depress. When the desire for "femininity" and appeal to the male sex dominates their thinking, they begin to underplay their capacities and attainments, and, indeed, even fail to attain. In general, "with an increase in age the boys have a progressively poorer relative opinion of the girls and the girls have a progressively better relative opinion of the boys."86 Shortly after World War II cultural contradictions and sex roles were studied among college women. Large numbers of the coeds were found to have . . . 'played dumb' on dates, that is, concealed some academic honor, pretended ignorance of some subject, or

< previous page

page_57 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_58

next page > Page 58

allowed the man the last word in an intellectual discussion. Among these were women who 'threw games' and in general played down certain skills in obedience to the unwritten law that men must possess these skills to a superior degree. 87 The situation doesn't seem to have changed much since then. No wonder, when the stereotypes of society are foisted upon them daily. The following is a quotation from a college textbook used in classes on writing and style: "Underlining is generally described as 'feminine,' by which it is to be inferred that no real man would make use of it for fear of being thought womanly, while no real woman would use it either, because it is unmanly."88 In an excellent review of child development research, a well-known scholar surveyed the studies done on sex role identification and intellectual mastery.89 He noted, for example, that the degree of academic involvement is greater for adolescent and adult males than for females. It is well documented that skills such as spatial and mechanical reasoning, science, and mathematics are considered more appropriate for boys than for girls. Many studies show that girls perform less well in these areas. The obvious connection with cultural conditioning was exemplified by studies that showed that the females who rejected traditional feminine interests performed better on mathematical and geometric problems, in contradistinction to the typical female, whose motivation to attack such problems is low. The researcher concluded that the construct of sex role identification is not without its ambiguity, but that "Its retention as a descriptive and explanatory concept rests on the assumption that the concepts male and female and the dimensions maleness and femaleness are basic to our language" (p. 162). Apparently there is a basic desire for congruence between an ideal representation of the self and one's everyday behavior. Also there appears to be a basic need for cognitive harmony and balance. Thus, one learns in unconscious imitation to follow patterns of long standing, even though the results may lead to enormous contradictions and doublebinds that are unbearable. Education, then, will have to deal with changes to sex role standards that will be more compatible with the actualities of human beings. Before we leave the matter of sex differences in education, let us consider the global problem of illiteracy"Woman's Worldwide Burden." It is a well-known fact that it is difficult to interpret the figures on literacy, in that the measures are different from country to

< previous page

page_58 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_59

next page > Page 59

country. Some figures for literacy are given on the basis of the ability to write one's name, while other tests for literacy demand that the person be able to read a paragraph from the newspaper. Thus, the figures betray us. But it is not unreasonable to say that about half of the population of the world cannot read materials such as simple readers, pamphlets on birth control, or health brochures, much less articles of laws and legislation that protect the vulnerable. Of this half of the world's population who cannot read, most of the persons involved are females. The figures vary from country to country, with nearly 100 percent female illiteracy in some underdeveloped countries to about a parity in countries such as ours. An editorial from Saturday Review paints a gloomy picture: "In a tragic sense, the vast majority of the women of the world are doomed, even today, because of their sex and because they are separated from the rudiments of their own written language." 90 For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. Educators of the nineteenth century declared, without hesitation, that higher education would be detrimental to the health of women. Anne Eisenberg cites several instances of historical importance for "Women and the discourse of science," in a Scientific American essay (July 1992, p. 122). Distorted beliefs were based on the mythology that dealt with science as male (bold, rational), and nature as female (passive, mysterious). Such beliefs relegated males and females to certain functions in complementary distribution. The twentieth century reached a culmination of defying such notions, when professional organizations took positions of actively challenging the limits put on the men and women of their memberships. The Modern Language Association (MLA), New York, established a Commission on the Status of Women in 1969; shortly thereafter, the Linguistic Society of America (LSA) established a similar committee. The National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) formed the Women's Committee in 1971 to deal with the role and image of women. The MLA cooperated with others in producing Female Studies, from 1970 on (see Florence Howe, ed.); and there is no doubt that these contributions affected the curriculum of colleges and

< previous page

page_59 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_60

next page > Page 60

universities in immeasurable ways. I prepared the linguistic outline and bibliography for the series (Key 1970a; Appendix B); an example of the use of this material is seen in Bodine 1973 [1975]. Events moved rapidly and exponentially during those times in the public media and in academia; an historical chronology is presented by the NCTE committee (Aileen Pace Nilsen et al. 1977, pp. 2-21). Some authors in the following Bibliography have been attentive to the need of monitoring and correcting the biases occurring in the classroom. Nilsen (1973b) produced the most comprehensive study for that time in her dissertation that dealt with the stereotypes found in children's books. For problems in education see also a report done by the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation (AAUW, Anon, 1992; Susan Bailey 1992). Committees of professional organizations, such as those mentioned above, have continued to make an impact in academia and in the editing of professional journals, revising curricula and eliminating sexist prose, and, overall, encouraging women to pursue their careers with confidence. (See Davison, and Eckert, eds. 1990.) Still, Stephen G. Brush asks a disturbing question in the subtitle of his article in American Scientist (79.5: 404-419, September-October 1991): "Women in science and engineering: women are still seriously underrepresented in the sciences, and they have made comparatively little progress in the past five years. Why?" Also disturbing is the fact that women publish less than men. Jonathan R. Cole, and Harriet Zuckerman (1987) discuss the disparity, and they conclude that it remains a puzzle, requiring further comparative inquiry. In the intervening years, I have not found satisfactory answers to the questions raised. The matter of illiteracy around the world continues to be of urgent concern, particularly to women. An economist at the World Bank, Lawrence Summers, puts a dollar value on the ignorance of females: "Educating girls quite possibly yields a higher rate of return than any other investment available in the developing world." (Scientific American, August 1992, p. 132.) Basic twentieth century knowledge cannot be separated from hygiene, medical problems, and family consequences.

< previous page

page_60 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_61

next page > Page 61

Chapter VIII Subjects, Not Objects: Linguistic Structures 91 Up until now we have talked mostly about language as it functions in the interrelationships between human beings who use language patterns that are fairly obvious, even to the casual observer. These surface structures result from the mind and thought, from basic attitudes and belief systems that are, for the most part, out-of-awareness. The question we now ask is whether or not male and female differences also occur in linguistic structures of language, or do they only occur in stylistic structures, variations in expressions, and choice of vocabulary? Do these differences occur in the form of language as well as the function? Linguistic structures generally are investigated along the lines of the three basic components of language: phonological (or pronunciation) features, grammatical features, and semantic (or meaning) features. The first two of these kinds of features are more easily analyzed and are dealt with rather handily as the data are more obvious. The semantic features, however, involve underlying conceptual categories that give meaning to linguistic performance. These features, in any language, are far more difficult to understand; if one needs proof of this, the computer gave it to linguists. Scientists, in fact, are not yet able to do machine translation, except in the rawest stages, because of these complex semantic structures, which have not been completely analyzed in any language. Phonological The phonological component includes, roughly, that which is involved in pronunciationthe articulation of sounds, as it were. In some languages, in some words, males and females pronounce some sounds with distinct patterns.92 Among speakers of Cham in Vietnam,

< previous page

page_61 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_62

next page > Page 62

in women's speech, /r/becomes /y/in some circumstances, for example, in initial consonant clusters; /b/and /d/are preglottalized; initial /y/may be glottalized. Cham men Cham women day

hray

hyay

new

praw

pyaw

ring

korah

koyah

to scratch koraw

koyaw

In the Gros Ventre language of Montana, it was reported that certain affricate sounds, such as /tc, dj (ty)/, in the speech of men were pronounced as velars /k and ky/in the speech of women. Gros Ventre Gros Ventre men women newborn child

wadjínsihiqawakínsihiqa

Upper Quarters (name of band)

idjiqan

ikiqan

his gum

itcénibitc

ikénibik

abundant grass

djáaqa

kyáaqa

bread

dja'tsa

kya'tsa

stones someones pinto horse Pronunciation changes involve pitch differences as well as change of consonant in Koasati, a Muskogean language of southwestern Louisiana. Koasati Koasati men women I am lifting it

lakawwíslakawwîl

we are peeling it

molhís

lift it! (addressed to 2nd person plural)

lakawhóslakawhô1

molhîl

Sapir gives several examples of differences of pronunciation in the Yana Indian language of California. Yana male Yana a female to eat

mô'i

mô'i

deer liver

imamba

imamp'a

little house wawip!a

wawip!a

quail

sigaga *

sigak'*a

crow

gagi*

gak'*i

ear

mal'gu

mal'k'u

< previous page

page_62 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_63

next page > Page 63

snow

p'adja

p'atc'a

coyote

mits!i

mits!i

river

daha *

dax*a

man

isi

is*i

dog, horse

cucu*

cuc*u

elk

ts!orêwa

ts!orêwa

trail

'iya

iy*a

horn

wêyu

wêyu

star

i'lala*

i'lal*a

inside

iwulu*

iwul*u

moon

wak!ara*

wak!ar*a

bird sp.

p'att!ama

p'att!am'a

dentalia

ba'ninu*

ba'nin'*u

lake

'ak!ali'li*

'ak!alil'*i

woman

mari'mi

mari'mi

Differences of pronunciation also occur in languages of India. The sounds of Bengali have been recorded and it is noted that ''In the speech of women and children and of the uneducated classes there is a tendency . . . to pronounce an 'n' for an 'l', in initial positions."93 In English, differences are perhaps more subtle, but they also occur. The pronunciation of the ending -ing, for example, is articulated differently at times, by male and female. In a study done with children, the -ing pronunciation symbolized female speakers, and the -in pronunciation symbolized male speakers. The variations between the pronunciations, however, were not solely sex-differentiated, but were intricately involved with status, personality, mood, formality, and specific verbs. Verbs associated with the -ing pronunciation were: 'criticizing, correcting, reading, visiting, interesting'. Verbs associated with the -in pronunciation were: 'punchin, flubbin, swimmin, chewin, hittin'.94 The semantic categories are obvious; one can further extrapolate on the interest domains permitted boys and girls! A study of speech in Detroit was concerned with the fronting of the three vowels, /æ, a, /, among various socioeconomic classes,95 and it was found that women outscored the men in fronting these vowelsanother example of status intersecting with sex dimensions. Significant male/female differences also showed up in the pronunciation or absence of /r/in various studies.96 A surprising conclusion was that changes of pronunciation were initiated by young women, a fact that fosters speculation regarding language change. A feature of pronunciation is the pattern of suprasegmentals or intonation, elements of pitch, length, and stress, found in all languages of the world. No linguistic study has ever indicated basic

< previous page

page_63 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_64

next page > Page 64

differences in male/female intonation patterns in English, that are exclusively one or the other, as, for example, one might find in vocabulary differences. The differences are quantitative; that is, there are preferences and avoidances of particular patterns. It would not be surprising to find individual patterns that would correspond to other idiolectal features already observed in other levels of language expressions. Students of languages recognize that there are individual characteristics and predilections for certain grammatical constructions and typical vocabulary use. Some persons, for example, use a great many hesitation patterns or uncertainty patterns. Some individuals use a high percentage of patterns that communicate such traits as coyness, bull-headedness, cheerfulness, and sarcasm. It is likely that these linguistic features correlate with personality types. It is also quite likely that women use patterns of uncertainty and indefiniteness more often than menpatterns of plight. That this is so is indicated by phoneticians who suggest that the "raised, weak syllables" are said to be a "woman's intonation." 97 Of the several patterns of intonation that dominate in women's speech, it will be noted that many or most of them fall into the areas of emotional, expressive language. Thus, the learned intonational features make women appear to be more emotional. Contrasts with the emotional language of men will be seen later as we discuss pronoun references. Another feature of the intonation of women's speech is a tendency to speak in an overall high pitch on the part of some women. In many cases, the pitch of women and children are comparable. In addition, within a range of the person's norm, women used the highest level of pitch (the excited pitch) more than men. That women do speak with more expressive intonational patterns has been noted by some pilot studies and observer-linguists. In a brief exploratory experiment, a student of mine listened to children in the third, fourth, and fifth grades retell a story. The girls spoke with very expressive intonation, and the boys toned down the intonational features, even to the point of monotony, "playing it cool." A study of adult intonation patterns98 corroborates this differentiation. Females more often use patterns of surprise, unexpectedness, cheerfulness, and politeness. The following examples, taken from this study, often occur in the speech of women:

< previous page

page_64 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_65

next page > Page 65

Radio and T.V. broadcasting is a career that is concerned with delivery of speech, particularly the features of pronunciation. Speakers are taught to control the pitch and quality of the voice in order to sound neutral. A handbook for announcers 99 states that while women were hired by radio stations during World War II, they were not retained after the war because "often the higher-pitched female voices could not hold listeners' attention for any length of time, while the lower-pitched voices were frequently vehicles for an overly polished, ultrasophisticated delivery that sounded phoney." The handbook goes on to say that "Women's delivery . . . is lacking in the authority needed for a convincing newscast . . . ." In Germany and in the South they have not read that handbook, though, because women's voices are heard frequently on the air in both of those areas. Grammatical Matters of a grammatical nature have to do with the analysis of how words are constructed. This level of linguistics is called morphology, i.e., the shape of words. Syntax is the matter of stringing these words together in an orderly arrangement. Male/female differences in morphological patterns have been demonstrated in several languages of the world. Kurux* a Dravidian language of north India, has such features. The differences in the verb paradigms are based on

< previous page

page_65 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_66

next page > Page 66

four possible speech contexts, depending on who speaks to whom: (1) man speaks to man (MM); (2) man speaks to woman (MW); (3) woman speaks to woman (WW); (4) woman speaks to man (WM). The following illustrations show the conjugation of the verb bar-('come') and show singular and plural persons: 100 Verb bar- 'come'

'Present paradigm

MM

MW

WW

WM

bar-d-an

bar-d-an

bar?-e-n

bar-d-an

bar-d-am

bar-d-am

bar?-e-m

bar-d-am

bar-d-at

bar-d-at

bar-d-at

bar-d-at

bar-d-ay

bar-d-i

bar-d-in

bar-d-ay

bar-d-ar

bar-d-at

bar-d-ay

bar-d-ar

bar-d-as

bar-d-as

bar-d-as

bar-d-as

bar?-Ø-i(d) bar?-Ø-i(d) bar?-Ø-i(d) bar?-Ø-i(d) bar-n-ar

bar-n-ar

bar-n-ay

bar-n-ar

Cocama, a Tupi language of the Amazon, has a different pronoun series for male and female speakers.101 male female this

iquiá ajan

that

yucá yucun

I, to me

ta

etse

you, to you

ene

ene

he, she, to him, to her

uri

ai

we (incl)

ini

ini

we (excl)

tana

penu

you (pl.), to you

epe

epe

them, to them

rana

inu

English does not have such well-defined differences in the morphological structures. Nevertheless, there is one suffix that gives us considerable trouble: the ending -ess to designate the female counterpart of a male "unmarked" word: poet:poetess; author:authoress. A scholar of the English language early in this century wrote about "doctress, authoress, preacheress, astronomess" and other forms that designate the femaleness of the professional person. She noted that this problem is of fairly recent origin, in terms of the long history of the language: As soon as woman got out of her rightful place as mistress of a home she began to make trouble for the

< previous page

page_66 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_67

next page > Page 67

writers and speakers who had to mention her unwonted doings. What to call a woman who usurped man's place in the pulpit, in the practice of medicine, in the editing of periodicals, in the writing of books, in the jury box, and on the field of battle, was a problem for the mid-nineteenth century American writer and speaker. 102 This confusion in the use of labels led to derogatory concepts, and the "ultra-chivalrous American gentleman . . . stigmatized women workers, wherever he could, with the suffix -ess." A former president of the Linguistic Society of America also noted this unpleasant flavor: "To refer to a woman aviator as an aviatrix sounds quaint nowadays, and even actress is sometimes dropped in favor of actormention of sex seems inappropriate except for humor or insult."103 Another English scholar has discussed the use of the term as applied to Emily Dickinson and noted, ''In the midnineteenth century the term 'poetess' expressed the general feeling that female nature lacked qualities essential to the creation of great poetry."104 This use of the suffix -ess, then, would automatically exclude female writers of poetry from an anthology or collection of "Great Poets." Perhaps not all users of the suffix -ess delimit the qualities of greatness in such labels. It appears that the term 'chiefess' was used in Hawaii with complete casualness by the Islanders.105 And when Nicholson revised and added to the material by Fowler on English usage, she argued for keeping the "feminine designations" and elevating the positions. If one could measure the rebellion against such labels today, one might conclude that this position has not been effective. Or better still, it perhaps depends on the dialect of English. In Scotland the suffix appears to have wider use and occurs in such forms as "clerkess" and "manageress." Magnificent vocalic feats result from pluralizing these forms: "clerkesses" and "manageresses"! A baffling inconsistency in the use of the suffix -ess is found in the group of nouns: 'prowess, largess, and duress'.106 Synthetic constructions, which involve the putting together of the vocabulary inventory of any language, seem to have more distinctions of female usage in English than morphological constructions. Females make more use of intensifiers, the often-emphasized words such as: 'so, such, quite, vastly'. "It was so interesting," "I had such fun." Jespersen107 gives other examples in German, French, Danish, and Russian, and one wonders if this might not be a feature of IndoEuropean language habits.

< previous page

page_67 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_68

next page > Page 68

The way people describe things exhibits male and female characteristics of language use. Several students of mine have done small studies on the use of adjectives in male/female linguistic behavior. 108 The conclusions invariably pointed to differences in the use of commonly-known adjectives. The results fall in the realm of tendency and avoidance, as with intonation patterns, rather than all-or none situations. Women tended to use reduplicated forms such as 'teeny-tiny, itsy-bitsy'. They also tended to use words that emphasized femininity, such as 'adorable, bubbly, cuddly, cute, darling, exquisite, pretty, precious, and sweet'. They tended to use more emphatic forms such as 'fantastic, horrifying, startling'. Males tended to use forms that emphasized masculinity: 'barbed, bristly, leathery, lusty'. One notes immediately that the studies showed nothing of varying linguistic behavior that has to do with linguistic ability, i.e., ability to innovate creative expressions, to originate complicated structures, and to correctly use embedded structures. Rather the studies just confirmed role identification and expression of femininity and masculinity. Besides the differences that males and females exhibit in their use of adjectives, there is the matter of how people describe themselves and the other sex. It is not a bit surprising that they tend to describe themselves in terms of society's description of feminine and masculine patterns. One senses the frustration of the vicious circle.109 The modal construction is another syntactic device that appears to be prominent in women's speech. When speakers refer to the kinds of action and the possibilities, probabilities, and doubtfulness of events that did or will take place, in English they use the modal class of words, such as: 'can, could, shall, should, will, would, may, might', along with other verb auxiliaries, 'have' and 'been'. Females use more of these words that show indefiniteness, inconclusiveness, and uncertainty. Males use fewer of these words and their speech tends to be more definite and authoritative (but necessarily correct!). There are other uses of these forms that show attitude toward a situation or person. An interesting example occurred recently on a TV newscast, where a manager was being interviewed about the employment situation in view of the recent focus on encouraging women to advance to higher status. He said, "It is very possible that we will have to integrate our present staff . . . which we are very pleased to do." (emphasis, MRK). Great conflict showed up in the

< previous page

page_68 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_69

next page > Page 69

linguistic use of "have to," which he then tried to nullify by adding that they were "pleased" to be forced to do this. Another construction which lends itself to indefinite and tentative styles of speech is the tag question, 110 a shortened question added to a declarative statement. 'He's coming tomorrow, isn't he?' If the information is definitely known, it can be expressed by the statement alone. Women tend to add the tag question, not because of lack of information, but to reinforce the feminine image of dependency and the desire not to appear aggressive and forward. Some observers of the scene have noted that at least some women frequently use combinations of words such as: 'what, how, who, why' with the form 'ever' in sentences such as, "Whatever are you doing?" Whoever would want to do that?" "However shall I carry all three packages?" The imperative construction is another indicator of male/female speech. In a world where women do not usually function in roles of decision-making and giving commands, it is not surprising that females use alternatives to the imperative construction, which is the simple, direct way of ordering an action: 'Bring that here!' 'Write that down!' 'Have my suit cleaned!' Women use constructions which are not so abrupt and straightforward. Questions substitute for commands: 'Would you drop this by the cleaners on your way?' Modals soften the approach: 'You could include that in the paragraph if you like.' Longer sentences eliminate brusqueness which is not permitted in feminine speech: 'Would it be all right with you if you had the students turn in these forms by Friday?' Hortative constructions relieve a woman from commanding a male figure: 'Do let's go!'111 It was said that during Sissy (Frances) Farenthold's campaign, one of her aides needed an ashtray and asked her to get it. She did, before she realized that it was she who was supposed to be giving the ordersnot taking them. English, of course, is not the only language where sex-differentiated speech is exemplified by command performance. A study that analyzed the speech of Luo, a language of Kenya, shows "that the speech of adults, especially males, to young girls has a higher percentage of imperatives than speech to boys of comparable ages."112 The last example that I wish to set forth here in this discussion of grammatical constructions is not from the speech of everyday, ordinary speakers, as the previous examples have been observed. Rather this is from the writing of the immortal Virginia Woolf. As so many literary critics have pointed out, the characters of Woolf's novels, as well as her other writings, often exemplify the male-female situation in real life.

< previous page

page_69 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_70

next page > Page 70

Mrs. Ramsay, of To the Lighthouse, is the prototype of the wife who is everything else to her family around her. The oblivious Mr. Ramsay is the prototype of the husband, the subject of the relationships in the household, in the way which de Beauvoir so often spoke of in the subject-object dependency. Mrs. Ramsay typifies the subordinate relation, the object of the action around her. noticed a remarkable sentence construction in Woolf's writing: And Mrs. Ramsay, in a sentence of significant syntax, rams out to have died, leaving Mr. Ramsay with his arms empty: "Mr. Ramsay, stumbling along a passage one dark morning, stretched his arms out, but Mrs. Ramsay having died rather suddenly the night before, his arms, though stretched out, remained empty." Mr. Ramsay, the subject of this sentence, stretches out his arms which remain empty, the same action which followed his desire to be told she loved him, the same distress which followed his seeing the stern look on her face when he looked into the intricacy of the hedge. Mrs. Ramsay exists only in a subordinate clause, the object of his needs [emphasis, MRK]. 113 Semantic In the first chapter we began to discuss categories and the development of these conceptual categories among human beings. Grammatical categories are an outgrowth of the human being's concept of reality, and these classifications may be true to the facts of nature, or they may be distorted and not in accord with the facts of nature. People classify things into categories by characteristics and function. Physical characteristics are used to classify such things as gases, liquids, and solids, or colors, shapes, and sizes. Functional behavior is used to classify occupations, supernatural beings, government documents, and women and children. Cross-cultural examination of how people classify things is an enlightening exercise in people's world-view. For example, the grammatical gender of the sun is masculine in Spanish and feminine in German, and the moon is masculine in German and feminine in Spanish. In Algonkin the words for 'raspberry, kettle, knee' occur in the class of animate gender, and the words for 'strawberry, bowl, elbow' occur in the inanimate gender. Likewise the concept of number (plural and singular) may be treated in different ways. Rice is singular, but oats are plural. Is a crowd singular or plural? In the United States 'the government is' but

< previous page

page_70 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_71

next page > Page 71

in Great Britain 'the government are'. Thus we see that linguistic classification is sometimes arbitrary. Nevertheless, it is these abstract structures that make a person accept, on the one hand, 'The child was frightened' and reject, on the other hand, 'The table was frightened'. Another curious example is a bit more subtle: a man can have children, but only a woman can have babies. The relationship of conceptual categories to everyday behavior is still a moot question. In some instances they are ignored; people probably don't think of rice being different in kind from oats. In other instances they are of supreme importancesupernatural categories can demand extreme behavior from human beings. And the sex categories deeply penetrate the value system and permitted/prohibited behavior of male and femalecertainly far more than is justified by actual physical and functional differences. In discussions of structures of languages, semantics comprises an area which is by far the least understood in linguistic theory. Jespersen 114 spoke of notional categories and extralingual categories. He noted that some of them relate to such facts of the world without, such as sex, and others to mental states or to logic. He said, "It will be the grammarian's task in each case to investigate the relation between the notional and the syntactic categories." He then attempted a "systematic review of the chief notional categories insofar as they find grammatical expression, and [an] invest[igation of] the mutual relation of these two 'worlds' in various languages." Whorf, in the 1930s, also spoke of categories which marked word classes. He noted certain types of patterning, or linguistic configurations, which he called lexical selection. He believed that meaning should be stated in terms of the semantic facts linked with the configurations.115 Nevertheless, a generation later, there is still not a consensus among linguists whether the roles of syntax and of semantics should be handled as an integrated system or as separate entities. Therefore, categories such as animate/inanimate, number, status (honorifics), proximate/distance, dimension (length, area, volume), and penetrableness (gas, liquid, solid) are handled in different ways by modern theorists, and sometimes they are not handled at all. Even though it is yet to be decided whether selectional restrictions are definable in terms of the restraints of syntax alone, or of syntax and semantics in conjunction with one another, it is still possible to make some statements about gender and sex in language and the relationship between grammars and verbal behaviors.

< previous page

page_71 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_72

next page > Page 72

In this study I am making a sharp distinction between gender and sex. For purposes of distinguishing, I will use the terminology feminine and masculine to refer to grammatical gender, and male and female to refer to sex. This idea is not new. In Jespersen's The Philosophy of Grammar, published in 1924, a chapter is titled "Sex and Gender." Royen's study of 1930 also distinguished sex and gender. In this immense work, incidentally, Royen gives the history of all theories concerning grammatical gender in Indo-European. More recently, linguist-philosophers in dealing with the structure of a semantic theory also differentiate between gender and sex. The semantic markers, Male and Female, are distinguished from the grammatical markers, which, in a given language, would be gender distinctions. 116 Recent descriptions of language do not always make it clear whether gender is to be considered apart from sex distinctions. Some scholars refer to "masculine/feminine" and some refer to "male/female" without making the distinction that one set of terms might apply to gender and another to sex. In any case, there seem to be three ways of handling the notion of the division of human beings.117 Langendoen represents one way of treating the sex/gender attributes. He uses the binary features with a plus or minus Masculine. Thus [+ Masculine] refers to males and [- Masculine] refers to females. McCawley in his proposal for the role of semantics in a grammar, uses [+ male] and [- male], though with a different position regarding semantics. He believes that only semantic information plays a role in selection. Postal includes only the Masculine feature in his analysis of English pronouns. One might conclude that the plus/minus analysis is good Freud, but not necessarily adequate description. Another way of treating the semantic distinction of sex is to consider that both of the features, male and female, are a positive condition, and both are given autonomous status and treated as independent wholes. Katz and Fodor postulate both male and female as semantic markers. Jacobs and Rosenbaum use two plusses in their feature analysis: Page 73

simply an absence of male reproductive organs. We could define '- male' as '+ female,' but this would be an ad hoc definition. It would not simplify the grids of such groups as child, pup, kitten, and fawn. To avoid the ad hoc definition, one must make female a feature here, as well as male. 117 Gruber117 also considers that the condition female leads an existence of its own. In this consideration, he also presents a different theoretical approach to selectional features. Gruber suggests "underlying categorial trees" rather than feature matrices in his paper on the "functions of the lexicon in formal descriptive grammars." He suggests "specificatory categories" vs. "contrastive features," in describing lexical items. Gruber makes an important empirical claim, and says further . . . that there should never be a need to call for or specify a word by its lack of some quality (for example, nonhuman, non-concrete, or non-mass). The existence of one feature does not necessitate the existence of some other feature contrastive to it. For example, feminine (in the semantic sense) is not the absence of masculine or even the necessary complement of masculine. It is not a linguistic principle that there be two sexes, nor does the existence of one of the sexes necessitate (as a linguistic principle) the existence of the other. We can have them both independently, yet mutually exclusively, generated in the base.117 A third way of treating the category of sex in grammars is to follow the conclusions drawn from human embryological development, which we have already mentioned in the first chapter. Thus, [+ female] would be considered basic and the male would be [- female]. This analysis has never been suggested in any grammar book or linguistic discussion, but, as can readily be seen, has more basis in fact than either of the previous models of analysis. It is clear that biology is behind certain language structures in unambiguous ways. For example, the person that is pregnant is most certainly female (unless he is a seahorse, my son tells me), and the one who shaves his beard is certainly male. There are, however, other conceptual categories that reflect male and female images in language. The following illustrate these constraints.

< previous page

page_73 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_74

next page > Page 74

Men bellow; women purr. Men yell; women scream (or squeal). . . . vivacious women, but not *vivacious men . . . . Women fret (a recent newspaper headline); men get angry. Men have careers; women have jobs. 118 Married women engage in 'homemaking'; single women 'keep house'. The concept formation behind the construction of language expressions such as these is a result of learned categories. Brunet, Goodnow, and Austin, in a book called A Study of Thinking, speak of "the invention of categories." They explain that: To one raised in Western culture, things that are treated as if they were equivalent seem not like man-made classes but like the products of nature . . . . But there exists a near infinitude of ways of grouping events in terms of discriminable properties, and we avail ourselves of only a few of these.119 In an appendix to the same book, Roger Brown says, "I should expect all such semantic categories to be susceptible of functional definition by the method of contextual probabilities. Indeed, I think functional categories are suggested to us by semantic categories," In my interest and study during the last few years of Boas', Whorf's, and Sapir and Swadesh's120 "grammatical categories," and more recently the "selectional restrictions" and "groupings" of exponents of transformational theory, I have become intrigued with the groupings in which WOMEN occur. The following illustrations of such groupings were collected at random from a great variety of sources of both written and spoken language. It seems that consideration of these groupings might throw light on the semantic constraints behind such constructions as those previously illustrated in noun-verb and noun-adjective combinations. These notional categories or selectional groups are powerful forces behind the actual expressions of language and are based on distinctions that are not regarded as trivial by the speakers of the language.

< previous page

page_74 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_75

next page > Page 75

The first examples are from very early times. Robert Cawdry published A Table Alphabeticall in 1604, saying that he had gathered the words "for the benefit and helpe of Ladies, Gentlewomen, or any other unskilfull persons . . . ." Another dictionary of 1623 classed women with "young schollars, clarkes, merchants, as also strangers of any nation." Thomas Blount intended his Glossographie in 1656 for "the more knowing women and less-knowing men." 121 A more recent scholar was quoted in the AAUP BulletinPresident Nathan Pusey of Harvardwho, realizing that the draft was going to reduce the number of men in graduate school, lamented, "We shall be left with the blind, the lame, and the women." A famous comedian is known to be vocal about his ''scotch, horses, and ladies." An editorial starts out naming everything that is rampant these days: "crime, violence, sex, and women." The Xth Commandment was written for men(were women not considered part of the audience?)they were admonished not to covet their neighbor's "house, wife, manservant, maidservant, ox, ass, property." The publisher of the Encyclopædia Britannica discusses Contract Law and lists the parties who are not legally competent and who enjoy indulgence of the courts. These persons are: minors, the mentally incapacitated, and sometimes special groups such as married women, convicts, and aliens. In earlier times, the state of New York once worded its franchise law to include everyone but women, minors, convicts and idiots. Often women have been classed with slaves and children. In Africa, secret associations have been formed to keep the women and children in subjection. In Islamic countries, there are signs on the mosques instructing that, "Women and dogs and other impure animals are not permitted to enter." In Martin's article on the "Speech levels in Japan and Korea,"122 he notes linguistic differences in situations of address and terms of politeness in the following situations: women to men, young to old, lower classes to upper classes. Note that the category comprises women, youth, lower classes. In the Bengali language women are classed with the children and the uneducated. Jespersen lists the persons who speak Sanskrit: gods, kings, princes, brahmans, ministers, chamberlains, dancing-masters, other men in superior positions, and a very few women of special religious importance. Those who are destined to speak Prakrit are: men of inferior class, like shopkeepers, law officers, aldermen, bathmen, fishermen, policemen, and nearly all women.

< previous page

page_75 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_76

next page > Page 76

Returning to this country and to more recent times, one notes that Women's Liberation has engendered new classifications. A recent newspaper article noted the following group in a news event: the Women's Lib people, the Third World people, the Blacks, the Chicanos. An article in Saturday Review this year [1975] referred to a certain crusader as a "defender of both forms of homosexuality, of Mozart, women's fights, and dumb animals." A Fantastic Foster Fenwick cartoon in the Los Angeles Times grouped the following marchers together: "Women's Lib, Teen Age Lib, Pre-Teen Lib, Toddlers' Lib." One of California's bourgeois sea communities prides itself in living a life "dedicated to boats, broads, and booze." Section 415.5 of the Penal Code in California states that anyone can be arrested for using ''vulgar, profane or indecent language within the presence or hearing of women or children . . . ." In discussing the impact and potency of words in their creative effect, a famous anthropologist says, "You utter a vow or you forge a signature and you may find yourself bound for life to a monastery, a woman or a prison." Spiro Agnew added to the collection of groupings that include women in a speech on August 26, 1970, Women's Liberation Day. His remarks were something to the effect that it is difficult to tame "oceans, fools, and women." That's how women are categorized. It's as simple as that. Paradoxically, the reasons for it are at the same time profoundly complex and the implications are deeply embedded in the thinking and subsequent behavior of human beings in their own actions and in the interrelatedness of human beings. Of all the grammatical/behavioral categories, probably no concept so determinedly governs human behavior. For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. One of the notions of Chapter VIII that I consider of supreme importance is reflected in the title. The objectification of one class of human beings over another class of human beings remains a problem in social structures. Writers (and speakers, of course) still fall into the trap of inequality, as can be seen in an announcement of a movie, in the Los Angeles Times (August 10, 1993), starring Jodie Foster and Mel

< previous page

page_76 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_77

next page > Page 77

Gibson. The announcement states "Foster will play Gibson's romantic interest . . ." She is his object; and Heilbrun's observations are still relevant. Some examples of the genders of Indo-European 'sun' and 'moon' are given in the section on Semantics; and I refer the reader back to my Introduction to this edition, "The sun darkens the moon" (p. xxvii). Also in the section on semantics, I note the analysis of distinctive features, using a [+] or [-] male/female, to denote attributes in the lexicon where it is pertinent. While preparing this update, I have brought the language of nudity into the discussion; I suggest here that, in our society (but not necessarily in other societies), the definition of "nudity" would include the distinctive feature of [+ female]. See Chapter XI, for further discussion on the language of clothes. Corbett (1991) provides a comprehensive view of linguistic gender (classes), with language examples from around the world. An important linguistic breakthrough is based on gender systems of the American Indian Algonkin (= Algonquian) family. Corbett summarizes the work of Black-Rogers, who studied gender classes of Algonquian from the speakers' point of view; this hearkens back to the perspectives that I first mentioned in the Preface to the 1975 book. Black-Rogers (1982) notes that POWER is the dominant element in Ojibwa (Algonquian) gender classifications. Power is essential for life; living things are powerful. See also Straus and Brightman 1982. These studies clarify the groupings in Chapter VIII, in the section on semantics. Another feature of interest for purposes of research in male/female language is Corbett's discussion of masculine and feminine pronouns (see his index). Using Greenberg's claims of universals, it is noted that if a language distinguishes gender in the first person, it distinguishes gender in the second or third person, or in both, as given in Universal 44 (Greenberg 1963: 76). There is also a tendency that if a language has gender distinctions in only one pronoun, it will be the third person pronoun, which is 'referentially ambiguous'. This recalls Simone de Beauvoir's "Other" (see my Chapter IV and Chapter IX). Categories used in our previous Contract Law (listed in Key 1972, and here in Chapter VIII) can be compared with those of French legislation at the time of the founding of our country. It would seem that the notions that are reflected in these groupings were widely accepted in Western society; they were and are profoundly significant in

< previous page

page_77 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_78

next page > Page 78

how people think and how they perceive each other. From France, Françoise Parturier offers an historical perspective on the era, a disruptive time of changing perspectives, that led up to Daumier's role as social and political satirist. The period of the French Revolution designed its principles of liberty to exclude women; the French ruling legislative committee gave legal backing to this exclusion: "Children, lunatics, minors, women, those convicted of odious crimes . . . shall not be considered as citizens." One way to set women apart was to make fun of them, and Daumier [18081879] reveled in the opportunity to do just this in his lithographs, which depicted intelligent women as grossly unattractive. (Parturier, p. 10, [Honoré] Daumier, 1974, Lib Women (Bluestockings and Socialist Women). Paris: Leon Amiel, 135 pages, 50 plates).

< previous page

page_78 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_79

next page > Page 79

Chapter IX Speaking in Reference to Male and Female Every language has a set of forms with which reference is made to people or things that are the focus of discussion. These referents may be known and previously specified or they may be unknown or non-specific. 'Mrs. Brown' will be referred to as 'she'; unspecified people may be referred to as 'they'. We have already considered some of the ways in which people can be referred tofor example, titles and names. Here we can expand our discussion and deal directly with pronominal forms and nominals. The pronominal forms in English 'I, you, he, she, it, we, they' belong to a "closed" class of linguistic forms. There are only seven, and over the centuries the inventory of this class is not likely to change, even though other changes take place every generation or so. Of course, circumstances can emerge which can change this classdropping or gaining some forms. In the last few hundred years, for example, the forms 'thou' and 'thee' have been dropped. The form 'they' was added with the Scandinavian invasions many centuries ago. If one compares the English set of forms with similar pronominals in other languages, different situations come to light. Spanish has ten forms: yo, tu, Vd., él, ella, nosotros, nosotras, Vds., ellos, ellas. The matter of declaring sex of referent is required, not only of the 'he-she' referent, but also of the 'we' and they'. Another dimension is added: that of status or degree of familiarity. In speaking to a person of close relationship, the form is tu; to a person of more formal relationship, the form is Vd. and both of these are simply translated 'you' in English. All the Indo-European languages use some of these same dimensions in their sets of pronouns; no two languages are exactly alike in their use of referents, but there are similarities derived from a common mother tongue.

< previous page

page_79 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_80

next page > Page 80

Other languages of the world may require that other dimensions be declared in the pronominals. In some languages the pronoun 'we' has forms that indicate whether 'we' includes only two persons (dual) or whether it includes more than two (plural). Still again, 'we' may have to indicate whether only those persons present are included or whether persons absent from the scene are included or excludedinclusive and exclusive forms. Some languages have an extensive range of honorifics in the pronoun system. Aztec has a form yejwa that corresponds to our 'he-she-it' with no regard for gender or sex, but it can be used with an honorific yejwatsin, which means 'honorable he-she-it'. It is used for God, Chief, and a highly respected person. In practice, the 'it' would not occur with an honorific because this kind of honor is attributed only to animate beings. The Thai language has the possibility of adding honorific forms even to the first person 'I', which indicates status relationships between the persons speaking. The matter of possession at times and in some languages changes pronoun referent. We might use a nonpersonal 'it' for a nonpersonal thinge.g., 'its toy'; 'her' (or 'his') might be used for personal body parts of a babywhen referring, for example, to 'her hair'. In English, body parts co-occur with a personal possessive pronoun: 'wash your hands', but in Spanish the pronoun is impersonal and not possessive: lave las manos (wash the hands). The context of situation makes it perfectly clear that the hands belong to the person addressed. The possessive pronoun, on the other hand, is used with impersonal objects: traiga su libro (bring your book). Besides possession, personal and gender reference is often intertwined with animate/inanimate concepts. These ideas go back long before history was recorded and we can only speculate on their origins, and on the contemporary situations that have derived from earlier thinking. "Mother Earth" undoubtedly had some spiritually animate qualities in the belief system of early earth dwellers (earthlings) and it is no great surprise to note that the land often is referred to as "she." Even though many ideas have been lost in the shuffle of civilizing people and their thinking, remnants remain. Another thing to consider in analyzing our English use of he/she for such things as ideas and animals and objects is the proto language backgrounds. We often refer to dogs as "he" and cats as "she" and various explanations have been attempted which have to do with size of animal and temperament. It might be noted that in German der Hund (dog) belongs to the masculine gender classification, and die Katz (cat)

< previous page

page_80 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_81

next page > Page 81

belongs to the feminine gender. It is not unlikely that the influence of our Germanic heritage has caused present-day English often to maintain that gender distinction in reference. It is clear from these and countless examples that can be observed daily that the matter of gender and sex referents is intricately mixed with other behavioral categories and linguistic dimensions. The English pronoun system is a rather simple system compared with other languages of the world, as far as the forms are concerned. Only seven forms are possible, thus not many choices have to be made regarding such things as sex, honorific, familiarity, presence or absence, or distance. Most of the time the grammatical forms of language correspond to the realities of nature. For example, in the sentence 'The boy hurt himself' gender markers and sex coincide. In fact, there are so many examples such as this in English, that we are lulled into the comfortable thinking that all is well and regular. In fact, the pronoun system in English is inadequate to handle many things that we want to say, where at times we need ambiguity, or some way to make reference to non-specific persons. The following examples illustrate this lack: Someone tried to get in, didn't (he, she, they)? Someone owes you money, doesn't (she, he)? Someone's knocking, (aren't, isn't) (he, she, they)? One of us could go, couldn't (I, you, we)? Whorf also gives examples of the inconsistent use of pronouns in English (Whorf had two goldfish, Jane and Dick): Each goldfish likes its food. *Jane likes its food better than Dick. *Tom [a dog] came out of its kennel. My baby enjoys its food. *My baby's name is Helensee how Helen enjoys its food. *My little daughter enjoys its food. That's Boston*I live in it. 123 The use of the editorial "we" is another example of inconsistency in pronoun referent. Mark Twain commented that "Only presidents, editors, and people with tapeworm have the right to use the editorial 'we'." If all the categories and dimensions that are possible were used in a language it would be intolerably cumbersome. Therefore, languages

< previous page

page_81 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_82

next page > Page 82

filter out some possibilities and mixes and are inevitably asymmetrical at some points. It is this that causes ambiguity at times, not only in the linguistic system, but in the communication processes between human beings. Nevertheless, ambiguity is a necessary and useful device in language and a powerful and intriguing device for poets. Interpersonal relationships are maintained by ambiguity, where either a lie or an absolute truth would destroy. An impersonal, ambiguous reference can be tolerated. To be practical, people need an ambiguous way of referring to an unknown person who rang the doorbell, or started gossip, or fixed the telephone lines, or gave warnings. An impersonal 'they' is often used in expressions in English: "Nobody knows, do they?" "Somebody could hurt themselves." "Anyone in their right mind." Shakespeare used this useful combination: "God send everyone their harts desire.'' English is at a disadvantage in meeting the need of an ambiguous, unspecified, unknown person referent. Languages which have no distinction of male/female for the third person pronoun, such as Hungarian, Finnish, Aztec, or Chinese, do not have this problem. In situations in English it is often stated that the pronoun 'he' is used in a generic sense to cover both sexes. Law documents, for example, are supposed to have this intent in the writings. In addition to the pronoun 'he', it is also said that the male forms such as 'man' and 'mankind' are used as generic terms that include both male and female. Jespersen points out that this interpretation was "a natural linguistic consequence of the social preponderance during many centuries," and this is quite believable, although he also noted a growing use of the term 'human'. 124 Nowadays this usage is being challenged on a two-point basis. People who believe that the condition 'human' outranks the condition of sex are no longer satisfied with using male terms. And, more seriously, innumerable counter-examples show that, indeed, the terms are often used with no thought of women in mind. For example, an article published recently says, "The first of these sections shows that a man's consistent pronoun style . . ." and on the next page, ". . . describes the ways in which a man may vary his pronoun style . . . ." The topic of discussion was not 'men' but pronoun use in general. A book on academic life is entitled: The Academic Mysteryhouse: The Man, the Campus, and Their New Search for Meaning. To add insult to injury, in the acknowledgments, the author says that his wife and secretary helped write, edit, type, and revise the book!

< previous page

page_82 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_83

next page > Page 83

Many of these counter-examples are offensive, but this "generic rule" can also lead to absurdities. A recent research report discusses "the development of the uterus in rats, guinea pigs and men." Perhaps a wish to develop a new species? And these absurdities make a farce of law. 125 This year a county judge in Indiana threw out of court a charge made against a female dancer. It had to do with indecent exposure, but the judge pointed out that the law specifically refers to a person exposing an inappropriate part of his body. Another state has a law that reads, "No person may require another person to perform, participate in or undergo an abortion of pregnancy against his will." If the use of "he" were the linguistic convenience that it is said to be, then one would be unable to find counterexamples where shifting of pronoun takes place within the dialogue, or where "he" and "she" are used exclusively for certain categories of people. Certain occupational roles are invariably designated with a single gender: policeman, doctor, bricklayer, president, sailor, and professor are "he;" nurse, elementary teacher, secretary, baby-sitter, typist, and housekeeper are "she.'' A computer count of the occurrence of words in children's reading material showed that "he" is used three times as much as 'she' in the writings.126 This is a reflection of culture, not of linguistic structures, but should be noted in terms of acquisition of language and role patterns. Also, I have noted elsewhere127 that in children's books animals are almost always referred to as "he" except when the animals are objects of derision such as the fat sow who entered the Fat Pigs contest, and the mother duck with "the bold ferocious mien," or when they carry names of derogation, such as Petunia the Goose or Frances the Badger. Interestingly enough, one of the Bantu languages uses the feminine 'mother' prefix with animals in a mocking sense: mother-hyena, mother-goose, mother-porcupine.128 The "generic rule" is never observed for teachers in the lower grades. Unspecified teachers are referred to as "she." The rule, however, does seem to be applied to levels above high school. A poem about professors in a recent AAUP Bulletin used the masculine referents entirely, along with the nominal referent "a man." A regent of a well-known university was quoted in the student newspaper as referring to the faculty as 'a distinguished group of men . . . .' A significant reversal of the rule that masculine referents are used for non-specific persons occurred in a term paper turned in to me last year. The antecedent was 'a student' and the following referent was 'she'. Perhaps this student had just heard the joke going around the country concerning

< previous page

page_83 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_84

next page > Page 84

God. When asked to describe God, the informant replies, "Well, to begin with, she's Black!" One of the most curious examples that I have collected comes from an upright etiquette book of the 1930s, which has quaint little chapters on how to behave. Chapter 14 is called "The Sniffler and the Snorter" and refers to the unidentified offender by shifting back and forth between "be" and "she": There is no cure. Have pity on her. Sometimes it is he who sniffles. It makes no difference. If you beg her to stop, she will continue. If you ask him to stop, he will never call again. (That would be just too bad.) Don't tell your friend that he sniffles, because he won't believe you. You are the only one who ever accused him of such a thing, and while he's telling you this he sniffles and doesn't even know it. The person who snorts when she laughs is also out of order. There is nothing disgusting about this habit but the sound is unpleasant. Watch your laugh and see if you snort. 129 [emphasis, MRK] This pronoun shifting in less deliberate circumstances reflects conceptual structures. At times the shifts are status defined. In a planning session for a new project on a university campus, there occurred a noticeable shift in the pronoun referents to the hypothetical personnel who were to be employed. When the decision-making personnel were referred to, the pronoun was invariably he; when the personnel at the level of secretary were referred to, the pronoun was invariably she. Written material adds to these examples. A book on teaching reading informs the reader, "When the teacher attempts to overcome the first kind of ignorance . . . she discovers that the student shows a strong and inexplicable resistance to learning the few simple rules that he needs to know." Another book from the field of education refers to both the researcher and the teacher: "The psycholinguist sometimes tries to bridge the gap between what he can legitimately conclude . . . . The teacher may believe that an object is blue, but if she accepts . . ." [emphasis, MRK]. Very recent examples, which occur only in isolated places, use only the 'she' form: "It gives the reader all the background she needs . . . ." This seems to be in the spirit of experimentation or facetiousness.

< previous page

page_84 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_85

next page > Page 85

In view of the ability to switch between he and she among English speakers, in spite of what the rule books say, the next illustration is shocking to the point of comedy: The Secret We have a secret, just we three, The robin, and I, and the sweet cherry tree; .......... But of course the robin knows it best, Because he built the - I shan't tell the rest; And laid the four little- - something in itI'm afraid I shall tell it every minute. .......... Anonymous 130 [emphasis, MRK] There are two areas in the functioning of human beings where the analysis of the pronoun referent is of particular interest, and these are religion and medicine. In these two areas, in any culture of the world, women are essential and often predominant participants in the scene. In spite of that, quotations such as the following are not uncommon: The schizophrenic is desperate, is simply without hope. I have never known a schizophrenic who could say he is loved, as a man, . . . When someone says he is an unreal man or that he is dead . . . First among the classification of silences is the silence of the pure listener, of womanly passivity; . . . [another is] the silence of indifference, . . . This is the ominous silence of the wife who woodenly listens to her husband relating the little things he so earnestly wants to tell her . . . . There is no greater distance than that between a man in prayer and God. Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of Christian Science, apparently had a more androgynous approach in her philosophy of religion. She recommended that the participants use the form "Mother Father Creator" in their prayers. It would appear from these anecdotal observations that the grammatical rules often cited for the use of personal gender are a fiction and that actual use does not corroborate the stated rules. There is a need for careful studies on the use of gender to clarify what the real situation is in this uneasy adjustment between language and culture. Simone de Beauvoir points out another type of pronoun referent that results from

< previous page

page_85 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_86

next page > Page 86

the larger issue of how females are regarded and how they regard themselves. Women do not use the referent "we" except, for instance, in formal circumstances at a meeting. Other groups have a solidarity that produces the "we" when they refer to their condition. Negroes, Portuguese fishermen, Swedish immigrants, the wealthy, educators, and all such groups regard themselves as subjects, in contrast to the "others" out there. But females are not the Subject. He is the subjectfather, husband, sonand she is the Other. So there is no solidarity of 'we' with a unified strength. De Beauvoir first put forth these ideas in 1949. There has, of course, been some change since then. The pronoun "it" is full of intrigue. 131 The referent is cursorily described as a single inanimate object, but it is much more complex than that. "It" may have an antecedent, but may be used as a euphemism without an explicit antecedent, for such things as urine and outhouse. In fact, I remember seeing an old outhouse at a service station on one of the highways across the desert of the Southwest that was named "It." The euphemism was two-fold: the outhouse also served for both "he" and "she.'' It is of interest to note that a ghost, a dwarf and a corpse are "it;" these illustrations might influence one to choose the diagram from the first chapter showing the quality "humanness" in the higher nodethat is, the human feature is in the hierarchy above either male or female. In former times, it was not uncommon for human beings to be referred to as "it." Here is an entry from Johnson's dictionary for "Person": "A person is a thinking intelligent being that has reason and reflection and can consider itself as itself, the same thinking thing in different times and places." [emphasis, MRK] Though we no longer use "it" in this way, contemporary English retains some expressions where the pronoun 'it' has human referents. "Who is it?" "It is I/It's me." A group of cognitive verbs co-occur with "it" as a reference to a human: 'believe, think, guess, hope, know, suppose, anticipate', as in "I believe it was John." Another class of verbs co-occur with "it," such as 'seems' or 'appears', as in "It seems it was John." In these times of challenging the present pronominal use of "he" and "she," speakers of English might consider reversing the trend away from using "it" for an unspecified person and going back to Johnson's use of "it" for 'personunspecified for sex'. The discussion so far has dealt with referents that were unspecified and the confusion and distortions that result from not knowing what to say. There is another group of interesting phenomena that occur when

< previous page

page_86 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_87

next page > Page 87

the referent is known and able to be specified according to sex. These arc anomalous constructions which occur where the pronoun (or noun) referent is not the same gender as the known sex of the precedent. Theorists in linguistics would label this anomaly "nonobservation of selectional restrictions." Sometimes incidents such as these have been simply put aside as "exceptions" in the grammar, or unimportant incidentals. Scholars are coming more and more to see that "exceptions" are the messy residue of undiscovered facts. In the course of studying languages, I have recorded eight instances where anomalous constructions occur. First, nonnative speakers have difficulties with the gender system, particularly the covert system, to use Whorf's terms. The difficulty is dependent upon the native language of the speaker. If the native language has a distinction between "he" and "she" then the speaker learning English will have little difficulty. If the native language is Chinese, or Hungarian, or Aztec, then the speaker will often be heard referring to a woman as "he" or to a man as ''she." An unusual example was articulated by an Italian woman who spoke English fairly well. It should be remembered here that Italian also has differentiated "he" and "she." In a review of a book that was written by another Italian woman, the speaker consistently referred to the author as "he." At the coffee hour later, she explained the discrepancy saying, "Well, you just expect a scholar to be a man!" Second, in certain dialects of Black English in such regions as coastal South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, children, especially, will use anomalous forms. 132 He a nice little girl. Here he book. (referring to hers) Here come he boyfriend. (referring to hers) It is likely that these forms are based on very old patterns brought from Africa centuries ago, where the languages there do not differentiate between male and female in the pronoun system. Nevertheless, this use is somewhat different from the use of speakers who are learning English in this generation. The third instance is child language, that is, the speech of the period of the acquisition of language. When a youngster is learning to talk, he or she has not yet learned to control all the grammatical categories and may refer to Daddy as "she" and Mommy as "he," in addition to mixing up the "it" and personal referent. The fourth instance occurs in the language of homosexuals. The pronoun "she"

< previous page

page_87 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_88

next page > Page 88

may be used to designate certain men with. "female" behavior and the pronoun "he" may be used for certain women with "male" behavior. The fifth instance is a form of baby talk. In the Marathi language of India a form of endearment is indicated by a variety of baby talk that switches gender referents. "The use of masculine ending and/or concord for a girl's name, of feminine ending and/or concord for a boy's name, and of neuter ending and/or concord for both" 133 shows endearment. A similar situation exists in Arabic. For example, wen* ruhti ya* binti? "Where did you go (fem.), little girl?" said to a boy. And inta zu'an* "Are you (masc.) hungry (masc.)?" said to a girl. In English we sometimes hear "it" used in baby talk: 'Did it hurt itself?'134 This anomaly in baby talk and endearment is strangely paralleled in an opposite meaning, that of insult and denigration. The famous linguist Jakobson cites examples from the Russian language where the feminine gender applied to a male is used in expressive, pejorative language.135 Other Russian scholars have noted this form of insult to a man.136 You don't just call him an "idiot''you call him a "female idiot" (the English translation is awkward.) A similar kind of insult is possible in the Czech language.137 And Marathi, which uses the switching for endearing baby talk, may use it for contempt in adult speech. Studies of English dialects note that "she" may be used contemptuously when referring to a man.138 Long ago in Scotland, the men from the Highland clans insulted their chief by calling him a "Hen Chief" when they thought his conduct had not become a real man.139 More recently, a literary scholar notes that Norman Mailer uses a similar device for showing contempt: "Croft's most withering insult is to castigate his subordinates as 'a pack of goddam women'."140 In addition to the feminine reference, another form of insult is to dehumanize the person by using the pronoun "it." Webster's Third gives examples such as "just listen to it talk" and "just look at my daddy and the big car it has."141 The seventh instance of anomaly is a deliberate inconsistency of pronoun referent used for effect by comedians. On a TV program heard recently, the audience responded with laughter to the comedian who was telling about a tiger: "The tiger's name is Sarah. Isn't he nice?" The last example of mismatch occurs in languages with grammatical gender, when the gender of the noun conflicts with the gender of the person. In French, for example, le docteur is masculine gender, but may refer to a woman. Linguistic writings have great fun with the French professor who is pregnant! Le professeur (masculine gender) est enceinte.

< previous page

page_88 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_89

next page > Page 89

Jespersen, who speaks of these anomalies as "incongruities" cites several humorous examples. 142 A conversation about an ape is taken from Swedish: Hvad heter den här apan? -Hon heter Kalle, för det är en hanne. "What is the name of that ape? She is called Charles, for it is a he." (In Swedish apa is feminine.) A Spanish lover becomes a comic when he wants to tell his sweetheart that she is an angel. In Spanish 'angel' is masculine gender, and there is no way to reconcile the grammatical concord with a female. Ella es como un ángel. The preceding discussion and examples have to do with reference to human beings. Another area of significance is the matter of personal referent to an inanimate object or to an abstract idea.143 Why do we refer to a little red sports car and to justice as "she" and to Old Man River as "he"? This situation can only occur in languages with feminine and masculine genders. It seems to be highlighted in English where nonhuman nouns do not carry grammatical gender, in contrast to other Indo-European languages where every table, window, tree, and river has a masculine or feminine referent according to the grammatical form. This is an especially delicate matter when it comes to translations between the languages. Jespersen and Jakobson relate some examples of the difficulties.144 Shakespeare's passage, "See how the morning opes her golden gates, And takes her farewell of the glorious sun," is an image in which the morning is the mistress who bids farewell to her lover, the sun. In German, the word 'morning' is masculine and 'sun' is feminine, so the translator inverts the relationship: Sieh, wie sein tor der goldene morgen öffnet, Und abschied von der lieben sonne nimmt. That kind of modification is not so difficult. Translations of Milton into French, however, are seemingly impossible. ''Sin is talking to Satan who has begotten on her his son Death," where le péché 'sin' is masculine, and therefore cannot be the mother, and la mort 'death' is feminine and cannot be the son. Vygotsky gives some charming examples of the challenge of coherent translation of nonhuman nominals.145 The German poem by Heine about a fir and a palm could not be translated literally into Russian with the same nuances. The poem suggests the love of a man for a woman, and in German 'fir' is masculine and 'palm' is feminine. In Russian both of these trees are feminine, and so in order to retain the implication, one translator replaced the fir tree by a masculine cedar. Another translator made a literal translation and lost the poetic overtones. Vygotsky also relates the problems of translating the fable

< previous page

page_89 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_90

next page > Page 90

La Cigale et la Fourmi, where La Fontaine's French grasshopper is feminine and symbolizes a lighthearted, carefree attitude. In Russian 'grasshopper' is masculine, so the translator settled for 'dragonfly' in order to continue with the thought of the author. It is not unlikely that these backgrounds of gender personification in Indo-European languages have something to do with the genders used in English today, even though we have lost grammatical gender in the sense that French, Russian, and German continue to use it. What, then, is our situation in English? Grammar books try to cite the rules in an orderly fashion. Here is an example: In this system [of 'hidden gender distinctions'], larger animals are usually 'he', while smaller animals, personified countries or states, nature, automobiles, trains, sailboats, and motorboats are usually 'she'. In short, power represents the masculine, grace the feminine. 146 In the early 1920s, a European scholar made an attempt to find the system of personal gender for inanimate things in English.147 He read through hundreds of books and documented examples from 175 of these. The illustrations are all from men speakers and all of the pronoun referents are the feminine she/her. The characters quoted are men "with work-calloused hands and speech uninfluenced by literature"men from the industries of fur, timber, and mining, as well as cowboys. The novels dealing with the upper and middle classes contributed very little to the collection of examples and the conclusion was drawn that there is a close relation of status of speaker and the use of "she" for inanimate objects. This vast study did bring together a few ideas toward explaining the use of personal gender in referring to inanimate things, such as literary versus colloquial "homely" style, spoken versus written language, personification of the instrument by the craftsman (the sailor's ship, the soldier's gun, the driver's car), artificial versus natural objects, American versus British dialect, foreign language influence, and emotional characteristics of emphatic expressions (she's a dandy!). Most importantly it was concluded that the rules of grammar researched in grammar rule books did not match actual usage, at least in the written language, and the explanations were dubious. It seems clear that much of the confusion has to do with dialects. An interesting study would be to investigate these differences

< previous page

page_90 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_91

next page > Page 91

by dialects in such far-spread places as Canada, northern Great Britain, Ireland, and Australia. 148 The overwhelming number of examples that I have observed, in all the studies I can find, show that the feminine pronouns are by far the favorites. Masculine pronouns are used for: death, hate, and war (horrors!); sometimes for rivers. Mountain climbers refer to El Capitan as "he." This may be because the Spanish word is in masculine gender. Lewis Carroll, in The Walrus and the Carpenter, referred to the sun as "he" and the moon as "she." Does this show influence from other languages? And the European scholar gently chides professors for giving a grammatical rule for a gentleman's pipe to be referred to as ''he"in actuality, a man may refer to his pipe as "she." In view of the preponderance of feminine referents for personifications occurring in natural language and in uninhibited situations, it is noteworthy that children's readers and textbooks do not follow this practice.149 In these books, personifications of the inanimate are invariably male. The wind, Showman, broom, table and chair are all male. No sailor worth his salt in real life would refer to a ship as "he"; even destroyers named after men ("Patrick Henry") are referred to as "she." But our children's boats, machines, trains, and automobiles carry male names and gender references. This kind of ambivalence is sure to produce some kind of double bind in the child learner. This discrepancy also forces another kind of evaluation. The use of feminine gender in novels might in some cases reflect something about the things talked about, for example, a romantic view of the Muses, beauty, loyalty, and creativity. But the almost total reversal of this in children's books reflects something of the motivation and goals of the writers and producers of the books. Is education so feminized that it must frenetically masculinize its books by using male pictures and male referents? Will this distortion of language patterns solve the problem? In the studies done on personification by using a human gender referent, there is ample evidence that this type of language falls into the areas of emotive language in both pleasurable and unpleasurable ways. Studies done in the Russian and Czech languages also show a kind of emotive language expressed by gender referents.150 An emotionally colored utterance, for example in Czech, would result in an anomalous construction, combining masculine and feminine gender: kluk (m.) hloupá (f.), 'a silly boy', and chlap (m.) patná (f.), 'a bad fellow'. It has not been as widely acknowledged in English that personification

< previous page

page_91 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_92

next page > Page 92

of this sort is a kind of expressive, emotive language. But certainly in many cases, perhaps most, it is just that. It has been previously noted that males predominate in using this pattern of speech. It has also been hotel that the reference is sometimes made in devotion and endearment, and is sometimes made in anger or hatred. e.e. cummings masterfully uses the feminine referent as he describes, tongue-in-cheek, the adventures of a man with his first car (his first woman? ) in the poem, "she being Brand." 151 Previously we have noted that males do not use the expressive patterns of emotions in intonation, or in the use of intensifiers and superlatives, nearly as much as females do. It may well be that males find their outlet in feminine personification, in addition to the well-recognized release of swearing. What we will eventually see, I think, is that both male and female have emotional language in equal quantities, and that the devices they use are culturally defined. Before we summarize our findings-in-flux on the situations of pronominal referents in English, I want to mention a couple of anecdotes, that, I hope, will help us keep from taking ourselves too seriously. A friend of mine has a dentist who personifies teeth by using the gender referent opposite to the sex of the owner. A tooth of his own the dentist refers to as 'she', and his wife's, as 'he'. Another curiosity occurs in the French language, and must be the source of much fun and satire. The word for 'love', l'amour, is masculine; 'making love' la cour, is feminine; and 'adultery', l'adultere, is masculine. Tentative Summary of Pronominal Referents in English it: machinery, furniture, [euphemism], linguistics . . . they (singular): pants, scissors, clothes . . . she: muse, ship, hurricane . . . he: ???

< previous page

page_92 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_93

next page > Page 93

unspecified, singular it: baby, child, goldfish, animal . . . she: nurse, elementary teacher, small animal . . . he: doctor, professor, large animal . . . he or she: (recent usage shows more occurrences of this alternative) we: (editorial) they: someone . . . specified female she, and he for anomalous forms male he, and she for anomalous forms Nominals belong to another class of words that are used for referents. We have already mentioned the nominals "man" and "mankind," which are said to refer to both sexes in a generic sense. Other words referring to male and female often have to do with occupation or position. The often quoted Fowler's Modern English Usage observed in 1926 that ". . . with the coming extension of women's vocations, feminines for vocation-words are a special need of the future . . . ." A Russian scholar observes that the Bolshevik Revolution brought about changes that produced a need for new terminology to refer to women occupying certain jobs or positions. 152 Sexual experiences show a remarkable use of reference. The word "adulterer" on many occasions refers only to the womanmales are not charged with adultery. In Italy the penal and civil codes indicated that the word "adultery" could legally refer only to women. "Peeping Tom" is an expression used only for males, though there is no clear scientific justification for believing that females are not qualified to be Peeping Toms. The recent sell-outs of the magazines with nude male centerfolds attest to that. If man/men is a term widely used and understood to be meant in a generic sense, then the following illustration is of significance. A newscaster on the radio recently reported a police raid saying ". . . persons taken in a surprise raid from massage parlors." Why wasn't the generalized "men" used?

< previous page

page_93 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_94

next page > Page 94

Another group of terms and names with sexual reference have to do with topography. A drive through the country will bring to attention: Tetons (Teats), Nippletop, Nipple Peak, Squaw Peak. Some of the local names are not found in official documents. Maiden's Peak is known to the oldtimers as Squaw Tit. And pilots have redubbed two mountains called Percy Peaks as the Jane Russell Peaks. 153 "The Average American" is an expression that should include both sexes, but definitions that follow the expression preclude any thought of females participating. During his life, the average American consumes 26 million gallons of water, 10,000 pounds of meat and 28,000 pounds of milk and cream while yearly junking seven million cars, 100 million tires, 20 million tons of paper, 28 billion bottles and 48 billion cans . . . In short, he's quite a man. For all the elegance of his dress, the richness and variety of his diet, the horsepower of his motor cars and the glitter of his womenfolk, the average American . . . "The Average Shopper," however, is usually "she." This is an economic appeal where linguistics and economics intertwine. Here money talks, and the "she" is elevated to a central and important position. I have one curious example that switches the reference to a consumer. The title says, "How the consumer can protect herself'' and two pages later the article continues, "The poor customer. He has a tough job. He can't tell a thing . . ." It has been argued that the word "manpower" includes both male and female working force. However, when the Boy Scouts of America advertise that "America's Manpower Begins with Boypower," it is clear that females are not considered in the expression. A very common expression in English uses the word "man" for groups and committees: "a 12-man committee." In a conference I attended recently, the speaker discussed the organization of a group and referred to "a group of 12 men." Giggles and objections from the audience interspersed his comments, and the next time, he said, "a group of men and women." Adjustments such as these are useful, until the whole human race realizes that women comprise half of the population. As a matter of fact, one does hear the expression "men and women" ever more frequently. Indeed women have come a long way from 1771 when the makers of the first Encyclopædia Britannica wrote

< previous page

page_94 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_95

next page > Page 95

only six words of information for the entry "Woman": "the Female of Man. See Homo." Dialogues and all manner of behavior today show that change is very much in evidence. A friend of mine told me of an incident with her small son which illustrates this. One day the youngster came home with all the indications that he had been the loser in a tough tiff. His mother asked him if he had hit the kid back, to which he answered, "No, she ran away!" For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. It is a commonplace that women have used initials or a male pen name when they wanted their writings to be accepted in the public arena. In 1992, the Los Angeles Times (May 18, 1992) published an obituary for Ellen W. Brooks who wrote children's books, including the famous Golden Dictionary. She also wrote a children's column, "Ask Andy," which ran for forty years. One would hope that this marks an end for the need of subterfuge; but I have some doubts. Corbett (1991: 221) reports on the generic he, concluding, as have others, that it does not seem to work in English. Statistical analysis of the Brown corpus is important in this discussion, q.v. According to the studies, there were 9,543 occurrences of he and only 2,859 occurrences of she in the Brown corpus; and generics do not account for the discrepancy. The statistics may be explained by looking at values and/or power. Curiously, perhaps not relatedor is it?, the index in Corbett's thorough study includes "masculine personal" but no listing of "feminine." Is this because of the asymmetry of language structures, or because of the biased perspective that linguists carry into their analyses?

< previous page

page_95 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_96

next page > Page 96

Chapter X Status and Standard/Nonstandard Language "Women, especially, are to be talked to, as below men, and above children." Lord Chesterfield(1748) 154 The emphasis on femininity and masculinity has blurred the caste system that prevails in our society. This is not a popular theme to discuss and in some bailiwicks it is not acceptable in any form. All kinds of restrictions and limitations have been imposed on a female's linguistic habits, with the idea that these behavioral patterns would ensure her femininity. Thus she is not permitted to swear or use "coarse" language. She is given titles and respect; males must not swear in her presence; in countless ways she is given "better" treatment. But all of this simply results in keeping women out of the running. In order to continue a caste system it is necessary for those in the lower ranks to accept their status. To all outward appearances women have accepted this lower status, often in the belief that it was femininity they were perpetuating. Religious instruction that this is right and the natural order of things has helped maintain the womanly image. These are powerful beliefs in the minds of females who want to be "real ladies" and in the minds of males who treasure and revere their "true ladies." There is evidence in language that this acceptance may only be a superficial mask overlaying other attitudes or feelings though out-of-awareness. In linguistic studies there are many examples of instances where female usage shows an attempt at "proper" language or more "refined" language. One can observe even within the same family, where the rearing and schooling have been identical, that very often the women use standard English and the men do not. We have already

< previous page

page_96 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_97

next page > Page 97

noted the difference of pronunciation in the -ing ending of verbs, with little girls carefully pronouncing -ing, and the boys shuffling off with -in. 155 Other dialects of English have shown a similar status-sex relationship. In South Africa, in the English-speaking universities, the men speak with more dialect features of South African English than the women, who seem to be more sensitive to the social connotations of dialect.156 In a dialect of Great Britain, an extensive study was done to test the hypothesis that women "consistently produce linguistic forms which more closely approach those of the standard language or have higher prestige than those produced by men, or alternatively, that they produce forms of this type more frequently."157 It was concluded that there is a very close relationship between sex differences in linguistic usage and status aspirations. It would appear, then, that women have not universally accepted the position in the lower ranks, and that, out-of-awareness, and in a socially acceptable and non-punishable way, women are rebelling. These distinctions are not difficult to maintain, on the other hand, because males, all too often, identify nonstandard language with masculinity. How many American families speaking standard English at home have gone through the traumatic experience of their teenage sons coming home with double negatives and "he don'ts"? It appears to be general American tradition that a red-blooded male would rather be caught dead than be grammatical! A recent advertising campaign recognized this and exploited the possibilities. On a huge billboard along one of the freeways into Los Angeles, a cigarette company put up a sign that showed a picture of a young man and a young lady. His statement said, "Winston tastes good like a cigarette should" and her statement said, "Winston tastes good as a cigarette should"! A TV commercial continued the grammatical distinction when the young lady in the commercial corrected her companion's grammar by saying, "You mean as a cigarette should." Apparently females attempt some kind of equilibrium by reaching a higher status in language to compensate for their lower status as members of society, and males attempt a kind of masculine identity by using language to maintain a group solidarity. Earlier in the century American Speech published a study of "affected and effeminate words" showing that students equated culture and effeminancy. Males, especially, avoided words that fell into these classes.158

< previous page

page_97 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_98

next page > Page 98

Status distinctions in language are universal. The degree and use of these distinctions differ from language to language. We have seen that status and sex distinctions are closely related in English. Are they also in other languages? It would seem that they are. In Germany I was told that boys tend to use more dialect and girls tend to use standard language. In Italian and Spanish, 159 upper-class women are very conscious of their pronunciation with regard to the tongue position and placement in the mouth. "[I]t is considered plebeian and socially inelegant to have a back articulation, and especially upper-class women affect a very fronted style of articulation."160 Jespersen tells of the situation in old Indian drama, where women talk Prakrit (prakrta, the natural or common language) and men talk Sanskrit (samskrta, the adorned language).161 The principal distinction, however, is rank, not sex. In the discussion of categories we noted that Sanskrit was the language of the upper echelons, and Prakrit was the language of men of inferior classes and nearly all women. Sapir, in his study of the Yana language, suggested that "the reduced female forms constitute a conventionalized symbolism of the less considered or ceremonious status of women in the community."162 The symbolic use of language with reference to sex is an almost unexplored area of language research by linguists.163 In Japanese, female speakers are expected to use polite expressions more often than males.164 Japanese is a language that incorporates many honorifics in the discourse. The use of these has to do with the people involved and the role they play. More polite forms are expected in certain relationships, that is, young to old, lower classes to upper classes, and women to men. In the study done on Detroit speech,165 which was intended to focus on socio-economic factors, the relation between certain syntactic constructions and status dimensions was shown to be clear-cut. Multiple negation (double negatives), pronominal apposition ('my brother, he went to the park'), plurals, possessives, and third singular verb inflections were all investigated as to their frequency and use. It was shown that females are more sensitive to these indicators of lower status, and are less likely to use them. Linguists who do field work have noted that dialect differences and unusual forms of speech may be difficult to elicit from women who are more socially conscious of being denigrated. Language is one way in which females can better themselves, even if only in their own image. Many other studies in the past few years have documented that Black females in the United States show a marked difference in their

< previous page

page_98 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_99

next page > Page 99

control of Standard English in contrast to males. 166 It is not clear why this is so; a complex of reasons probably is involved. [In the 1970s it was thought that] Black females may have occasion to hear and speak more standard English because of their work as domestics in homes where standard English is spoken. [In the 1990s, many Black women work in an office environment where standard English is a necessity. Young Black women may also be more receptive to instruction in school, where most, if not all, teachers use standard English.] Black males have acquired the Power of Words in a style and use of language uniquely their own. This versatility and creativity in language is enhanced in a world that is devoid of material evidence of their power. Thus, Black males may signal their masculinity by verbal dueling, playing the dozens, and reciting epics. This is not the same language that is found in school and in reading materialsthe undesirable effeminate world. But that world is desirable in another sensethe economic sense. Thus, the young male struggles with an ambivalence that is seemingly insolvableto maintain his masculinity and prowess among his peers, or to learn the "feminized" language of the mainstream community. Analogies between the situation of women and Black people have often been made, especially in the last generation since Myrdal's now famous Appendix to his An American Dilemma.167 Webster's definition of 'disadvantage' applies to both: "The state or fact of being without advantage: an unfavorable, an inferior, or prejudicial condition."168 In interpreting male and female differences in any language, it is important to recognize hierarchies of status as well as male/female patterns. It is well to recognize these aspects of the communication systems and the linguistic demands of these systems, as people either do or do not participate equally in the mainstream of society. For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. Will we ever get to a point at which people will not depend on irrelevant factors, such as non-standard versus proper language, to define their masculinity and femininity? There are indications that significant changes are taking place in important areas. When women entered the

< previous page

page_99 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_100

next page > Page 100

managerial ranks, they took a managerial style and language into the company offices. Some males found it a relief not to have to maintain a confrontational language, always seeking the power play. As Tunick (1993) notes, the managerial ranks will improve when the gender gap narrows, and the macho business style diminishes. Loden and Rosener (1991) and Rosener (1994) advocate redefining the male workplace by recognizing gender differences: men and women motivate others differently, they exercise power and allocate their time differently. The end product will be that men and women will learn how to deal with each othernot as "one of the boys," but as "one of the team." If females want to be treated with dignity and same-status, they will not permit themselves to be called "baby doll" or "one of the girls."

< previous page

page_100 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_101

next page > Page 101

Chapter XI Nonverbal, Extra-Linguistic Messages 169 Besides language, there are other ways that people communicate. These extra-linguistic systems are sometimes referred to as nonverbal communication or as body language.170 There is not yet a unified, widely-understood terminology even though these aspects of communication have been recognized and discussed since classical times. Generally speaking, the things that people do in conveying nonverbal messages fall into two categories: vocalizations and movements. Paralanguage171 comprises all extra-speech sounds or modifications of speech. These may be separate sounds such as whistling, yelling, or 'tsk-tsk'. Paralanguage may also consist of modifying features accompanying speech in the way of quality of voice, pitch, or loudnessvocal expressions that add emotional and attitudinal meaning to the verbal expression. Silence, when it substitutes and interrupts speech or a communicative sound, is also a paralinguistic act. Kinesics172 is body language, any movement from muscular or skeletal shift. These body movements result in such acts as postural expression, facial expression, and gestures. Kinesic acts also convey meaning to the interaction among human beings. These nonverbal components contribute to communication in a definable structure. They correlate with language and are themselves systems that are indispensable concomitants to communication. In fact, speech acts cannot be understood correctly or interpreted in any meaningful way without taking kinesic acts into consideration. Male and female differences in human behavior signaling masculinity and femininity are perhaps conveyed more by nonverbal means than by any other way. All people walk and talk, but females walk and talk differently from males. When we examine the paralinguistic and kinesic variables of male and female behavior, it is necessary to take into account temporal and cross-cultural differences

< previous page

page_101 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_102

next page > Page 102

throughout history and throughout the world. What may have been considered male behavior at one time may not be considered masculine at a different point in history. Some children's games, for example, were once played by adults; young people courted in this way during the restricted days of colonial America. Business men participated in parlor games during the 1800s, and these games have since become games only for children. 173 One observation concerning female behavior (and this is probably not confined to nonverbal communication but applies to other cultural behavior as well) is that it often coincides with children's behavior. The high pitch and thin quality of a woman's voice may be very like that of a child. Likewise, characteristics that are said to be feminine behavior in one country may not be thought of as feminine in another country. In order to determine correctly what are feminine and masculine behavior patterns, one must know a great deal about the norms of behavior in many situations of a particular country or cultural group. As I have searched for descriptions of sex differences in paralanguage and kinesics, I have found surprisingly little that is of substance. The comments made are often subjective and imprecise. Worse, the descriptions may reflect prejudices and double standards. Several years ago, a reporter coveting the Oscar awards ceremony centered his article on the women's voices and concluded that they sounded "gosh-awful." Here, he wrote, were the ambitious women of America and Europe, decked out in their best with their hair perfectly coiffured: Yet, their voices! Holy Eliza Doolittle! What sounds, what nasal sawings, what boorish bleatings, what toneless mumblings, what gratings of brass on tin, what shrill squawks, what jarring scratches, what put-on ladylike breathings assaulted our ears.174 The male voices, he went on, sounded better on the whole. It would be difficult to assess male and female differences honestly in the atmosphere of that kind of description. Difficulties in describing male/female paralanguage go back to terminology, subjective judgments, and lack of specific analysis regarding paralanguage itself and the interpretation of these events, which is obscured and distorted by double standards. If a female talks or cries into a pillow, it's "muffled sobbing"; if a male does the same, it's "blubbering," with negative connotations. Added to the difficulties created by double standards and prejudices, are the difficulties of being

< previous page

page_102 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_103

next page > Page 103

scientifically precise in describing such things as voice quality and movement behavior. The scientific study is in the very early stages of trying to define the discipline and find rigorous, objective ways to describe a 'rough/squawky/smooth/sweet/resonant /mellow/brassy -voice'. Nevertheless, a few observations have been made that are worth noting. Austin contributes several observations regarding male/female paralinguistic behavior. Women use a higher than usual pitch to indicate innocence, femininity, helplessness, and regression. Males use an exaggerated low pitch to signal masculinity. But, Austin adds, low pitch has become fashionable for women. Teen-age boys project toughness with low pitch "O.K. you guys." The distinctive features of oral/nasal sounds are also part of the paralinguistic system even within a language that does not have contrasting nasal vowel sounds. Nasality is a characteristic of the speech of teenage boys and men trying to appear tough. Paralanguage carries a heavy load in courtship languagelow and nasal sounds from the male; high oral and giggling sounds from the female. Only in the final stages is the voice low and nasal with both sexes, but with wide pitch and intensity variation on the part of the female. When intoxicated, both sexes produce nasal quality. Other distinctive features occurring in the paralinguistic systems signaling sex roles are laryngealization and extra-aspiration or breathiness. Imitative behavior is exhibited by paralinguistic means. Derogatory imitation, Austin continues, is one of the most infuriating acts of aggression one person can commit on another. A male will imitate a female in high rapid speech, "Yes dear, I'll be down in a minute" or the female may imitate the male with exaggerated slow and low speech, "Aw, just one more little drink." Though the information is sparse regarding other cultures of the world, it would appear that male/female behavior patterns are also differentiated by nonverbal means. The Tzeltal women of southern Mexico speak with a very thin, high-pitched quality. George Trager tells me that a Taos Indian woman changes voice quality depending on whom she is speaking with. To the husband and children she uses a special high-pitch, nasalized, twangy quality, with an intense pulsating beat. In Swedish, women but not men express agreement by articulating ja with air drawn in. The Mazateco whistle speech 175 is articulated almost exclusively by men, though women understand and may respond verbally to a flirtatious approach or to a whistled communication from a son. And note that some females in our own

< previous page

page_103 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_104

next page > Page 104

society do not whistle. ''Whistling girls and crowing hens, Always come to some bad end." While crying is taboo for American males, in Iran it is the men who weep. 176 Among the Gros Venue Indians who communicate by sign language, Flannery noticed differences among male and female signers. The Gros Ventre also articulate the war whoop, which in their case, expresses joy and thankfulness, in differing ways: the women "mule the tongue" and the men break the sound by striking the mouth rhythmically with the palm. In a study of Castilian Spanish177 it was noted that only the male speakers used the creaky sounds of laryngealized voicing. Note that in English females may use this low, creaky voice in sensuous moods. Austin notes marked linguistic and paralinguistic differences in male/female speech in Japan. The male speech is loud and low, in Samurai movies almost a bark; female speech is soft and high, almost a squeak. Again, interpretation of nonverbal signals is a delicate process. In Japan, the paralinguistic features that indicate respect and politeness are breathiness, openness, lowered volume, and raised level of pitch. Note that some of these, for example, breathiness, quieter voice, and higher pitch, are female signals to the opposite sex in English. Teachers of English in Japan point out the conflict for Japanese speakers: When the Japanese system is carried over into English, the results are not always as the Japanese speaker would expect. In the case of women's speech, (extreme examples of which might be the girls who make announcements over the public address system in department stores, trains, etc.), the English speaker's nearest equivalent is a kind of feminine baby-talk usually associated with lack of intelligence or private male-female relations. On the other hand, female English speakers often sound harsh, raucous, rude, or overly masculine to a Japanese ear.178 Some cultures have developed paralinguistic "tools." Voice disguisers, instruments made by stretching a membrane over a hollow, are used in secret ceremonies in Africa and some other areas.179 The voice of the speaker, a male, is disguised by the buzzing membrane, and is thus used to intimidate women and children and gain greater control and discipline. The falsetto voice is wrongly thought to be a prerogative of male articulation. Among the Gbeya people in the Central African Republic,

< previous page

page_104 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_105

next page > Page 105

the speech of women is often modified by falsetto. The uses that were noted seem to have to do with emotions and attitudes, but this is not clear yet. 180 In the United States the use of falsetto is significantly different among some segments of the Black population and the white population. Both male and female Blacks may use falsetto in ways that are distinct from the use in Western cultures, though the occurrences are not clearly defined yet. Falsetto occurs frequently in circumstances of great emotion, either very happy or very angry. It occurs often in storytelling and joking. Both male and female children use it frequently. When Black males use it, it does not necessarily have the connotation of femininity. In Western societies falsetto is often used by men to imitate women, but not so in all cultures. Among the Mohave, the male does not change to a falsetto, but using his normal voice, suggests the nuances of female speech.181 In addition to vocal behavior and speech modification, femininity and masculinity are expressed by body language or movement behavior. This is the kinesics we defined at the beginning of the chapter. Posture is a marked feature and at times communicates things that can not be said. One way to examine postural behavior is to observe the postural configurations in magazines and newspapers. A very common feature that one will discover is that females very often tilt their heads. This head gesture may convey an attitude of coyness or submissiveness, but it is so common that one can almost always find such a head position in any group of women. A recent scientific study with film documented this kinesic behavior.182 Two scholars of communicative behavior did an extensive study of the greeting behavior that took place at a large birthday party in a garden setting. They analyzed the film by measuring, counting, and showing angles and distances. They categorized five positions of the head during the greetings that took place: erect head, head tilted forward, head tilted back, head cocked to one side, and head held erect or forward. Males favored the forward position: 27 out of 35 occurrences were by males. Females tilted their head to one side significantly more than males: 18 out of 20 times recorded. The head-tilt seemed to be more obvious in male-female greetings. An analysis of children's books showed that the vacuous, "pretty" mother is shown in illustrations "in the classic servant's posture, body slightly bent forward, hands clasped, eyes riveted on the master of the house or the child."183 Clothes have an effect on posture. The mini skirt significantly affected the walking and sitting posture of females in recent years.

< previous page

page_105 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_106

next page > Page 106

Mark Twain noticed the correlation of clothes and sex in sitting posture in the famous passage where Huck Finn, disguised in a girl's dress, gave himself away when he closed his legs to catch something. Facial expression is another aspect of kinesic behavior that has rich possibilities for communication between human beings. It has been thought that females, who are supposed to be more intuitive, could interpret these aspects of communication better than males. The research in these matters of sex differences, however, is highly contradictory and ambiguous, with many variables obfuscating the results. In the final analysis, researchers conclude that sex differences are not significant. All we can say is that some males are more sensitive to these features than some females, and some females are more sensitive than some males. There are some differences in facial expression that do show statistical significance. In interaction, for example, women look at each other more than do males. 184 It seems to me, also, that in observing the behavior of couples with an established relationship, the woman looks at her man much more than he looks at her, at least in public appearances. With regard to differences in the brain, it appears that the visual area also has sex differences. It has been shown that males are superior to females in certain visual-spatial tasks. In the functioning of the right hemisphere of the brain, males tend to have a greater left-visual field superiority for dot location and dot enumeration than females as we saw earlier in Chapter II. How much of this innate difference is carried over into the life-style and masculine/feminine behavior of human beings is not at all clear. For just as in sound behavior, females have learned to use their eyes in ways different from males. An old Spanish scholar noted the many instances throughout the Spanish literature on the references to the glances of women.185 It would appear to be an endless study! Another important component of facial expression is the mouth, with all its subtleties of shape and movement even during speech. Study of the smile also shows significant differences in male and female use. When females approach males, they smile. In fact, they smile more than males throughout their lifetime, if they learned their lesson wellthat females are supposed to be pleasant and create a happy home. A recent observer equates it to the servant's shuffle.186 Recent studies of the chimpanzee may suggest that this submissive gesture is of more than ancient standing. It is uncanny how closely some of the gestural behavior of the chimpanzees resembles that of human beings.

< previous page

page_106 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_107

next page > Page 107

In noting the submissive behavior throughout the discussions of chimpanzee life, one is somehow reminded of the smile behavior of female to male human being. In describing the appeasement and submission behavior of one of the low ranking chimpanzees, Jane Goodall noted that during such an encounter, he would "pull back the comers of his lips and expose his teeth in a nervous grin." 187 Submissive and dominant behavior is also evidenced in the manner of touching that male and female exhibit. Henley shows that tactile behavior between the sexes is correlated with status dimensions. Tactile behavior in the autistic realm is also a tension-reliever mechanism. Montagu makes several observations on male/female differences noting that: . . . perhaps the most familiar [tension-reliever] in Western cultures being head scratching in men. Women do not usually behave in this manner; indeed, the sexual differences in the use of the skin are marked. In states of perplexity men will rub their chins with their hand, or tug at the lobes of their ears, or rub their forehead or cheeks or back of the neck. Women have very different gestures in such states. They will either put a finger on their lower front teeth with the mouth slightly open or pose a finger under the chin. Other masculine gestures in states of perplexity are: rubbing one's nose, placing the flexed Fingers over the mouth, rubbing the side of the neck, rubbing the infraorbital part of the face, rubbing the closed eyes, and picking the nose. These are all masculine gestures; so is rubbing the back of the hand or the front of the thigh, and pursing of the lips.188 The role of the speaker must be considered in describing the inventory of male/female nonverbal events. Silence must be observed by widows in some cultures but is not required of the widower. Male/female nonverbal behavior is closely involved with other dimensions of status and control. Consider, for example, the patronizing and conciliating tone of the male department store clerk to a woman asking information, of a male physician to a female physician, or of a male government official to a female reporter. He'd better not talk that way to a man! The pattern is reversed when a man becomes ill. The female nurse uses Baby Talk even to mature males who command high executive positions when they are on their feet! A study of Roman art shows the ranking status depicted in sculpture and

< previous page

page_107 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_108

next page > Page 108

coinage. When husband and wife are shown she is in the inferior position. 189 Human sounds have been studied by Ostwald, who also observes sex differentiations among the uses and prohibitions. Sexual prejudices and taboos against noise-making by women may account for the fact of so few outstanding female musicians. Traditionally women are expected to be more contained and silent than men, and their instruction in music was limited to such lady-like instruments as lutes and harps. Times change, of course, and during World War II many noisy women were employed as boilermakers or riveters.190 The restrictions and prohibitions surrounding female vocal behavior are of very long standing. Shakespeare recognized them and conveyed this through his characters: "Her voice was ever soft, Gentle and low; an excellent thing in woman." (King Lear, V, iii). Recently a panel of bachelors described a "feminine" person as "a woman who does not talk loudly.'' In order to assess differences of behavior, one is always brought back to consider innate sexual differences. As we saw earlier, there do seem to be some sex differences in the brains of males and females. Because the research is in very primitive stages, it is not clear yet how these brain differences might affect the nonverbal communicative behavior of male and female. Another physiological difference lies in the vocal cords and this results in higher pitched voices for women. Since pitch is relative, however, some females speak with lower voices than some males. Other than pitch differences, male and female share equal possibilities of articulations for any verbal or paralinguistic communicative act as we observe them in languages of the world. If, then, the physiological differences are minimal, why are the culturally learned differences so ubiquitous? Infants are taught these learned differences at very early ages. We saw earlier that infants at the pre-speech stage of development were already responding to male/female differences in intonation patterns. Goldberg and Lewis studied early sex differences of infants at six months and again at thirteen months. They found a high correlation between the behavior of mother and resultant response of infant. Their experiment demonstrated that the sex-role behavior patterns are already evident during the first year of life. Because of the differential treatment of mothers to sons and daughters, they concluded that parents can be active promulgators of sex-role

< previous page

page_108 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_109

next page > Page 109

behavior through reinforcement of sex-role-appropriate responses during the first year. In adolescent years, and thereafter, paralanguage and kinesics become important in attracting sex partners. Studies of eye movement have indicated that eye communication is a crucial matter in sex response patterns. Pupil dilation occurs in response to the desired sex. 191 Birdwhistell, who pioneered nonverbal messages of kinesic behavior in a rigorous, scientific way, studied the "courtship dance" among American teen-agers: We found it quite easy to delineate some twenty-four steps between the initial tactile contact between the young male and female and the coitional act. These steps and countersteps had a coercive order. For instance, a boy taking a girl's hand must await a counter-pressure on his hand before beginning the finger intertwine. The move and countermove, ideally, must take place before he "casually" and tentatively puts his arm around her shoulders. And each of these contacts should take place before the initial kiss. However, there seems to be no clockable duration necessary for each of these steps. The boy or girl is called "slow" or ''fast" in terms of the appropriate ordering of the steps, not in terms of the length of time at each. Skipping steps or reversing their order is "fast." Insistence on ignoring the prompting to move to the next step is "slow."192 For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. The Ninth Circuit Gender Bias Task Force recognized the impact of nonverbal behavior in their guidelines for a policy on sexual harassment (Coughenour et al. 1993: D15-16). Among the examples: "Prohibited conduct also includes nonverbal, suggestive, or sexually insulting actions such as leering, whistling, suggestive sounds, and obscene gestures." Language is given life and vitality with the extra-linguistic concomitants that always occur, in the way of vocalizations and movement. Clothing, with communicative value, was scarcely mentioned in my 1975 edition. The Language of Clothes is another kind of nonverbal activity, and it is often dealt with in semiotic

< previous page

page_109 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_110

next page > Page 110

systems and other kinds of symbolic behavior. In Paralanguage and kinesics (1975, Scarecrow Press), I dealt with clothing under the section called "By-elements of the nonverbal act: artifacts, clothing, hair." The concerns of male/female interaction, and the concerns that arise when females move into positions that were previously maledominated, oblige us to consider the wardrobe. When women were only home-bodies, the inventory of clothes consisted of house-dresses and party dresses. The former have been replaced with sweat-suits and shorts, but young adults have not inherited instructions on what to wear for the professional assignment. "The clothes make the man!" does not have an equivalent expression for women; in a parallel way, the female wardrobe does not comfortably have the flexibility for a women to function in the workplace. Uniforms are a way of dealing with the problem for some occupations. In other situations, women are still struggling with what is acceptable clothing. One cannot assume that the choices don't matter, because "The clothes make the man!'' I have often said that males and females will never acquire parity in the workplace until the problem of shoes and pockets is resolved. High heels do not lend themselves to standing for long hours or for rapid locomotion between meetings or assignments. A garment made with pockets to hold keys, coins, and Kleenex frees the hands for the work of the moment. A purse and a briefcase make an awkward combination. The discussion of clothing leads into the realm of nudity, another kind of communicative behavior. Anthropologists have documented ritual dress and undress, and the removal or addition of garments may be used as a sign of respect: "Remove your hat before entering." "Cover your head before entering." It is also known that "nakedness is often a sign of inferior social status, subserviency, or submission . . ." (J. C. Flugel, 1969, The psychology of clothes, New York: International Universities Press, p. 56). The human body is beautiful, but when its display is distorted by an exploitative function, the individual is demeaned. Discrimination is best seen in nudity that is asymmetrical. The moral argument is a futile exercise that has no winners. Asymmetry is at its worst and ugliest in the family newspaperperhaps because it is the family newspaper, and there is no way to avoid it. Movies are advertised with pictures of nude women and fully clothed men; clothing is advertised with the male in shirt and trouser and the female skin exposed up to the point of nudity. The extremes of daring, suggestive poses by women can be easily illustrated by reading the daily newspaper. I made a count

< previous page

page_110 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_111

next page > Page 111

for a few days in one family newspaper: every day there were six to eight pictures of women seductively exposing their thighs and breasts; there were no pictures of men in such poses. The workplace displays another example of asymmetry, where pictures of nude females, but not nude males, are hung on the walls of the office, or the fire station, or a fine restaurant. An elegant example of symmetry in nudity is seen in Rodin's The Kiss, where the graceful flow of the lines speak for respect and appreciation of the pristine human shapein both male and female form. The double standard is what makes the problem of nudity more than just a problem of moral standards. On August 15, 1989, the Los Angeles Times printed an article discussing an advertisement with a picture of a male nude. The displeasure it caused in the community caused the ad to be rejected in some locations by city administrators. In the same paper, another advertisement was announced: this time provocative billboards showed a "sensual set of female thighs," with the claim that the ads were "tastefully done." The company producing the billboards said that it had not received complaints. The infantilization of women was mentioned previously, in Chapter IV, with the examples of "men" and "girls." A parallel is seen in advertisements of clothing, where "baby doll" garments are modeled by dreamy-eyed females, and one can imagine their child-like, high-pitched voices. If women want to be treated with dignity and equality, they will learn new strategies on how to deal with their various roles. In a sex role, be sexy! If women continue to buy from the "baby doll" collection, they needn't complain of being paid less in the work place. The fabrication of sexy clothing for children is especially disturbing, in view of the abuse of children. It is one thing for a small lassie to dress up in Mommy's high heels and sequin dresses, while she is playing house; it is quite another thing to dress her in provocative clothing at public outings, leading to roles of baby dolls and sugar daddies, if not worse.

< previous page

page_111 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_112

next page > Page 112

Chapter XII Male and Female Authors America's first poet was a woman. Anne Bradstreet (1612-1672) was among the earliest immigrants from England to settle in the New World. Her writings came out of a time of mistrust and discouragement toward women who dared to take time from their housewifely chores to pen a verse here and there. Such a woman was considered immoral and received the contempt of her neighbors: "I am obnoxious [oblivious] to each carping tongued Who says my hand a needle better fits . . ." 193 A man of London, in 1650, was so offended by his sister's writings that he wrote in a public letter, "your printing of a Book, beyond the custom of your Sex, doth rankly smell."194 Or such a woman was considered insane.195 Margaret of Newcastle, for example, an author, was called the "crazy Duchess" according to Virginia Woolf, who discusses other women writers and their distracted states of mind.196 At the same time that Anne Bradstreet was writing, another Anne, the wife of Governor Hopkins of Hartford, was also writing. She received a typical judgment from Governor Winthrop, who wrote in his journal for 1645: Mr. Hopkins, the governor of Hartford upon Connecticut, came to Boston, and brought his wife with him . . . who was fallen into a sad infirmity, the loss of her understanding and reason, which had been growing upon her divers years, by occasion of her giving herself wholly to reading and writing, and had written many books. Her husband, being very loving and tender of her, was loath to grieve her; but he saw his error, when it was too late. For if she had attended her household affairs, and such things as belong to women, and not gone out of her way and calling to meddle in such things as are proper for men, whose minds are stronger, etc.,

< previous page

page_112 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_113

next page > Page 113

she had kept her wits, and might have improved them usefully and honorably in the place God had set her. 197 So intense have been the feelings about women writers, their own feelings as well as others', that only a small proportion have found their way to publish. Some of those early writers who were able to overcome the paralyzing psychological barriers of this kind of repression did their publishing under a man's name. Emily Brontë used the pseudonym "Ellis Bell" in the first edition of Wuthering Heights. It was reviewed as though the author was male. In printing the second edition, she used her own name, and thereafter the quality of the critical response changed. It became known that all three of the Brontë sisters wrote and subsequently their writings were thought of as being "feminine." Charlotte had recognized this hazard: "We did not like to declare ourselves women, becausewithout at that time suspecting that our mode of writing and thinking was not what is called 'feminine'we had a vague impression that authoresses are liable to be looked on with prejudice . . ."198 Emily Dickinson fared somewhat better at the hands of critics who realized that her poetry was equal to the finest written in the United States. She was, however, known as a "poetess"the very word implying that the "female nature lacked qualities essential to the creation of great poetry."199 It is still true that there is "lacking an intellectual tradition which provides ways to think about" female writers. "When the poetry fails it is feminine; when it succeeds it is universal."200 Lady Winchilsea, of the seventeenth century, was satirized as ''a blue-stocking with an itch for scribbling."201 How then can one truthfully judge a Jane Austen, a Virginia Woolf, a George Sand, a George Eliot, or a Simone de Beauvoir? The father of Virginia Woolf, Leslie Stephen, whose name is not nearly as well known as his daughter's, was a literary critic who is said to have "prized masculinity very highly and despised effeminacy."202 He found the works of women novelists such as the Brontës and George Eliot to be seriously defective because of their failure to create believable male characters. As one critic observed, "The corresponding failures of male writers to create plausible female characters seem to have troubled him far less."202 Chesterton, another literary critic, in a penetrating discourse, reviewed the biased treatment given the male characters of female writers, and concluded, "The reply may be made that the women in men's novels are equally fallacious."203 It is said of Leslie Stephen, "The opposite of masculine is not feminine but

< previous page

page_113 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_114

next page > Page 114

morbid." 204 Out of this atmosphere Virginia Woolf transcended sex. She realized that "it is fatal for any who writes to think of their sex. It is fatal to be a man or woman pure and simple; one must be woman-manly or man-womanly."205 The inhibitions and restrictions limiting the use of language by women are well established in human societies. Ironically this limitation took a strange twist in Japan a thousand years ago.206 Males, with their prestigious duties, were confined in their writings to the formal court language, which was Chinese. Thus, they produced the works of history, theology, science, and law. Women were able to create in the vernacular, the "women's language," and thereby women writers brought about a brilliant age of literature, unique in the history of Japanese literature. Out of this, Lady Murasaki produced Genji Monogatari (The Tale of Genji), which has been acclaimed the greatest work of Japanese literature. The Tale of Genji was written over a period of years, about the year A.D. 1000. It has been likened to the greatest works of fiction that the world has produced. The influence that resulted from its central importance and from its grandeur still survives. One of the scholars of Japanese literature noted, "It is a remarkable and. . .unexampled fact, that a very large and important part of the best literature which Japan has produced was written by women."207 He goes on to explain the causes for this and believes that the most effective cause had to do with the position of women in Japan at that time: The Japanese of this early period did not share the feeling common to most Eastern countries, that women should be kept in subjection, and, as far as possible, in seclusion. Feminine chieftains are frequently mentioned in the old histories, and several even of the Mikados were women . . . . Many instances might be quoted of Japanese women exercising an influence and maintaining an independence of conduct quite at variance with our preconceived notions of the position of women in the East. It is this which gives their literary work an air of freedom and originality which it would be vain to expect in the writings of inmates of a secluded harem. It was during this time that Lady Murasaki gave the world its first novel. This atmosphere was not to last, however. The later Yedo period was very different:

< previous page

page_114 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_115

next page > Page 115

Chinese notions of the absolute subjection and the seclusion, as far as possible, of the [female] sex, made great progress. Women were now rarely heard of in public life, and disappear completely from the world of literaturea significant fact when we remember the feminine masterpieces of the Heian period. 208 In spite of the position restricting women in China, women also influenced Chinese literature. Countless anonymous love poems arc traditionally attributed to women.209 In another ironic historical accident, women began to do more writing when the novel in Western culture was being formed as another literary genre.210 This new literature was free from the presuppositions of a public accustomed to male authorship of the historical epics and the Shakespearean types of poetic drama. The Brontës and Jane Austen were free to explore and experiment and release their creative powers to a genre that was not yet denied to them. In the oral literature of ancient times, which was recorded only long after it was originally created, it is much more difficultperhaps impossibleto establish whether the creators were male or female. We know that many of the Gaelic poets were women. One famous one was called Mary, daughter of Red Alasdair. Before she died, in 1674, she had been welcomed all over the Highlands as a true sennachie (shanachie) who captivated her people with living chronicles of the past.211 Almost a century ago, Samuel Butler put forth the idea that a woman anonymously composed The Odyssey.212 Only in the last decade does this idea seem possible to believe. Many historically obscure people are assumed to be male even though not enough is known of their personal lives to identify their sex. We can now re-evaluate judgments about literature written anonymously.213 Turning to more recent authorship, it still remains that more males than females are listed in the card catalogs of libraries, even though learning has become coeducational and courageous women writers of the past removed the stigma of being labeled insane and survived the contempt of society. If one critically examines the "Acknowledgments" and credits of many nonfiction books, I believe that some can be found there. Many husband-wife and professor-student teams have produced books that have been published as authored by a single author. The Acknowledgments often read something like this: "To ____, Without whom this book would not have been written" or "This book is hers as much as mine." After reading several dozen of those, I began

< previous page

page_115 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_116

next page > Page 116

to wonder why the wife or female student, who had done the "countless weeks of research" and "edited every line" was not listed as a co-author. One very honest scholar, in an interview to the Los Angeles Times, noted that his wife "should have been a writer. But she always thought my work was more important. If she hadn't edited my articles all these years, I would never have gotten anything published." 214 While most men try to be generous in acknowledging the help of their female research associates, wives or otherwise, there are some who are reluctant to acknowledge this work. In the extreme, a man may cite himself as a reference without staling the wife's name even though she was co-author. It has also been a modest, socially accepted style to list the female author as second author even though she may have been the primary investigator. One book, which was written by a woman, is listed in the card catalog under the name of the man who wrote the Preface, because he put his name first on the title page. On the other side of the coin, it is pleasant to remember that there are people like Will and Ariel Durant, who share their work and authorship. It is not difficult, then, to conclude that women could and did do keen intellectual research and are capable of writing, but that often it was not the custom to acknowledge it publicly. As Pygmalion pointed out, the expectations of society have a controlling and manipulating effect on behavior. If society expects little from females in the way of literature, paintings, and music, is it any surprise that females produce relatively little? An evaluation of women's writings must be done alongside an evaluation of the response to their writings. A recent president of the Modem Language Association noted that her students invariably considered women writers inferior to men writers.215 This was verified in an experimental study to evaluate the writings of women scholars and men scholars.216 Some 140 college women participated in the experiment. Articles from professional journals were selected for the experiment and edited and put together in booklets that were identical except for changes in the name of the author. In one booklet an article would carry a male name, such as John T. McKay. The same article would carry the name Joan T. McKay in the other set. Each booklet contained three articles by "men" and three articles by "women." The women students read through the articles and then answered a questionnaire that would rate the authors for writing style, professional competence and status, and rate the articles for value. The women students consistently found an article more valuable and the author more

< previous page

page_116 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_117

next page > Page 117

competent when the article bore a male name. The male pseudonyms won hands down! This finding supports other studies where it is shown that not only society, but females themselves feel themselves to be inferior. 217 In judging written language it is inevitable that one is more likely to enjoy writing that deals with subject matter of one's own interests. How, then, can one compare a book about adventure and travel with a book about cooking; a book about international diplomacy with a book about a child's growing up; a book about war with a book about human relationships? The subject matter of a woman's writing is limited to the four walls of her experiences, as well as to her interests"For women have sat indoors all these millions of years . . . ."218 Then again, who is to say that a book about war is more important than a book about human relationships? What are the important things in life? Virginia Woolf's mother wrote about crumbs in the bed of a sick person. Among the number of small evils which haunt illness, the greatest, in the misery which it can cause, though the smallest in size, is crumbs. The origin of most things has been decided on, but the origin of crumbs in bed has never excited sufficient attention among the scientific world, though it is a problem which has tormented many a weary sufferer.219 This poignant passage goes on to describe the persistent crumb. Apparently this was Julia Stephen's single publication. Holtby's original and insightful comparison of Virginia Woolf's writings with those of her mother were reiterated in Annan's study.220 Regarding subject matter, the double standard again prevails. If a woman were to write about daffodils, it might be passed by as trite. But when a Wordsworth writes of daffodils, he is quoted for generations. Besides the content of writings, there is the matter of the protagonist and the characters that move through the scenes and chapters. A prominent literary scholar commented on the place of women, "If we were to judge by Old English literature alone, we would conclude that only queens, princesses, abbesses, a few wives, and a scattering of mistresses comprised the female population of England at that time."221 Jane Austen, in an imaginary conversation, expressed the sentiments of a good many who found history dull:

< previous page

page_117 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_118

next page > Page 118

I read history a little as a duty; but it tells me nothing that does not either vex or weary me. The quarrels of popes and kings, with wars and pestilences in every page; the men all so good for nothing, and hardly any women at all, it is very tiresome . . . 222 History is a study of the powerful, and women have had no power. This is the situation of women in all countries. A study of two documents of medieval Russia shows a count of 2400 persons; only 93 are female, or about 4 percent.223 Indeed, our present writings of history have made no progress in recognizing the presence of women. In a study of textbooks used in college history courses, it was discovered that no book had more than 2 percent of its pages about women. Some had almost nothing.224 Virginia Woolf perceptively observes that though females are scarcely mentioned in history, they pervade poetry from cover to cover. Imaginatively she is of the highest importance; practically she is completely insignificant . . . . She dominates the lives of kings and conquerors in fiction; in fact she was the slave of any boy whose parents forced a ring upon her finger. Some of the most inspired words, some of the most profound thoughts in literature fall from her lips; in real life she could hardly read, could scarcely spell . . . .225 While books, plays, and movies are produced by the hundreds with all-male casts, almost nothing is written with only female characters. Clare Boothe Luce's recently revived play The Women is an exception. A review of The Women said, "The cast is entirely womenwhich, oddly enough detracts from it. You sometimes have a strange desire to see some of the men in the lives of these New York society ladies . . . ." It is doubtful that there has ever been a review of an allmale book, movie, or drama that lamented the all-male cast, wistfully wishing to know something of the women in their lives! No, books are not written with women as the main characters and with men mentioned marginallyentering the scenes only as lovers. While the above may be true, a curious paradox exists in the matter of writing about male/female relationships. Hundreds of books have been written about women and their peculiarities, but almost none about men. The Kinsey report is an exception. Why this morbid fascination with women, who are left out of history?

< previous page

page_118 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_119

next page > Page 119

The study of dialogue is a study of the relationships between male and female, as well as a study of the skill of male and female writers to successfully portray the dialogue of real people. How can writers put words in the mouth of a person of the opposite sex? D. H. Lawrence is a good example to analyze, because he was concerned with male/female relationships. Lawrence depicted how the gamekeeper kept control over Lady Chatterley by code-switching in the way of manipulating his dialect to manipulate her. 226 In addition to observing the way writers of literature depict what they think is a viable conversation between male and female, one can observe the way children's books depict male/female dialogues. Linguistic behavior. is culturally taught, as are other expressions of behavior.227 In surveying the dialogues that occur in children's books, one notes a pathetic lack of conversation with bright, adventurous females of any age. Rarely is there a give-and-take dialogue in which a female is shown to be capable of making a decision or in which a female provides intelligent and useful information. The things that girls and women say in these books too often reflect the stereotypes of society: "Women are emotional." In one book, in reference to a pleasurable experience, we read, "One little girl thought they were so beautiful she began to cry." During a scene about fishing and baiting the hook, the girl says, "I can't . . . I don't want to touch those things." "Of course you don't, here I'll do it for you." And then she would have lost the pole but Johnny grabbed it in time. In another story, the boy says, "You can't do it, Babs. You will get scared if you do." "No I won't," said Babs. "Yes, you will. You will get scared and cry.'' The Little Miss Muffett syndrome, which depicts females as helpless, easily frightened, and dreadfully dull, occurs over and over again in children's literature. If one compares this image, which crystallizes in the formative years of child development, with the potential of women in adulthood, it becomes apparent that both male and female have difficulty participating in equal sharing of dialogues at the professional level. Males who have grown up learning dialogues such as are in children's books today are not able to listen to a female in adult life. Males paralyze when a rare female makes a constructive suggestion. Likewise, females are trained not to take their share, or hold their own in decision-making interchange. There are no linguistic models in this early literature for females to take active pans in the dialogue nor for males to respond with dignified acceptance and a willingness to listen. With such indoctrination as this, is it any

< previous page

page_119 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_120

next page > Page 120

wonder then, that doctors don't permit women on the surgical team and women scientists are excluded from projects and from the laboratory where a female is thought to be useless or a nuisance? Finally, in this discussion of the language behavior of male and female in the written language, we can consider certain types of writings that were produced specifically for female readers. Throughout the centuries, where women could read, writings have been produced in dialects, styles, or varieties of language directed to appeal to women. Yiddish literature, for example, was first oriented toward women readers, because women did not know how to read in Hebrew. Pearl Buck observes that from the old Chinese point of view, novels were not worthy of serious attention; they were "fit only for an idle moment of recreation or for women to read." 228 No reputable scholar would admit to reading a novel, and if he wrote one, it would be produced under an assumed name. Interestingly enough, these Chinese novels, intended primarily for women, were written with a candor and frankness that makes our pornographic writings look tame in comparison.229 Not all societies "protect" women from flagrant sexual detail. In the United States, ''women's fiction" became an industry when women began to be educated in great numbers. Between 1830 and 1860, sixty-four magazines for women were launched.230 For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. The 1849 diary of a little eleven-year-old lassie reveals the humor and charm of a developing female mind, struggling with the problems of spelling (Bank 1979: 17): I think spelling is very funny, I spelt infancy infantsy, and they said it was wrong, but I don't see why, because if my seven little cousins died when they were infants, they must have died in their infantsy; but infancy makes it seem as if they hadn't really died, but we just made believe. Catherine Elizabeth Havens, August 6, 1849 When she became a little older, her diary contained her thoughts about the struggle with the problems of love, with a rhetorical comment on a

< previous page

page_120 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_121

next page > Page 121

concept that remains an enigma todaythe piercing of the heart(Bank 1979: 48): When I grow up I think I shall have a beau, and his name is Sam B. and he lives across the street, for he sent me a valentine he painted himself, and it is a big red heart with an arrow stuck through it, and one of my school friends says that means he is very fond of me, but I don't see much sense in the arrow. Catherine Elizabeth Havens, April 15, 1850 How does a young mind become numbed when she is ready for adult roles, when she should continue to voice her insights of irregularities and beauties in the real world? Evaluating the writings of others contains built-in biases that must be recognized, even if no solution to the problem is immediately forthcoming. It is heartening to see responsible journals deal with the problem, as, for example, Nature, which published correspondence on "Referee bias" (Vol. 367: 108, January 13, 1994). Menkel-Meadow (1992: 293) touched on the problem of whether one can distinguish a male writer from a female writer, in her discussion of the writings of lawyers. The matters of "credits due," co-authorship of work done, and recognition of ethnic and female writers and artists, remain problems at the end of a century of struggles with racism and sexism. It is stunning that the reluctance to play fair still dominates. In 1990, Lee Dembart wrote a book review in the Los Angeles Times (February 13) on a scientific book that told the story of the discovery of the opiate receptor in the brain. Dembart points out that the essential work of the woman graduate student was not properly acknowledged. Throughout my academic career, I have seen evidence of such stories, and yet I know of no study or proper documentation of the consistent lack of proper acknowledgments. It is embarrassing. On a more encouraging note, women are finding their voices. Doris Earnshaw (1994) has brought together some significant speeches of California women in public offices. Perhaps there will be a day when we will not consider this unusual.

< previous page

page_121 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_122

next page > Page 122

Chapter XIII The Silent Woman: Tyranny in Language "Silence gives the proper grace to women." Sophocles 231 One might wonder why, in a book on language, there is a chapter on silence. In a linguistic sense, patterns of silence figure in language structures and must be dealt with in the analysis of language. Thus, on a micro-level, silence can be used to separate and give emphasis to different words. On another level, silence separates different speakers, except in simultaneous speech or in interrupting behavior. This kind of silence must be distinguished from nothingness, or moments when nothing is happening. Silence is part of language and is as important as sound to communication and thought. Silence means different things depending upon the users: master/slave, teen-ager/adult, male/female. In still another capacity, silence has a global meaning among certain categories of human beings who illustrate an intellectual or creative silence. I have been haunted through the years by a question from one of my male studentsa sensitive, bright young scholar, who asked the old question, "Why aren't there great women composers, artists, and writers?" The fact is, women have been "silent." We have to deal here with the paradox that women, with a reputation for volubility, have made all-too-few extra-biological contributions to society. I do not believe that the explanation for this phenomenon is strictly biological. There is a great deal of evidence that the expectations of societypresented to each of us at birthare powerful enough by themselves, without biological imperatives, to thrust males into often inappropriate roles of dominance, and to similarly paralyze females into silence.

< previous page

page_122 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_123

next page > Page 123

Ingmar Bergman created a complete film with the main character speechless throughout the movie. The protagonist in Persona was an actress who reached a crisis before the plot was presented to the audience. She became paralyzedher vocal cords refused to play the game any longer. Her voice was stopped during a performance of Medea. One cannot forget that the ancient drama of Medea dealt with the role of motherhood. Bergman's actress was also a mothera classical archetype of talent conflicting with duty. In the film the pleas and letters from home to her hospital bed and convalescent retirement were focused on their needs for her return to be wife and mothernot to return to her great acting accomplishments! In any discussion of silence, it must be made clear that there are many varieties. 232 Silence is communicative and there is the comforting, companionable silence between people in equilibrium, which must be distinguished from the negative disturbing silence of anger, fear, or hate.233 Historically, women are expected not to make substantive verbal contributions in the mixed social setting. Recall the conversation that D.H. Lawrence wrote to highlight the silence of Lady Chatterley, reproduced in Chapter III. A woman's role is to twitter about the weather, give opinions that are dull and charming and brief, and respond with "Yes?" and "Really?" during the men's dialogue. A male can use linguistic silence to produce intellectual silence in women. Randolph Churchill, Winston's father, had a maxim to handle women who wanted to enter the discussions, "Gentlemen, there is only one reply to a lady when she argues with yousilence."234 Ben Jonson (ca. 1572-1637) wrote a satiric comedy called The Silent Woman. Elsewhere he noted that "Women are but Men's Shadows."235 Chaucer had also observed, through the exceptional mouth of the Wife of Bath in The Canterbury Tales, that women had not commented on men in anything like the manner that men had written of women. Indeed, as we noted before, a hip to any library and a browse through the stacks will show shelf after shelf of books about womenwritten by men. What do women have to say about themselves . . . or the world around them? It is a commonplace that silence is necessary for deep thought, for either the artist or the scientist. The centuries of women's silence might be explained, in part, by the repression caused by not having private periods of productive silence. Lack of silence, in this respect, can produce silence.236

< previous page

page_123 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_124

next page > Page 124

Mourning is a specific situation where women were assigned to absolute verbal silence in many societies. Sir James Frazer devotes a chapter to "The Silent Widow" in his study of comparative religions. 237 The Silent Widow belonged to several areas of the world: the Congo, East Africa, British Columbia (Indians), and Australia. The period of silent mourning lasted from a few days to a year, depending upon the tribe. This restriction of silence was based on supernatural beliefsfears concerning the spirit of the late husband. In Australia, where the mourning period was lengthy, there developed gesture sign languages to continue the necessary communications. Other vocalizations were permitted when language was prohibited. Even laughing was acceptable behavior. Religious beliefs in Western cultures also contributed to the muting of women. Saint Paul admonished women to keep silent in the churches. Indeed, the more conservative congregations took this advice very seriously, and women were simply not allowed to verbalize in the services in any way. Interestingly enough, in Hastings' encyclopedic study of religion and ethics, a section on silence is included, which covers the worshipful and devotional silence and the monastery silence, but says nothing about the imputation of silence to women. It should not be forgotten that Jesus Christ himself did not instruct women to be silent, but rather encouraged them to participate. Religion must come to grips with the conflicts imposed upon women in order for religion to be viable. The famous linguist Edward Sapir long ago noted sex-discrimination and rank-discrimination, and the relationship of these two in language.238 The balance of power is maintained by imposing tyrannies back and forth. Females may respond to male verbal dominance by hen-pecking or by becoming inconsolably emotional. Language differences and nonverbal behavior (which we discussed earlier), particularly the latter, might prove to be a measure of discrimination in evaluating relationships in society. Silence is imposed by various "put-downs." These are subtle forms of control, sometimes covert, usually out-of-awareness and reflecting mental states and attitudes. The "put-downs" can take many forms, some of which we have already discussed in previous chapters. Titles are a way of denoting inferior status and can be used to suggest that females do not have anything of value (to a male) to say or contribute. Labels and descriptors imply unequal status: "girls" would not participate in an

< previous page

page_124 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_125

next page > Page 125

adult discussion. Labels can also be used as "the killing abstraction." 239 It has been noted that the label "Women's Liberation" is being manipulated to create a counterproductive movement, which would again silence women. It is certainly a distraction from one's career to be asked rather pointedly, "Are you a feminist?" While language is a means of communication, it can also be used to misdirect human beings. Flattery is a deceptive put-down; used by a male, it can fool the listener into thinking she is valued highly. One does not hear the blarney poured out to experts and authoritative figuresthey don't need it. Explanations are very often subtle put-downs. Observation shows that explanations usually go one way: male to female. It is unladylike for a female to explain a concept. Categories are another way of putting women aside. Several examples were given in Chapter VIII. These status groupings continue to appear. A young man from the riot-filled sixties defines his situation: "I have a woman, a child, and a dog." A well-known educator in California prides himself: "I get along all too well with small children and with women's clubs." A radio discussion on street loitering listed the "freaks, widows, and kooks." A campus newspaper reviewed a production that satirized social ills such as economics, Women's Liberation and corrupt government. A social studies textbook wrote that "Men trekked over the mountains with their wives, children and cattle." So be it. Females, classified thusly, could hardly be in a state of mind to be anything but silent. But, if by some stint of courage, or overflow of knowledge or experience, a female does start to talk, the final put-down is interruption. Two studies have been made in California recently that indicate the high incidence of males interrupting females, and husbands answering for their wives. "The hypothesis is that women . . . have restricted rights of speakership, which is reflected in male speakers overriding the constraints of conversational ordering when engaged in conversations with females."240 In another study, which focused on visibility in the interaction of two persons, rather unexpected findings resulted: "It looks as if males are motivated to dominate and do so largely by interrupting and talking more, especially when. the normal cues for floor-apportionment are absent."241 All of these put-downs are socially acceptable, and the necessary aggressive behavior that would challenge and overcome the put-down is socially unacceptable on the part of women. Thus, they are forced into patterns of silence. How and when are these patterns of behavior

< previous page

page_125 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_126

next page > Page 126

learned? And how can they be so deeply ingrained, so that even those who know better can hardly overcome the set patterns? One study that focused on the variations that children learn very early in language behavior noted that the first is between speech and silence. "Very small children will frequently talk or jabber nonsense to their own parents or siblings, but fall silent in the presence of strangers." 242 We have already noted that male/female differences start even before this. It is not unreasonable to extrapolate and note that females learn patterns of silence very early. Tyranny, however, receives its counterbalance. In turn, men are the victims. In place of silence, nagging becomes a way of dealing with a situationa way of bringing about an equilibrium, albeit a distasteful one. Another way is for the female to focus on her delicacies and purities and not permit the male to express himself emotionally or with "rough talk" around her or the children. George Bernard Shaw recognized that the most tyrannical female was the most resolute opponent of Women's Rights.243 Thus, both are losersneither man nor woman permitted full range of expression for every human emotion. The personality is damaged and creativity is curtailed with the inhibitions imposed. When human beings are robbed of their dignity, all humanity is debased. The truth is that a slave State is always ruled by those who can get round the masters: that is, by the more cunning of the slaves themselves. No fascinating woman ever wants to emancipate her sex: her object is to gather power into the hands of Man, because she knows that she can govern him. She is no more jealous of his nominal supremacy than he himself is jealous of the strength and speed of his horse. The cunning & attractive slave women disguise their strength as womanly weakness, their audacity as womanly timidity, their unscrupulousness as womanly innocence, their impunities as womanly defencelessness; simple men are duped by them, and subtle ones disarmed and intimidated. It is only the proud, straightforward women, who wish, not to govern, but to be free . . . .244 We have only partially answered the question of the young man who wondered why women haven't created to the extent that males do. We still have much to learn about the brain, about creativity, about environment and learned behavior, about repression, and about the marriage dynamic. Perhaps the question cannot be satisfactorily

< previous page

page_126 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_127

next page > Page 127

answered until it is asked by more women. Perhaps these days we are seeing a start. For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. . . . The married woman's secret upstart mind . . . Rodney Jones My very strong and overriding impression in reviewing studies that refer even obliquely to male/female differences, is that it is still true that not much is known about female inner thoughts, attitudes, and feelings. In general, universities, the courts, and business corporations have not availed themselves of the perspectives of the "secret upstart mind." Probably this can be said of some males too, but since they are in the class of the powerful, that is another matter. The "mask" of the less powerful and the "public self" that women exhibit continue to preclude actual and true descriptions of females, except for the most obvious and outward behaviors. The poet cited above has captured some insight into the unspoken. (''Second nature," in Apocalyptic narrative, Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin, 1994. Quoted in the Los Angeles Times, Book Review, February 6, 1994.) Tillie Olsen must be remembered again; her book on Silences has been released since my 1975 edition. She is an important voice for the Silent Woman. Twenty years ago Muriel Rukeyser was quoted as saying: "I am working out the vocabulary of my silence" (Willson 1973). It takes a while for a powerless category of people to practice their vocabulary and find effective rhetoric to express a full voice. Ethnic minorities and women are experimenting with various means of expressing themselvesnot always effective, sometimes counterproductive, sometimes ignored. But at least they are speaking up. Lest we fall into the trap of blaming men for the silence of women, let us also note that there are dutiful men who are going about their responsibilities in energetic waysso busy that at times they, too, appear to be silent. And some are writing books, such as Mark Gerzon, who believes that "preventing violence is more important than being good at violence." (A choice of heroes: the changing faces of American manhood, Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin, 1982; l992.)

< previous page

page_127 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_128

next page > Page 128

While many males are flowing with the changing times, and listening to women and ethnic groups becoming less silent nowadays, there remains a segment of the male population that has not kept up, and they are feeling left out. What can be done to help men not to feel helpless, in a world that runs on POWER? My advice to them is to hustle to catch up with the thinking of the times that will move them into the twenty-first century with grace. Behind the veils of silence are many concerns: violence, child abuse, child slavery, rape. War, too, can be scrutinized for a fresh interpretation of the real motivation and thinking behind the rationalizations that feebly attempt to justify it. While it is repugnant to listen to news and watch television accounts of these outrages, still, it is a healthy thing for society to drag them out from behind the veil of silence and examine what is going on. Evidence shows that violence is related to sex and to power. Its frightening aspects have to do with control and hatred. The First World War was brought to my awareness from time to time with my father's horror stories of trench warfare. Besides such hideous experiences, there continues to be a "silent problem" in all wars, the matter of children who are sired by men in uniform in all the countries where they are stationed. These children are denied full family relationships, and full citizenship from the time they are born. I would like to hear outspoken military men voice some concern for the rape of women, and also for the voluntary unions that produce children who forever will remember that they were conceived during wartime. Wartime rape is a complex mixture of males doing damage to other malesthrough their women. The little children and damaged women remain a shameful problem. The large silence. Definitions of the term "rape" disclose the ambivalence of males who used to joke: "Relax and enjoy it." This cruel joke was excused by inadequate and wrong definitions and translations. This was graphically brought to my attention when I was in Florence, Italy in 1972. I purchased postcards depicting the artwork; one of the subjects was the well-known statuary, usually called "The Rape of the Sabines." On one of the postcards, the title is given in four languages, including English "rape." But on another postcard, the English title reads: "The rapture of the Sabines." I would not attempt an explanation for the wrong translation, but clearly the examples illustrate a cavalier attitude that is intolerable to a thinking woman, even though she might possess a "secret upstart mind."

< previous page

page_128 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_129

next page > Page 129

Gravdal (1991) explores the subject of rape in medieval French literature and law. Her research may explain the offensive translation on the postcards I bought in Italy. The purpose of Gravdal's study was to examine the use of rape as a "stock narrative device" in medieval genre. She asks: "[H]ow does it happen that the representation of sexual violence is built into a variety of medieval genres and what purpose does it serve?" (pp. 1-2). She comes to the disquieting conclusion that it "reveals that certain ambiguous ways of discoursing on rape, forged in the Middle Ages, still function effectively (and invisibly) today." Gravdal's insightful perspectives highlight the relationship of literature and law and she gives important references. She also treats the problem of abduction as it came to have a spiritual or religious sense: "the action of carrying a soul to heaven" (p. 5). Contemporary religious texts continue to speak of the ultimate union of believer with God as The Rapture, a word that derives from the same source as 'rape'. This doublet explicitly illustrates the ambivalence, confusion, and contradiction still evident today in society. Sex is a way to gain power, among other things. "When I say NO, I mean NO!" A well-known societal rule, mentioned previously, is to use a device that minimizes the impact of the voice of the powerless by making jokes about the problems, or speaking lightly of them. An advertisement for a savings and loan company paraphrased the above expression, by bragging that the company offered loans with low interest rates: "When we say no, we mean no: No points. No application fee. No appraisal fee, etc." Surely the management of the company who wrote the advertisement would not condone rape, but the use of language in a light-hearted way seriously undermines the condemnation of rape. ". . . rap music is really rape music." Sheila James Kuehl, of the California Women's Law Center (Los Angeles Times, July 27, 1992), points out that many rap songs are about power, and the male's "right" to control women through pain and humiliation. Upright citizens who have been concerned (and rightfully so) about nippers who shout out for violence to police officers, must also be concerned about songs that callously foment violence to females. The Language of Violence demands a loud vocal response to the double standard not silence. Taboos are a recognition of silences that hauntingly cover certain topics. In various countries of the world, female circumcision and infibulation are initiation rites performed on little girls before puberty.

< previous page

page_129 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_130

next page > Page 130

The veil of silence has covered the practice so successfully, that many of us who took anthropology courses in college never heard of it. Silence in the face of the ''ultimate child abuse," as this Rite of Passage has been called, cannot be tolerated. And again, we are brought to recognize that we are a global community, and we share a common humanity with people in other countries. We have to deal, now, with the problem of responsibility to little sisters, who own citizenship in other countries. Women have been silenced by the threat of being called a suffragists or women's libbers. When the powerless are the brunt of jokes, their silence needs to burst open. MacKinnon's works have lit a fire "under the complacent acceptance of pornography and inequality, racial and sexual," according to one reviewer (Susan Salter Reynolds, Los Angeles Times, October 3, 1993). MacKinnon, a highly qualified law professor with a long publishing list, writes from the point of view of a legal theorist. Her writings can be viewed as treating powerful symbols that "say" something about the value of females.

< previous page

page_130 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_131

next page > Page 131

Chapter XIV Language Change and Bilingualism Language change is, nowadays, one of the best established facts of linguistic science. Language is always in a state of flux, with outside and inner pressures and tensions molding and modifying, causing new forms to be added and old forms to be deleted. One of the factors to be considered in the theory of language change is what and/or who initiates the changes? In the observations made, if male/female linguistic behavior has been considered at all, it is generally believed that women are more conservative in their language habits and "maintain the purity of the language." It is said that the speech of women is more archaic, and indeed, Cicero said that when he heard his mother-in-law speak, it was to him "as if he heard Plautus or Nævius, for it is more natural for women to keep the old language uncorrupted, as they do not hear many people's way of speaking and thus retain what they have first learnt. " 245 These kinds of assumptions are based on the belief that "innovations are due to the initiative of men." There are, of course, situations where women are cloistered or kept barefoot down in the holier with little or no contact with speakers other than the immediate community. Women in those situations would not likely be innovators of change. Language change involves linguistic processes that alter sounds from one to another, for example 'learnt' to 'learned'; and that change words and parts of words, such as 'thou gavest' becoming 'you gave'. Besides linguistic processes that modify language, there are sociological and historical factors that affect language. Status must be considered, particularly in the matter of women's language. When lower status is associated with a certain form'ain't', for examplewomen are less likely to use that form because they are low enough already. Jespersen gives further examples of the important part that women have played in sound change and other

< previous page

page_131 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_132

next page > Page 132

changes in language. He refers to the weakening of the fully trilled tongue-point /r/in French and also notes the involvement with status change. 246 Women experienced a different kind of status in the forming of the United States. There was a shortage of women in those .days and this scarcity had its effect on behavior. The traditional "Gentlemen and Ladies" became "Ladies and Gentlemen" in an address.247 It was not difficult for women to impose language behavior which was thought proper onto males who had to succumb to this numerical tyranny. Differing roles apparently have influenced linguistic change in the French language in recent times. French, of course, has masculine and feminine grammatical genders, which are obligatory to each noun in the language. Le docteur (the doctor) is masculine, along with book, lunch, and shoe. La sentinelle (the guardsman) is feminine, along with lesson, meat, and mouth. The usual pronoun referent would be the masculine pronoun "he" for the first group and the feminine pronoun "she" for the second group. However, if the doctor is female, the pronoun referent now is "she." This is not so in the case of the guardsman, which retains the feminine form elle in grammatical concord with the feminine gender noun.248 Guardsmen have not changed sex throughout the centuries, but doctors have, and this role change appears to have affected the linguistic habits. In an historical event of grand proportions, social revolution brought change to the Russian language, Since 1917 women have taken on jobs and positions that were traditionally male/masculine designated, and thus new forms and feminine referents have made their way into the language: obsledovatel'nica ('female investigator'), syrovarka ('female cheese-maker'), and frezerovcica* ('female milling-machine operator').249 A factor in the degree. of influence male and female have in language change is the matter of written or unwritten language and literate or nonliterate speakers. Some scholars have thought that speakers who are literate tend to keep the old forms intact, and since in many countries only the males are given education, the male/female differences would parallel literacy and nonliteracy in the language. Jespersen believed that this was true of the Japanese language. In the Cham language of Vietnam, a similar situation occurs. A linguistic investigator of Cham notes that women streamline the linguistic forms perpetuated by the Cham script.250 She also notes that boys evidence a change in speech when they begin to study the script and their speech

< previous page

page_132 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_133

next page > Page 133

becomes more like their fathers'. There could be other reasons, of course, why boys would want to imitate their fathers at this point in their lives. Nevertheless, it appears that women's speech, may well be a preview of the Chain language of the future. Hoenigswald, a renowned linguist, discusses universals of linguistic change and does not credit literacy with such powers in linguistic maintenance. 251 Before any definitive statements can be made, we must have more data, along with careful, extensive studies. It would be enlightening, in the study of language change, to seriously consider male/female differences. Women's language, which might otherwise be ignored, may retain root-words that have been lost in the general or the literary language. This has happened in the Zulu languages. Both Xosa and Zulu have a special dialect called Isihloonipa, which is restricted to women. Literally, the term means "the language of having shame," the idea resulting from a superstitious belief that if a woman uses a word identical with or similar to her husband's name or nickname, it will bring him ill-luck. Every generation changeor change of personnelcauses the speakers to revert to the archaic forms; thus the women maintain very old forms of the language.252 Language change is often related to bilingualism or bidialectalism, in addition to the relationship to literacy. Earlier we noted that where there is illiteracy, it is most often the females who are illiterate. In bilingual situations the men are more likely to talk the lingua franca, if it is a case of outside contacts being necessary for economic purposes. On the other hand, if the people belong to a market economy, and the women do the selling, then, of course, they know the necessary vocabulary to carry out the bargaining. This is a special kind of bilingualism; the various degrees and kinds of bilingualism make it extremely difficult to measure, in the same way that literacy/illiteracy is difficult to measure. There is also the matter of aural and oral bilingualism. Many females in bilingual situations can understand the other language but cannot speak it. This is the situation with hundreds and thousands of Spanish-speaking women in the border states of the United States. Their husbands go out to work and learn a workable English, and they stay close to home, buying at the neighborhood grocery in Spanish, and learn only a passive, listening English. One of the best known examples of male/female differences is found in the Caribbean area, and, as I noted in the first chapter, was the

< previous page

page_133 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_134

next page > Page 134

first one reported in the seventeenth century among the American Indian languages. Several centuries ago, a tribe of Karina Indians (True Carib) from the mainland, conquered an Antillean tribe or nation that spoke an Arawakan language. Apparently the conquerors did not bring their women, and so the language which was used as a means of communication was essentially Arawakan, with overlays of vocabulary from the Carib language of the conquerors. A contemporary linguist, Douglas Taylor, has studied the situation carefully, and reports the following: . . . the language of the conquerors came to be known as the "men's speech," and was learnt with diminishing success by subsequent generations of Island-Carib youths; while that of the conquered Arawakan-speaking indigenous subsisted as the "women's speech" and continued to be, in fact, the mother tongue and first language of all. Today, although traces of this linguistic apartheid may still be found among the Black Carib of Central America, such differences now amount to little more than would, in English, those between endure and bear, beverage and drink, feeble and weak, were the members of these pairs but synonyms belonging, respectively to the speech of men and to that of women. 253 Today most of the Carib men's language has been lost, though there are remainders and the women know them and use them when they want to be funny or put on the appearance of being mannish. Another bilingual situation that is important for its extent and dynamic continuance is the Spanish and GuaranÍ bilingualism of Paraguay. The male and female variances are different in kind from those of the Carib-Arawak situation. A linguist who has studied the language behavior in Paraguay relates the use of Spanish and GuaranÍ respectively to dimensions of solidarity and power. Interesting differences turn up in the observations of male/female use. For example, young men tend to use Spanish when they start to court, in order to show respect. As the intimacy increases and solidarity increases, they switch to GuaranÍ, and language style that is used in familiar situations. The matter of topics also has something to do with language choice. Between equals, it was observed that jokes, politics, sports, and women are discussed in GuaranÍ, whereas school subjects, legal matters, and business affairs are discussed in Spanish254

< previous page

page_134 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_135

next page > Page 135

In a previous chapter I noted that Japanese women were superior in the writings of the literature during the period when Chinese was being used at court. This is a remarkable illustration of a monolingual condition actually being an advantage. The males, who were bilingual, were not able to excel in their writings because of the restrictions put upon them in writing in their own vernacular. Another unusual situation is from Africa. The Sango language is spoken in the Central African Republic, and a linguist who has lived there for many years and knows the language well reports that, "Men claim not only that the women living in the towns speak the language better than they do but also that the Sango of the women sounds good: anzere rningi 'it is very sweet'." 255 In summary, we see that there are so many different situations and so many different mixes of male/female linguistic behavior in relationship to other things that are happening in society that we must honestly admit that there is no evidence one way or the other that either males or females are more creative or more influential in linguistic abilities. It is clear, however, that both males and females have the potential for many varieties and are constantly creating new ways to communicate across language barriers. For further study Unless given here, references are found in the Bibliography. The computer has added new dimensions to the interactions between male and female. The exchanges that are possible nowadays extend to those who have never met and may never see or hear each other. Thus, the dialogue takes on characteristics that people have not had to deal with previously. Shy people can "speak" boldly; angry people can speak crudely; business messages can turn into comedy. This is language change that is triggered by a medium, analogous to changes in language that writing and printing caused in previous centuries. Historians should keep a log of electronic interactions and "the language of the superhighway."

< previous page

page_135 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_136

next page > Page 136

Chapter XV An Androgynous Language-The Future Tense Language Planning In any behavioral change adjustments with resultant strains and tensions are inevitable. In some instances of behavioral change the strains are so minor one hardly notices them. In the matter of change in male and female patterns, the stakes are inestimably high and the emotions are at peak level; therefore, the strains and tensions are enormous. In situations as potentially explosive as these, persons who lose their sense of humor lose themselves. Extremes of behavior will occasionally occur and there will be seemingly endless chaos. But, as in all changes of behavior, the end result will again be an orderly language system with acceptance and peaceful coexistence. Until we get to that peaceful end, we will, like our immigrant ancestors, wander between two worlds, belonging to neither one nor the other, but working toward that integrated whole which will be our permanent linguistic homeland. Today, dialogues and conversations are taking new forms. Both men and women are learning new styles and modifying linguistic forms with which they are no longer comfortable. It is possible to elevate women to equal consideration and respect without putting men down. Some changes taking place today are being accepted in a relatively easy and smooth way. We have all been observing some examples. The several-volume set of reference books listing important persons in the technical world has for 65 years been known as American Men of Science. Recently the editors changed the rifle with little or no fanfare, at least to the public, to American Men and Women of Science. The stylebook of the U.S. Government Printing Office now includes "Ms." in its list of acceptable titles. More and more people are using the alternatives "he or she" and "him and her" rather than the lone form "he"

< previous page

page_136 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_137

next page > Page 137

or "him" in their speaking and writing. The particular illustrations that I have noted are from men speakers as well as womenmen who have important positions such as presiding officers, or mayors, or chancellors. Someone has suggested that the form s/he could be a useful device in the written language. It seems worth trying. Editors of journals are publishing revised editorial policies advocating change that will "eliminate the subtle forms of discrimination against women which so often are practiced as a matter of course in the process of discussion and writing." The Washington Post issued a memo to the editorial staff: "Words like divorcée, grandmother, blonde or housewife should be avoided in all stories where, if a man were involved, the words divorcé, grandfather, blonde or householder would be inapplicable." 256 Advertisements now include such expressions as, "The officers and crew of S.S. ____ are men and women of gentle manners who speak your language." Government, business, and school forms are being revised with terminology that includes both male and female: "this student" instead of "this man." A news magazine recently substituted ''Person of the Year" for "Man of the Year." A newspaper account of a recent betrothal gave equal space to the education and career accomplishments of both bride and groom. A 200-year-old coeducational college is changing the last stanza of its Alma Mater, which says, "Men may come and men may go . . . ever to thy sons a pride." (Incidentally, the song was written by an alumnus who had six childrenall girls!) A major textbook company has published "Guidelines for Improving the Image of Women in Textbooks."257 Across the nation committees are combing the textbooks and newspapers and suggesting alternate wording such as the following: people, human beings, or person for men/man; telephone lineworker for lineman; seller for salesman; journalist or reporter for newspaperman; clergy for clergyman; police officer for patrolman or policewomen; cabin attendant for stewardess; business people for business men; Members of Congress for Congressmen; mail carrier for mailman; ordinary people for the common man/the man on the street; a farm couple for the farmer and his wife; homeowners and their children for a homeowner and his family; human energy for manpower; ancestors for forefathers; the women in the office for the office girls. A different focus is suggested for some phrasing: "Marie Curie did what few people could do" for "Marie Curie did what few peoplemen or womencould do." "Women in ancient Egypt had considerable

< previous page

page_137 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_138

next page > Page 138

control over property" for "The ancient Egyptians allowed women considerable control over property." 258 A news account reported, "A driver was stalled . . ." instead of "A woman stalled her car . . ." These changes are being made and suggested by both men and women, it should be noted. Males who are interested in fairness and consideration for all persons have come out with strong statements and guidelines.259 The examples quoted above are all articulated quite easily and move smoothly into speech acts without major adjustments in linguistic structures and patterns. There remain some difficult problems. There will be indecision and uncertainty until a solution is worked out for such anomalous forms as "Madame Chairman." The matter of pronoun referent is still a burden. The use of "he" alone is unsatisfactory in view of past history leaving women out of the scene. There need to be some evidence that the females are in consideration. Suggestions for a new pronoun that does not differentiate have been made on many. occasions. In the last century a serious attempt was made to add another form to the set of referents that would solve the he/she dilemma. Charles Crozat Converse, a musician and lawyer, introduced a new word, 'thon', which he constructed from 'that one' with the idea that it would take the place of 'he' or 'she'. By 1889 it had received some attention and, Converse claimed, had "gained the consent of many eminent philologists." His efforts made enough impact for the word to be included in Webster's second edition, where it was glossed as "a proposed genderless pronoun of the third person." Interest faded so completely, however, that the third edition of Webster's did not include it. Other recent terminology has been put forthall to no avail. The reasons are clearly linguistic, as I observed earlier. These pronouns belong to a set or class of linguistic forms that is not easily expandable. It is relatively easy to introduce new nouns into the language: margarine, polyester, and astronaut. But classes of words such as pronouns remain stable for hundreds of years without significant change. It is easier to change usage than to change the list of items being used. Linguistic changes down through the ages have followed linguistic patterns. Other changes advocated have been the order of items listed as in couplets: women and men instead of men and women; female and male instead of male and female. This kind of change would also be difficult, I believe, again for linguistic reasons. Rhythm in language is

< previous page

page_138 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_139

next page > Page 139

far more important than most people realizeeven linguists. These pairs are only a small sample of dozens of pairs in English that have been said as is for hundreds of years and will resist change not because of chauvinism but because the rhythms of accent and timing are familiar. Note other pairs that would also be difficult or impossible to change: bread and butter, meat and potatoes, milk and honey, bride and groom. A pair that does seem amenable to switching is "boys and girls" or "girls and boys." This pair does not seem to follow the strict ordering that the others preserve. Euphony also has a strong influence on what things can be combined and in what order. "Her or his" does not flow with ease as "His or her" because of the particular combinations of sounds. Salutations in business letters to companies or unknown persons is also a matter to be dealt with, although few suggestions and little experimentation have been tried. "Dear Sirs" no longer pleases everyone. "Dear Friend" has been offered, but somehow seems out of place to a business establishment. It would be additionally incongruous if the letter were a reproach of some kind. "Gentlepeople" has been suggested, but I suspect with more tongue-in-cheek irony than seriousness. "Ladies and Gentlemen" might accommodate in formal situations where the persons are unspecified or unknown. Serious and responsible people can experiment in areas that will encourage rational changes based on patterns of human behavior. Such a process may bring stability to the seeming chaos. Research in languages and linguistic studies allied with male/female social behavior should be undertaken in depth. There is much to be done yet in understanding the universalities of gender systems in all languages of the world. We don't even understand the gender system in English yet. In order to analyze and construct theories there is a crucial need for data. It would be useful, perhaps, to know more about the anomalous use of gender systems in other languages besides English. The matter of personification is of vital importance to the study of human beings and their relationship to their environment, and yet few studies have been made in languages of the world on this aspect of animate and inanimate relationship. And what of the languages of the world without gender systems? How do they deal with male/female referents? The matter of selectional restrictions or grammatical categories with regard to male/female conduct has not been explored sufficiently. Earlier I said that it would be useful to consider male/female linguistic patterns in the matter of language change. Recently several

< previous page

page_139 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_140

next page > Page 140

linguists set forth some interesting questions to explore in an attempt to find a theory of language change. 260 These same questions would be useful to deal with the matter of language change in male/female usage. Some general principles would take into consideration the following: (1) What are the general constraints on immediately succeeding language states? (2) How does one characterize transition between two stages of change? How are the transitional dialects distinguished in terms of archaic/innovating features? How does the transfer of features from one speaker to another take place? (3) How are the observed changes embedded within larger linguistic structures and extra-linguistic contexts? How are the variables distinguished between linguistic structures and social structures? (4) How does one evaluate changes in terms of their effect on both linguistic structures and performance factors? (5) What actuates the change process? Linguistic change may involve stimuli and constraints from both the society around and from the structure of language. Considering the potential number of variables that may influence language change, is it possible to predict change, or is this a seemingly unsolvable problem that is common to all studies of social behavior? Another possible area of research is in the area of technical instruments. One of the most commonly used instruments in phonetic studies is the sound spectrograph. This machine "was designed for analysis of voice output in the male range."261 Other sophisticated audio-sonic instruments are being developed which respond to the "human" voice. It turns out, however, that the equipment deals only with the male voice. This precludes female participation in many American scientific enterprises. So far all the statements made about male/female linguistic behavior that I can find are from societies with a strong male dominance pattern. It would be worthwhile to investigate the linguistic patterns in societies that are matrilineal and/or have strong female influence in the decision making of the community. There are matrilineal societies in India that might lend themselves to investigation of this kind. The prospects seem tantalizing. One such society is described: The point to be made clear is that. it is the female principle in society, rather than the assumption of dominant roles by individual women, which is strengthened through the customary inheritance and name succession in the female line. This is a subtle, but important, point. It changes, among other things, the

< previous page

page_140 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_141

next page > Page 141

nature of the brother-sister relationship and, above all, that of parents to their daughters. The strengthening of the female principle has such an impact on the general mentality that every facet of daily life is affected. 262 If one has faithfully observed and analyzed the language of the past few years, it is patently obvious that "change is here and here to stay." It is not, however, altogether clear in all instances which changes will be permanent and which are yet to come. The problems for education and career choice are implicit. Parents and teachers are relating to new forms and new dialogues which they never had to deal with on the basis of sex before. Child training in the future will be directed toward developing an androgynous nature rather than diminishing or deleting certain human characteristics. The matter of performance in certain careers, such as radio broadcasting, business conferences, and political meetings is affected by male and female differences in language. Women will learn to produce authoritative intonation patterns in speech in addition to passive listening cooings. Women will learn not to be so "sweet" and dainty and helpless in their voices, as they assume responsibilities that all adults must assume to keep a society running smoothly and pleasurably for all. Men will have to learn, as women have been doing for thousands of years, to stay in there and continue the conversation even after a put-down. Men are going to learn to respond to the command form, "Bring me an ashtray!" "The time has come when men must careif not for woman's sake, for man's," said Clare Boothe Luce.263 Men's relationships to society in terms of power and competition must be examined and modified. D.H. Lawrence observed that "there are two kinds of power: the power to dominate others, and the power to fulfill oneself." Lawrence wrote that "The leader-cum-follower relationship is a bore, . . . And the new relationship will be some sort of tenderness, sensitive, between men and men, and between men and women."264 I would suggest that perhaps the most urgent problem of human beings, if the ecologist and the peacemaker will bear with me, is the friendship of male and female. Personal satisfaction and fulfillment might preclude the "need" to wage war and contaminate the environment. Overpopulation and war are results of more profound problems. If the male/female relationships were satisfying to begin with, we would not have the need to try to "fulfill" ourselves with distracting activities. Robert Graves wrote, "The most important historical study of all, utterly dwarfing all economic and political ones,

< previous page

page_141 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_142

next page > Page 142

is for me the changing relationship between men and women down the centuries . . ." 265 Too often and for too long it has been the central theme that any relationship between male and female peers is only a sexual relationship. As someone has said, "The friendship of a man and woman is one of the most unexplored of all human experiences . . ."266 Unexplored it is, but not exactly new. Another scholar of a former generation noted that "the love (sex) relationship between men and women is only one of the many kinds of relationships possible and desirable, and that they must learn to accept each other primarily as human beings, and only secondarily as beings of different sex."267 This brings us back to the line drawing in the first chapter where we considered whether human/nonhuman or male/female had the higher priority. If the conceptual treatment of human beings moves toward the human having the higher hierarchy, then the language will likewise assume those shapes. Such a language can be called an androgynous language. The contemporary ideas revolving around androgyny seem to go back, in recent times, at least, to Coleridge's remark: "The truth is, a great mind must be androgynous."268 As we saw earlier, the mind of the Aztec and the Chinese probably had a realistic comprehension of the dual nature of human beingsor the androgynous nature. It is not unlikely that their language structure aided them in not distorting the balance between male and female principles. The Indo-European languages, with their obligatory sex and gender markings, make it more difficult to grasp qualities in the human being without their being relegated to a male or a female division. It is probable that in the origin of human beings, neither sex was more important, nor more dominant. In order to survive, both had to be equally important, in their own ways. In the development of civilizations, an imbalance gradually took over, and progressed with increasing ferocity, until the time when people began to talk of the Battle of the Sexes. Now, with the inventions of destruction readily available to anyone, it is time to return to the androgyny that precludes sexual competition and anticipates cooperation. Life is difficult enough as it is. Though the linguistic examples in this book make it appear that the language problem is worse for females, this is not the whole picture. Men's lives have been shortened by burdens too great for them to bear alone. The perpetual struggle has been harder on men than on the women who have received their benefits and pensions, and now "enjoy" them alone.

< previous page

page_142 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_143

next page > Page 143

Virginia Woolf developed the androgynous concepts more fully than any other writer up until her time. Beginning with Coleridge's idea, she worked toward the fusion in the mind that would evoke all its faculties: ". . . a mind that is purely masculine cannot create, any more than a mind that is purely feminine." . . . the androgynous mind is resonant and porous; . . . it transmits emotion without impediment; . . . it is naturally creative, incandescent and undivided. In fact one goes back to Shakespeare's mind as the type of the androgynous, of the man-womanly mind, . . . And if it be true that it is one of the tokens of the fully developed mind that it does not think specially or separately of sex, how much harder it is to attain that condition now than ever before. 269 Shakespeare may have been the greatest androgynous writer, but he was by no means the only one. Critics will go back now, and rediscover many other writers who wrote neither as male nor female. It is interesting to note that an early review of Jane Eyre observed that it had the mark of both a male and a female mind.270 George Bernard Shaw is another keen observer that people will reexamine now as they realize his androgynous attitudes. He explained that the secret of his extraordinary knowledge of women was due to his assuming that they were persons exactly like himself.271 He recognized the conflict in women for what it was: Social questions are produced by the conflict of human institutions with human feeling. For instance, we have certain institutions regulating the lives of women. To the women whose feelings are entirely in harmony with these institutions there is no Woman Question. But during the present century, from the time of Mary Wollstonecraft [British feminist, 1759-1798] onwards, women have been developing feelings, and consequently opinions, which clash with these institutions. The institutions assumed that it was natural to a woman to allow her husband to own her property and person, and to represent her in politics as a father represents his infant child. The moment that seemed no longer natural to some women, it became grievously oppressive to them. Immediately there was a Woman Question, which has produced Married Women's Property Acts, Divorce Acts, Woman's Suffrage in local elections, and the curious deadlock to which the Weldon and Jackson cases have led

< previous page

page_143 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_144

next page > Page 144

our courts in the matter of conjugal rights. When we have achieved eforms enough to bring our institutions as far into harmony with the feelings of women as they now are with the feelings of men, there will no longer be a Woman Question. No conflict, no question. 272 To live an androgynous life, one must have an androgynous language. Both males and females will work toward such a dynamic language that will exhibit neither chauvinism nor bitter grievances. The "new" language will be concerned with quality of life rather than power. People will work toward achieving a style that is a personal styleneither masculine nor feminine. Women should not try to copy the language of the male, even though it has been the language of politics and history. She should not try to speak like men, nor to think like men. This would only replace one inadequate model for another. Women will never be freed by imitating masculine behavior. Shaw insightfully commented: "It was clear to me that what women had to do was not to repudiate their femininity, but to assert its social value; not to ape masculinity, but to demonstrate its insuff'iciency."273 An androgynous language will be complementary rather than divisive. It will find balance and harmony in its completeness. It will establish an equilibrium in its unity rather than invidious separation. It will combine the abstract with the concrete; feeling with logic, tenderness with strength; force with graciousness. It will be a balanced tensionsupporting rather than opposing. It will be exuberant and vibrant, leaving out the weak and the brutal. It will not tolerate the simpering, helpless, bitchy sweetness of the "feminine" language. Nor will it tolerate the overwhelming smash of the opinionated and blustering "masculine" language. It will move away from the cruel distinctions that have wounded both male and female human beings. In the days when an androgynous language is spoken, women will be freed from the repression that has resulted in hesitant language or silence. Men will be freed to creativity when they can permit themselves sensitivity and intuition. Men will profit from passiveness when it implies an emptiness and receptiveness that is able to receive a new thought, a creation, an idea born in its time, an invention that will produce. The androgynous life will be the next important evolutionary development, for the Act of Creation will not be complete until male and female become aced event.

< previous page

page_144 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_145

next page > Page 145

Chapter Notes* Chapter I 1. de Beauvoir, 1953, p. 74. There is some doubt among classical scholars that Pythagoras wrote anything. Nevertheless, even if this quotation is not actually his, it reflects the philosophical environment of the times, and the theory of opposites in dualistic form was prevalent in his school of thinking. "There was a theoretical distinction between male and female per se: in the Table of Opposites, Female stands on the left side along with Darkness, Evil, the Unlimited and the rest." (Kathleen Freeman, 1966. The Pre-Socratic Philosophers. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 8283). Before condemning Pythagoras too harshly, though, remember also that Pythagoras addressed himself to women as well as to men, and women were among the first to enter his school. 2. Newsweek, December 6, 1971, p. 58. 3. Robin Morgan, 1972. Monster. New York: Random House. 4. The examples in this paragraph are from Jespersen 1921, pp. 242-254. 5. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 23, "Women," p. 705. * Complete bibliographical data for works that are of primary interest to male/female language, and which are in these notes cited by author's last name, are found in the Bibliography, which follows. Other references and works of peripheral interest are cited in full here.

< previous page

page_145 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_146

next page > Page 146

6. Lasch, 1907, p. 96. 7. R. Priebsch, and W. E. Collinson, [1934] 1968. The German Language. rev. 6th ed., London: Faber & Faber, p. 293. 8. Otto Weininger, 1906. Sex and character. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, p. 189. On the other hand, "Woman is soul," de Beauvoit, p. 167. 9. Barbara Bellow Watson, 1964. A Shavian guide to the intelligent woman. New York: W. W. Norton, p. 17. 10. Jespersen, 1921, p. 253. 11. Inge K. Broverman et al., 1970. "Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 34.1: 1-7. 12. Mary Jane Sherfey, 1966. "The evolution and nature of female sexuality in relation to psychoanalytic theory," Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 14.1: 121-122. (Parts of this article were reprinted in Robin Morgan, ed., 1970. Sisterhood is powerful. New York: Random House, pp. 220-230.) John Money, 1965. "Psychosexual differentiation," in Sex research: new developments. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 8. See also de Beauvoir, Chapter I. 13. With apologies to John Ciardi, World, May 22, 1973, p. 8, who, I hope, is still my friend after nullifying his beautiful palindrome. 14. Stanley, 1972. 15. J. C. Catford, 1968. "The articulatory possibilities of man," in Bertil Malmberg, ed., Manual of Phonetics. Amsterdam: North-Holland, p. 310. 16. Uhlenbeck's review, p. 94. 17. Robert Graves, 1964. Man does, woman is. New York: Doubleday. The idea was earlier articulated by de Beauvoir, p. 336.

< previous page

page_146 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_147

next page > Page 147

18. See Roman Jakobson, 1970. ''Linguistics," in Main trends of research in the social and human sciences. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 426-431, for other discussion and references on economics and linguistics. 19. R. M. Glasse and M. J. Meggitt, eds. 1969. Pigs, pearlshells and women: marriage in the New Guinea Highlands. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 20. Graves, 1965, p. 108. 21. See Watson (note 9), pp. 105-108. 22. Mary Ritchie Key, Spring 1971. "A language-category test: from a composite culture," duplicated by Orange County Department of Education. 23. Daniel Brinton, 1871. The Arawack language of Guiana. Philadelphia, p. 3. 24. Harold Key and Mary Ritchie Key, 1953. Vocabulario Mejicano [Aztec] de la Sierra de Zacapoaxtla, Puebla. Mexico, D. F.: Instituto LingüÍstico de Verano, Dirección General de Asuntos IndÍgenas, 232 pages. 25. For this discussion I have drawn heavily from the distinguished Mexican scholar, Miguel León-Portilla, 1963. Aztec thought and culture: a study of the ancient Nahuatl mind. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press; and "Philosophy in the cultures of ancient Mexico," in F. S. C. Northrop and Helen H. Livingston, eds., 1964. Cross-cultural understanding: epistemology in anthropology. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 35-54. (León-Portilla is not to be blamed for my interpretation!) Also see Alfonso Caso, 1958. The Aztecs. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press; Jacques Soustelle, [1955] 1961. The daily life of the Aztecs. Penguin Books; and George C. Vaillant, 1962. The Aztecs of Mexico, rev. by Susannah B. Vaillant. New York: Doubleday. 26. León-Portilla, 1963, p. 90, from note 25.

< previous page

page_147 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_148

next page > Page 148

Chapter II 27. Jane van Lawick-Goodall, 1971. In the shadow of man. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 28. Gail Shea, 1972. "Sex role socialization," in 51% Minority.Connecticut Conference on the Status of Women, National Education Association, USOE-0-72-2507, pp. 28-30. 29. John Money, 1965. "Psychosexual differentiation," in Sex research: new developments, ed. by John Money. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 12. 30. Doreen Kimura, 1973 "The asymmetry of the human brain," Scientific American 228.3 (March): 70-78. 31. Edward T. Hall, 1959. The silent language. New York: Doubleday, p. 49. 32. Diana Scully, and Pauline Bart, 1973. "A funny thing happened on the way to the orifice: Women in gynecology textbooks," American Journal of Sociology 78.4 (January): 1048. 33. Gerald Holton, 1970. "Presupposition in the construction of theories," in Edward M. Jennings, ed., Science and literature. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Anchor Books, p. 252. 34. Weston La Barre, 1954. University of Chicago Press. The human animal, pp. 276-277. 35. Graves, 1965, p. 50. Deborah and Barak are characters from the Old Testament (Judges 4 and 5). Deborah was a great judge of Israel, who ruled with remarkable intuitive wisdom. She commanded Barak to go against Sisera, the commander-in-chief of Jabin's army with 900 iron chariots. Barak agreed to go only if she would go with him. Together they won the battle and afterward sang together in triumph. Graves says that: No release from the present impasse can come, in my view, except from a Barak who has put himself under Deborah's orders. Barak means 'lightning', but is

< previous page

page_148 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_149

next page > Page 149

associated with báraka, or 'blessedness' that comes from divine Wisdom. Potential Deborahs are not uncommon even today, but the Jabins and Siseras make every effort to limit their activities and sap their self-reliance. The Deborahs either resign themselves to marriage, or commit some spectacular form of suicide, or are confined to the psychotic wards of mental hospitals. It is the Baraks who are missing from the scene, or who fail to answer their summons. 36. Richard Wilhelm, 1967. The I Ching: or Book of changes. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press (Bollinger series XIX). For further discussion of the duality of non-Western thought, see de Beauvoir, p. xvi. Chapter III 37. Philipp Wegener, 1885. Untersuchungen über die Grundfragen des Sprachlebens. I expand on his ideas in "Nonverbal behavior in speech acts," paper read at the conference, Sociology of Language and Theory of Speech Acts, Bielefeld, Germany, April 1973. This material is included in my book on nonverbal communication, 1975. "The context of situation in a theory of communication," Chapter VII, Paralanguage and kinesics. Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, pp. 122-134. 38. For definitions, see Harold Key and Mary Ritchie Key, 1953. Vocabulario Mejicano [Aztec] de la Sierra de Zacapoaxtla, Puebla. Mexico, D. F.: Instituto LingüÍstico de Verano, Dirección General de Asuntos IndÍgenas, 232 pages. 39. The Aztec example was taken from Erich Neumann, 1955. The Great Mother. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, pp. 200-202. 40. I am grateful to Harold Key for this exposition. I have consulted with several Aztec scholars about this word and they are in general agreement that the interpretation was misused. See also Miguel León Portilla's Aztec thought and culture, 1963: 126; Jacques Soustelle's The daily life of the Aztecs, [1955] 1961: 118-119; and George C. Vaillant's Aztecs of Mexico, 1962: 140-141; (for all three works, see note 25).

< previous page

page_149 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_150

next page > Page 150

41. Cratis D. Williams, 1962. "Metaphor in mountain speech," Mountain Life and Word 38.4 (Winter): 9-12. 42. Eric Partridge, 1963. Swift's polite conversation: with introduction, notes and extensive commentary. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 13-14, 28. 43. D. H. Lawrence, 1957. Lady Chatterley's lover. New York: Grove Press, pp. 72, 77-78. 44. Charles A. Ferguson, 1964. "Baby talk in six languages," The ethnography of communication, American Anthropologist 66.6 (December): 103-114. Chapter IV 45. Dorothy L. Sayers, 1947. "The human-not-quite-human," in Unpopular opinions: twenty-one essays. New York: Harcourt, Brace, p. 148. 46. Simeon Potter, [1950] 1959. "Etymology and meaning," Chapter 9, Our language. Penguin Books, p. 106. 47. de Beauvoir, 1953, pp. xvi, 167. 48. Ellis and Abarbanel, 1961. 49. Wilfred Funk, 1950. Word origins and their romantic stories. New York: Grosset and Dunlap, p. 247. 50. Wayland F. Dunaway, 1944. The Scotch-Irish of Colonial Pennsylvania. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, p. 132.

< previous page

page_150 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_151

next page > Page 151

Chapter V 51. See for example, such articles as: Roger Brown and Marguerite Ford, 1961. "Address in American English," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 62.2: 375-385; and Dan I. Slobin, Stephen H. Miller, and Lyman W. Porter, 1968. "Forms of address and social relations in a business organization," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 8.3: 289-293. 52. See Goldberg, 1968. 53. Donald Dean Parker, n.d. Scottish and Scotch-Irish ancestry research, (mimeo. edition) Santa Fe, New Mexico: n. p. 54. Rosalie Fellows Bailey, 1954. "Dutch systems in family naming: New YorkNew Jersey," Genealogical Publications of the National Genealogical Society 12: 12. 55. Elmira M. Townsend, n.d. [ca. 1951], revised by Mary Key, [1959] 1961 "Names and rifles," Latin American courtesy. Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics, pp. 25-27. 56. Mead, 1949, p. 266. 57. According to the Gallup Poll, Los Angeles Times, March 12, 1973, p. 14. 58. Atwood, 1950, pp. 10-18. 59. Zoltán Bánhidi et al., 1965. Learn Hungarian, Budapest, p. 52. 60. Ambrose Bierce, [1911, 1958] The devil's dictionary. New York: Dover, p. 88. New edition published 1967. The enlarged devil's dictionary. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, p. 197. 61. Los Angeles Times, June 4, 1972, p. 8.

< previous page

page_151 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_152

next page > Page 152

Chapter VI 62. Jespersen, 1921, p. 239. 63. Vance Rudolph, (1928-1939) "Verbal modesty in the Ozarks," Dialect Notes 6, American Dialect Society, p. 57. 64. Lynne S. Crumrine, 1968. "An ethnography of Mayo speaking," Anthropological Linguistics 10.2 (February): 1931. 65. Robert Murphy, 1959. "Social structure and sex antagonism," Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 15: 92. 66. For other examples, see Robin Morgan, 1970. Sisterhood is powerful. New York: Random House, pp. 526-527. Chapter VII 67. Lester Warren Sontag and Robert F. Wallace, 1935. "The movement response of the human fetus to sound stimuli," Child Development 6: 253-258. 68. Margaret Bullowa, 1970. "The start of the language process," Actes de Xe Congrès International des Linguistes Bucarest 1967. Editions de l'Academie de la Republique Socialiste de Roumanie, pp. 191-200. 69. T. Berry Brazelton, and Grace C. Young, 1964. "An example of imitative behavior in a nine-week-old infant," Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry 3.1 (January): 53-67. 70. Biological rhythms in psychiatry and medicine, 1970. Publication No. 2088, Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, pp. 4, 36-38. See also William S. Condon and Louis W. Sander, 1974. "Neonate movement is synchronized with adult speech: interactional participation and language acquisition," Science 183 (January 11): 99101.

< previous page

page_152 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_153

next page > Page 153

71. Peter H. Wolff, 1969. "The natural history of crying and other vocalizations in early infancy," in B. M. Foss, ed., Determinants of infant behavior IV. London: Methuen, pp. 81-109. 72. Ruth H. Weir, 1966. "Some questions on the child's learning of phonology," in Frank Smith and George A. Miller, eds, The genesis of language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, p. 156. 73. Philip Lieberman, 1968. Intonation, perception, and language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, p. 45. 74. References for several studies reflected in these paragraphs are found in Lewis, 1972. 75. O. C. Irwin, 1957. "Phonetical description of speech development in childhood," in L. Kaiser, ed., Manual of Phonetics. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company, pp. 403-425. Sister Helen Daniel Malone, 1954. "An analysis and evaluation of phonemic differences in the speech of boys and girls at the kindergarten, first, second and third grade levels," Dissertation, University of Michigan, microfilms A 54-1871. 76. Paula Menyuk, 1969. Sentences children use. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, p. 19. Mildred C. Templin, 1966. "The study of articulation and language development during the early school years," in Frank Smith and George A. Miller, eds, The genesis of language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, pp. 173-186. 77. Jean Berko [Gleason], 1958. "The child's learning of English morphology," Word 14: 150-178. Reprinted in Sol Saporta, ed., 1961 Psycholinguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 359-375. 78. Gleason, Jean Berko, n.d. 79. Norma Farquhar, Susan Dunn, and Elizabeth Burr, 1972. "Sex stereotypes in elementary and secondary education," Westside Women's Committee, Los Angeles. 80. Schuell, 1946.

< previous page

page_153 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_154

next page > Page 154

81. Mildred Dawson and Georgiana Collis Newman, 1966. Language teaching in kindergarten and the early primary grades. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, pp. 3-4. 82. Eleanor E. Maccoby, 1966. The development of sex differences. Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press, p. 26. 83. Patricia Sexton, 1970. "How the American boy is feminized," Psychology Today 3.8 (January): 23-29, 66-67. 84. Edward T. Hall, 1959. The silent language. New York: Doubleday, p. 120. 85. Stanchfield, 1970 (?). 86. Stevenson Smith, 1939. "Age and sex differences in children's opinion concerning sex differences," Journal of Genetic Psychology 54: 20. 87. Mirra Komarovsky, 1946. "Cultural contradictions and sex roles," American Journal of Sociology 52.3 (November): 187. Reprinted in Judith M. Bardwick, 1972. Readings on the psychology of women. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 58-62. 88. Hugh Sykes Davies, 1964. "Grammar and style," in Paul C. Wermuth, Modern essays on writing and style. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 19. 89. Kagan, 1964, especially pp. 156-163. 90. Richard L. Tobin, 1970. "Illiteracy, woman's worldwide burden," Saturday Review (September 5): 16. Chapter VIII 91. Ideas for this chapter were first presented at the annual meeting of the American Dialect Society, New York, December 1970. A slightly revised version of the paper was later published: Mary Ritchie Key, 1972. "Linguistic behavior of male and female," Linguistics: An

< previous page

page_154 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_155

next page > Page 155

International Review 88 (August): 15-31. Most of it is included with the permission of the publisher, in chapters VIII and IX. There are some revisions. 92. Complete references for the following examples are found in the bibliography. For linguistic rules that govern these examples see the articles: for Cham, Blood, 1962: 140-141; for Gros Ventre, Flannery, 1946: 134; for Koasati, Haas (Mary R.), 1944: 143; for Yana, Sapir, 1929: 208. 93. Suniti Kumar Chatterji, 1921. "Bengali Phonetics," Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies 2 (Pt I). London, p. 6. 94. Fischer, 1958. 95. Ralph W. Fasold, 1968. "A sociolinguistic study of the pronunciation of three vowels in Detroit speech," Washington, D. C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, mimeo. 96. Lewis Levine, and Harry J. Crockett, Jr., 1967 "Speech variation in a Piedmont community: postvocalic r," International Journal of American Linguistics 33.4 (Pt. II): 76-98. See also Shuy. 97. Elizabeth Uldall, 1964. "Dimensions of meaning in intonation," in David Abercrombie et al., In honour of Daniel Jones. London: Longmans, p. 274. 98. Brend, 1971. 99. Ben Graf Henneke, and Edward S. Dumit, 1959. The announcer's handbook. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 19. 100. Ekka, 1972, pp. 26-27. 101. Norma Faust, 1963. 102. Meredith, 1930, p. 476.

< previous page

page_155 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_156

next page > Page 156

103. Dwight Bolinger, 1968. Aspects of language. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, p. 112. See also Charles Barber, 1964. Linguistic change in present-day English. University of Alabama Press, pp. 105-106. 104. Greene, 1972, p. 63. 105. Wise, 1951. 106. Erades, 1956, p. 5. 107. Jespersen, 1921, p. 250. 108. I would particularly like to mention the extensive research project of Deanna Deeley Spehn. 109. Jo Freeman, "The building of the gilded cage," duplicated, KNOW, 16 pp.; and Edward M. Bennet and Larry R. Cohen, 1959. "Men and women: personality patterns and contrasts," Genetic Psychology Monographs 59: 101-155. 110. Lakoff, 1975, pp. 53 ff. 111. E. A. Levenston, 1969. "Imperative structures in English," Linguistics 50 (July), pp. 38-43. 112. Ben G. Blount, 1972. "Parental speech and language acquisition: some Luo and Samoan examples," Anthropological Linguistics 14.4 (April): 130. 113. Carolyn G. Heilbrun, 1973. Toward a recognition of androgyny. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, p. 161. 114. Jespersen, 1924, pp. 55-57. 115. Benjamin Lee Whorf, [ca. 1937]. "Grammatical categories," Language 21.1 (1945). Reprinted in John B. Carroll, ed., 1962. Language, thought, and reality: selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press; New York: John Wiley, pp. 87-101.

< previous page

page_156 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_157

next page > Page 157

116. Jerrold J. Katz and Jerry A. Fodor, 1963. ''The structure of a semantic theory," Language 39. 170-210. Reprinted in Jerry A. Fodor and Jerrold J. Katz, eds., 1964. The structure of language: readings in the philosophy of language. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, especially p. 517. 117. Material for this discussion is found in the following references: D. Terence Langendoen, 1969. The study of syntax, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 37. James D. McCawley, 1968. "The role of semantics in a grammar," in Emmon Bach and Robert T. Harms, eds., Universals in linguistic theory, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 140, 134. Paul M. Postal, 1966. "On so called 'pronouns' in English," Monograph on Languages and Linguistics 19, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, reprinted in David A. Reibel and Sanford A. Schane, eds., 1969. Modern studies in English, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, p. 208. Roderick A. Jacobs, and Peter S. Rosenbaum, 1968. English transformational grammar, Waltham, Massachusetts: Blaisdell, p. 63. Mansoor Alyeshmerni, and Paul Taubr, 1970. Working with aspects of language [workbook], New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, p. 184. Jeffrey Gruber, 1967. "Functions of the lexicon in formal descriptive grammar," Santa Monica: System Development Corporation, TM 3770/000/00, pp. 37, 24. 118. The last two examples are from Eli Ginzberg, 1966. Life styles of educated women. New York: Columbia University Press. 119. Jerome S. Bruner et al., 1956. A study of thinking. New York: John Wiley, pp. 7, 267. 120. Franz Boas, 1911. Introduction pp. 5-83 to "On grammatical categories," Handbook of American Indian languages, reprinted in Dell Hymes, ed., 1964. Language in culture and society, pp. 121-123. Benjamin Lee Whorf, 1956. "Grammatical categories," Language, thought, and reality. Edward Sapir and Morris Swadesh, 1964. "American Indian grammatical categories," reprinted in Hymes, 1964, pp. 101-111. 121. Francis P. Dinneen, 1967. An introduction to general linguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 152153.

< previous page

page_157 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_158

next page > Page 158

122. Samuel E. Martin, in Hymes, pp. 407-415. Chapter IX 123. Whorf, ca. 1937, pp. 91-92. 124. Jespersen, 1933, p. 190. 125. The following two examples are taken from Sutton, 1973, p. 8. 126. John B. Carroll, Peter Davies, and Barry Richman, eds., 1971. The American Heritage word frequency book. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 127. Key, 1971, p. 172. See the bibliography for other studies done on children's books. 128. Harry H. Johnston, 1922. A comparative study of the Bantu and Semi-Bantu languages. London: Oxford University Press, p. 230. 129. Sophie C. Hadida, 1933. Manners for Millions. New York: Doubleday, Doran, p. 94. 130. The Roberts English series: a linguistic program, book 3, 1966. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, p. 155. 131. For many enlightening examples, see Webster's Third New International Dictionary, 1966. Springfield, Massachusetts: G. & C. Merriam; and Louise Pound, 1949. "Extensions of usage of a pronoun," in Selected writings of Louise Pound, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, pp. 324-325. 132. William A. Stewart, 1969. "On the use of Negro dialect in the teaching of reading," in Joan C. Baratz, and Roger W. Shuy, Teaching black children to read. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, pp. 156-219. See also Svartengren, 1928-1939, p. 48. 133. Ashok R. Kelkar, 1964. "Marathi baby talk," Word 20.1: 47.

< previous page

page_158 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_159

next page > Page 159

134. Charles A. Ferguson, 1964. "Baby talk in six languages," American Anthropologist 66.6 (Pt 2), (December): 106109. 135. Jakobson, 1960, p. 541. 136. Rothstein, 1973. 137. Michalsen and tech 1962, p. 187; Vachek 1964, p. 192. 138. Svartengren, 1928-1939, p. 49. 139. C. R. MacKinnon of Dunakin, 1961. The Highlands in history. Glasgow, Scotland: Collins, p. 58. 140. Kate Millett, 1970. Sexual politics. New York: Doubleday, p. 316. 141. Webster' s Third New International Dictionary, 1966. Springfield, Massachusetts: G.& C. Merriam. See also examples in Erades, p. 3. 142. Jespersen, 1924, p. 230. 143. For some penetrating ideas, see de Beauvoir 1953, pp. xvi, 167. 144. Jespersen, 1924, p. 236. Roman Jakobson, 1966. "On linguistic aspects of translation," in Reuben A. Brower, ed., O n translation. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 232-239. 145. L. S. Vygotsky, [1934] 1962. Thought and language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, p. 128. 146. Harold Whitehall, 1956. Structural essentials of English. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, p. 110. 147. Svartengren 1928-1939. 148. For example, see Stene [before 1954]; and Langenfelt, 1951. 149. Key, 1971.

< previous page

page_159 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_160

next page > Page 160

150. See, for example, Erades; Michalsen and tech; Svartengren; and Vachek. 151. For an excellent discussion on this poem and "Sex and the humanization of modem life," see Barry A. Marks, 1964. e. e. cummings. New Haven, Connecticut: College and University Press, pp. 72-75. 152. Rothstein, 1973. 153. Don and Aileen Nilsen, n.d. Chapter X 154. Letters, Sept. 20, 1748, ed. John Bradshaw. London: Alien and Unwin [1892; repr. 1926], vol. 1: 149. 155. Fischer, 1958, p. 484. 156. L. W. Lanham, 1963. "English in South Africa," University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, Institute for the Study of Man in Africa, p. 35. 157. Trudgill, 1972, p. 180. 158. Steadman, 1938. 159. Abstract by Louisa Stark, of J. M. Lope 'Blanch, 1970. "La -r final del español mexicano y el sustrato nahua," International Journal of American Linguistics 36.1 (January): 54. 160. Robert A. Hall, Jr., 1964. Introductory linguistics. New York: Chilton Books, p. 67. 161. Jespersen, 1921, pp. 241-242. 162. Sapir, 1929, p. 212. 163. See Ellis and Abarbanel for bibliography.

< previous page

page_160 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_161

next page > Page 161

164. Samuel E. Martin, "Speech levels in Japan and Korea," in Dell Hymes, pp. 407-415. See also Roy Andrew Miller, 1967. The Japanese language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 277-286. 165. Shuy, 1969. 166. Roger D. Abrahams, 1964. Deep down in the jungle. Hatboro, Pennsylvania: Folklore Associates, p. 36. Ulf Hannerz, 1969 Soulside. New York: Columbia University Press, p. 95. Frank Riessman, 1966. "The culture of the underprivileged," in Staten W. Webster, ed., The disadvantaged learner. San Francisco: Chandler, pp. 53-61. Walter A. Wolfram, 1969. A sociolinguistic description of Detroit Negro speech. Washington, D C.: Center for Applied Linguistics. 167. Gunnar Myrdal, [1944] 1962. An American dilemma. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 1073-1078. Helen Hacker also compares the "Castelike Status of Women and Negroes" in a well-developed chart, in "Women as a minority group," Social Forces 30 (October 1951): 60-69. 168. Webster' s Third New International Dictionary. Chapter XI 169. The material in this chapter also is found in my book on nonverbal communication, Key 1975, Chapter VIII, "Dialects of nonverbal behavior and special message systems." 170. Weston La Bane used the term "body language" in an early article, 1947. "The cultural basis of emotions and gestures," Journal of Personality 16.1 (September); also in Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series S-157; also in D. G. Hating, ed., 1956 Personal character and cultural milieu, Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press. 171. George L. Trager, 1958. "Paralanguage: a first approximation," Studies in Linguistics 13: pp. 1-12. Reprinted in Hymes, 1964, pp. 274-288.

< previous page

page_161 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_162

next page > Page 162

172. The term "kinesics" was introduced by Ray L. Birdwhistell in 1952. See Kinesics and context. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1970. 173. William Wells Newell, [1883] 1963. Games and songs of American children. Reprinted by Dover Publications, New York, pp. 5-6. 174. Los Angeles Times, April 25, 1966, p. 26. 175. George M. Cowan, 1948. "Mazateco whistle speech," Language 24.3: 280-286. Reprinted in Hymes, 1964, pp. 305-311. 176. Alfred S. Hayes, 1962. "A tentative schematization for research in the teaching of cross-cultural communication," International Journal of American Linguistics 28.1 (Pt. II), (January): 155-167. 177. Carroll L. Olsen, 1972. "Voice register and intonation levels in two dialects of Spanish," paper read at the Modern Language Association. 178. Floyd M. Cammack and Hildebert Van Buren, 1967 "Paralanguage across cultures," The English Language Education Council, Bulletin 22 (November): 8. 179. Henry Balfour, 1948. "Ritual and secular uses of vibrating membranes as voice-disguisers," Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 78: 45-69. 180. William L Samarin, 1966. The Gbeya language. Berkeley: University of California Press, p. 39. 181. George Devereux, 1949. "Mohave voice and speech mannerisms," Word 5.3: 268-272. Reprinted in Hymes, 1964, pp. 267-271. 182. Adam Kendon and Andrew Ferber, 1973. "A description of some human greetings," in R.P. Michael and J. H. Crook, eds., Comparative ecology and behaviour of primates. London: Academic Press.

< previous page

page_162 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_163

next page > Page 163

183. Dick and Jane as victims, 1972. Women on Words and Images. Princeton, New Jersey, p. 40. 184. Argyle et al, 1968. 185. Werner Beinhauer, 1934. "Über 'Piropos': eine Studie über spanische Liebessprache," Volkstum und Kultur der Romanen 7: 111-163. 186. Shulamith Firestone, 1970. The dialectic of sex. New York: William Morrow, pp. 101-102. 187. Jane van Lawick-Goodall, 1971. In the shadow of man. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, p. 81. 188. Ashley Montagu, 1971. Touching: the human significance of the skin. New York: Columbia University Press, p. 208. 189. Richard Brilliant, 1963. Gesture and rank in Roman art. New Haven, Connecticut: The Academy. 190. Peter F. Ostwald, 1960. "Human sounds," in Dominick A. Barbara, ed., Psychological and psychiatric aspects of speech and hearing, p. 126. 191. Ian Hindmarch, 1969. "Pupil size and non-verbal communication," in NATO Symposium on nonverbal communication, eds. Michael Argyle and Ralph Exline, Wadham College, Oxford, p. 26. 192. Birdwhistell, 1970, p. 159. Chapter XII 193. Ann Stanford, ed., 1972. The women poets in English: an anthology. New York: McGraw-Hill, p. xxxvii. Robert Hutchinson, ed., 1969. Poems of Anne Bradstreet. New York: Dover Publications, p. 13.

< previous page

page_163 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_164

next page > Page 164

194. Quoted in Ann Stanford, "Anne Bradstreet . . . ," 1966. The New England Quarterly 39.3 (September): 375. 195. Hutchinson (see note 193), p. 9. 196. Woolf, 1929, p. 65. See also quotations in Adburgham. 197. Ann Stanford, ed., 1972. The women poets in English (see note 193), p. xxxvi. 198. Carol Ohmann, 1971. "Emily Brontë in the hands of male critics," College English 32.8 (May): 906-913; especially pp. 906 and 908. 199. Greene, 1972, especially p. 63. 200. Greene, 1972, pp. 66-67. 201. Woolf, 1929, p. 64. 202. Herbert Marder, 1968. Feminism and art: a study of Virginia Woolf. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 1415. 203. Gilbert Keith Chesterton, [1913] 1966. The Victorian age in literature. Oxford University Press, p. 48. 204. Noel Gilroy Annan, 1952. Leslie Stephen: his thought and character in relation to his time. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, p. 226. 205. Woolf, 1929, p. 181. 206. W. G. Aston, 1907. A history of Japanese literature. London, 410 pages. Donald Keene, 1955. Japanese literature. New York: Grove Press, pp. 67-73. The Kokusai Bunka Shinkokai, ed., 1948. Introduction to Classic Japanese literature, Tokyo: Kokusai Bunka Shinkokai (Society for International Cultural Relations), p. 443. Roy Andrew Miller, 1967. The Japanese language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 38-39.

< previous page

page_164 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_165

next page > Page 165

207. Aston (see note 206), pp. 55-56. 208. Aston (see note 206), p. 232. 209. Encyclopædia Britannica, 1965, vol. 5, s.v. "Chinese literature." 210. Woolf, 1929, p. 80. 211. C. R. MacKinnon of Dunakin, 1961. The Highlands in history. Glasgow, Scotland: Collins, p. 82. 212. Samuel Butler [1897] 1967. 213. Woolf, 1929, pp. 51- 52. 214. Los Angeles Times, November 7, 1972, pp. 1, 6-7. 215. Florence Howe, "Identity and expression: a writing course for women" (mimeo.), p. 4. 216. Goldberg, 1968. 217. Lawrence Kohlberg, 1966. "A cognitive-developmental analysis of children's sex-role concepts and attitudes," in Eleanor Maccoby, ed., The development of sex differences. Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press. 218. Woolf, 1929, p. 91. 219. Quoted from Mrs. Leslie Stephen, 1883. Notes from sick rooms, p. 5, in Noel Gilroy Annan, 1952 Leslie Stephen: his thought and character in relation to his time. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, p. 100. 220. Winifred Holtby, 1932. Virginia Woolf. London: Wishart and Company, pp. 12-14. 221. George K. Anderson, 1962. Old and Middle English literature from the beginnings to 1485. New York: Collier Books, p. 18.

< previous page

page_165 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_166

next page > Page 166

222. Jack Hamilton, 1973. "A conversation with Sane Austen," Intellectual Digest (May): 17. 223. Baecklund, 1956, p. 19. 224. Bernice Sandler et al., 1972. "Women in the curriculum," Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges, 1818 R Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20009, (November): 2. 225. Woolf, 1929, pp. 45-46. 226. D. H. Lawrence, 1962. Lady Chatterley's lover. New York: Grove Press. 227. The remarks following are taken from my article, 1971. "The role of male and female in children's books," Wilson Library Bulletin 46.2 (October): 174-175. 228. Pearl S. Buck, 1932. East and West and the novel. Peking, pp. 4-5, 24. 229. Francis L. K. Hsu, 1953. Americans and Chinese: two ways of life. New York: Henry Schuman, pp. 23-25. 230. Caroline Bird, 1968. Born female: the high cost of keeping women down. New York: David McKay, p. 27. See also Adburgham. Chapter XIII 231. Ajax, line 293. 232. Key, 1975, Chapter V, "The function of silence in nonverbal communication." 233. Sidney J. Baker, 1951. "Autonomic resistances in word association tests," Psychoanalytic Quarterly 20: 275-283.

< previous page

page_166 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_167

next page > Page 167

234. Ralph (G. Martin, 1969. Jennie: the life of Lady Randolph Churchill: the romantic years 1854-1895. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, p. 143. 235. The Oxford dictionary of quotations, 1955. New York: Oxford University Press, p. 280. 236. See Olsen, who discusses why writers don't write. 237. Sir James George Frazer, 1919. Folk-lore in the Old Testament: studies in comparative religion, legend and law, vol. 3. London: Macmillan, pp. 71-81. 238. Sapir, 1915, p. 179. 239. Corinne Geeting, 1971. ''The tyranny of women's liberation," ETC: A review of General Semantics 28.3 (September): 358-359. 240. Zimmerman and West, 1973. The other study was a student paper by Kester [before 1975]. 241. Michael Argyle, Mansur Lalljee, and Mark Cook, 1968 "The effects of visibility on interaction in a dyad," Human Relations 21.1 (February) p. 15. 242. Gleason, Jean Berko, n.d. 243. Barbara Bellow Watson, 1964. A Shavian guide to the intelligent woman. New York: W. W, Norton, p. 189. 244. "Shaw at Peak," 1973. Book Selection, Intellectual Digest (January), p. 27. Chapter XIV 245. Jespersen, 1921, p. 242. 246. Jespersen, 1921, p. 244. For sound change in the Spanish language see Gregorio Salvador, 1952. "Fonetica masculina y fonetica

< previous page

page_167 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_168

next page > Page 168

femenina en el habla de Vertientes y Tarifa (Granada), in Sever Pop, ed., Orbis 1.1: 19-24. 247. Harvey Wish, 1950. Society and thought in early America. New York: David McKay, p. 573. 248. André Martinet, 1962. A functional view of language. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 15-19. 249. Rothstein, 1973. 250. Blood, 1962. 251. Henry M. Hoenigswald, 1963. "Are there universals of linguistic change?" in Joseph H. Greenberg, Universals of language, Chapter 2, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, pp. 23-41. 252. Harry H. Johnston, 1922. A comparative study of the Bantu and Semi Bantu languages. London: Oxford University Press, vol. II, p. 89. 253. This information was given to me by Douglas Taylor in correspondence. Taylor has published extensively on the linguistics of this area and has a book in progress on these aspects. 254. Joan Rubin, 1962. "Bilingualism in Paraguay," Anthropological Linguistics 4.1: 52-58. 255. William J. Samarin, 1967. Field linguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 62. Chapter XV 256. Spokeswoman 1.4 (August 28, 1970): 5. 257. Scott, Foresman and Company, 1972. 258. Anon., "Guidelines . . . ," Scott, Foresman and Company, (see note 257), pp. 6-7.

< previous page

page_168 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_169

next page > Page 169

259. Gardner; Bosmajian; and Sutton. 260. Uriel Weinreich, William Labov, and Marvin I. Herzog, 1968. "Empirical foundations for a theory of language change," in W. P. Lehmann and Yakov Malkiel, eds., Directions for Historical Linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press, pp. 183-187. 261. John Lind, ed., 1965. Newborn infant cry, Acta Paediatrica Scandinavica, Supplement 163, Uppsala, p. 51. 262. U.R. Ehrenfels, 1964. "The common elements in the philosophy of matrilinear societies in India," in F.S.C. Northrop and Helen H. Livingston, eds., Cross-cultural understanding: epistemology in anthropology. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 105-124. 263. Clare Boothe Luce, 1973. "Woman: A technological castaway," Britannica Book of the Year, p. 29. 264. Lady Chatterley's lover, 1957. Introduction by Mark Schorer, New York: Grove Press, p. 13. 265. Robert Graves, 1965, p. 101. 266. Heilbrun, 1964, p. 100. 267. Dallas Kenmare, 1960. The nature of genius. London: P. Owen, p. 94, paraphrasing John Macmurray, 1935. Reason and emotion. London: Faber and Faber. 268. Specimens of the table talk of the late Samuel Taylor Coleridge, vol II, London, 1835, p. 96. 269. Woolf, pp. 102-103. For more historical information on the androgynous concept, see Ruth Gruber, 1935. Virginia Woolf: a study. Leipzig: Bernhard Tauchnitz, pp. 86-87. 270. Carol Ohmann, 1971. "Emily Brontë in the hands of male critics," College English 32.8 (May): 907.

< previous page

page_169 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_170

next page > Page 170

271. Quoted in Barbara Bellow Watson, 1964. A Shavian guide to the intelligent woman. New York: W. W. Norton, p. 21. 272. George Bernard Shaw, 1967. "The problem playa symposium" in James B. Hall and Barry Ulanov, eds., Modern culture and the arts. New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 346. 273. Quoted in Watson (see note 271), p. 23.

< previous page

page_170 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_171

next page > Page 171

Appendix A Guidelines In 1975, the year that this book was originally released, the systemwide administration of the University of California sent out a memo* to all the campuses announcing a policy statement from President David S. Saxon that had to do with gender-related terms. Across the nation similar policy changes were being made, but it was important that one of the great universities took a lead on this issue. The memo advised writers of administrative documents to construct sentences so that gender-related terms would be unnecessary. When it was impossible to avoid such terms, then both pronouns should be used: "he/she" or "his/her." Also the term "chairperson" was to replace ''chairman." The General Counsel modified the statement slightly for Regental materials, but, in any case, this was a profound change in vision and commitment. Human beings have always had guidelines to keep their communities functioning in a systematic way. In pristine times, small groups passed on the rules of behavior in informal and ritualistic ways, as preliterate societies do today. We do not, of course, have written regulations of prehistoric societies. But surely the regulations that groups imposed upon themselves were the precursors of the more formal laws and rules that all people today choose either to follow or to ignore or disobey. When books became the prestigious evidence of "educated" and "civilized" people, etiquette manuals and guidebooks came into being. In publications today, one sees a recognition of both female and male populations. For example, the prestigious Mayo Clinic sends out * Memo to Systemwide Administrators, December 8, 1975, from President David S. Saxon's office, Berkeley, California.

< previous page

page_171 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_172

next page > Page 172

a health newsletter,# with full recognition that a physician may be female. Thus, in an article on coronary angioplasty, the text reads: " . . . your physician inserts a long, hollow tube . . . . Then he or she inserts a thinner [tube]." Textbooks give a better picture of our society and history by saying, "This is the story of strong men and women . . ." instead of ''This is the story of strong men and their women . . . ." Publishing houses have contributed substantially to the recognition of females participating in the mainstream, by producing guidelines for their writers and editors. Major newspapers have dealt with the issues by providing in-house guidelines. The editors of the Los Angeles Times update their style manual periodically with sensitive awareness to ethnic groups, gay men and lesbians, and older citizens, in addition to male and female readers. The Wall Street Journal Stylebook has only an entry on "race". The following list contains some older publications, which I have retained for historical reasons. In a sense, the list is a survey of the history and rationale of changing language. It is suggestivenot necessarily complete. The list contains some abbreviated forms; see the bibliography for complete information. Anon n.d. [before 1975]. "Guidelines for equal treatment of the sexes in McGraw-Hill Book Company publications." New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 11 pages. Anon 1972. "Guidelines for improving the image of women in textbooks," Sexism in Textbooks Committee of Women. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company, 9 pages. Anon 1975. "Guidelines for nonsexist use of language," American Psychological Association [= APA], APA Task Force on Issues of Sexual Bias in Graduate Education, American Psychologist 30: 682-684. #Mayo Clinic Health Letter 11.7 (July 1993), page 1. Information from the office of the Assistant Managing Editor, February 16, 1994, The Wall Street Journal, New York.

< previous page

page_172 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_173

next page > Page 173

1977. "Guidelines for nonsexist language in APA journals," American Psychological Association. Washington, D. C.: APA Publication Manual Task Force, 8 pages. Anon n.d. [before 1975] "Guidelines for publications," Committee on the Role and Image of Women in the Council and the Profession, The National Council of Teachers of English [= NCTE]. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English, 2 pages. [Also, see Nilsen, 1987; Nilsen et al., 1977.] Anon 1993. "LSA guidelines for nonsexist usage," [LSA = Linguistic Society of America.] LSA Bulletin 142 (December): 58. Baron, Dennis 1992. "MLA's nonsexist stylebook." [See bibliography.] Battistella, Edwin 1990. Review of Language, gender, and professional writing. [See bibliography.] Burr, Elizabeth, Susan Dunn, and Norma Farquhar 1973. "Guidelines for equal treatment of the sexes in social studies textbooks." Los Angeles, California: Westside Women's Committee, 12 pages. Coffey III, Shelby, editor [Los Angeles Times] 1993. Guidelines on ethnic and racial identification. [Inter-Office Correspondence] Los Angeles, California: Los Angeles Times, 19 pages. [n.d.] "Courtesy titles and sex references," 4 pages. In preparation. "Sexist and gender-neutral language," proposed by Frederick S. Holley, 5 pages draft.

< previous page

page_173 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_174

next page > Page 174

Coughenour, John C. et al. 1993. The effects of gender in the Federal Courts: the final report of the Ninth Circuit Gender Bias Task Force. Appendix D: "Policies, canons of ethics, and guidelines: rulemaking on gender bias and sexual harassment." [See bibliography.] Frank, Francine Wattman 1985. " . . . guidelines for non-sexist usage." [See bibliography.] Frank, Francine Wattman, and Paula A. Treichler 1989. Language, gender, and professional writing. Part Two, "Guidelines for nonsexist usage," pp. 135-278. [The Modem Language Association of America = MLA; see bibliography.] Garner, Bryan A. 1991. "Root out sexist language," in The elements of legal style, pp. 199-203. New York: Oxford University Press, 236 pages. Kasper, Carol 1988. AAUP questionnaire on the use of gender-biased language in university press publications and public documents. New York: American Association of University Presses, Task Force on Bias-Free Language, 11 pages. Kett, Merriellyn, and Virginia Underwood 1978. How to avoid sexism . . . [See bibliography.] Maggio, Rosalie 1992. The bias-free word finder . . . [See bibliography.] Marshall, Joan K. 1977. ". . . nonsexist indexing and cataloging." [See bibliography.] Miller, Casey, and Kate Swift 1988. The handbook of nonsexist writing. [See bibliography.]

< previous page

page_174 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_175

next page > Page 175

Nilsen, Aileen Pace 1987. "Guidelines against sexist language: a case history." [See bibliography.] Nilsen, Aileen Pace et al. 1977. Sexism and language. "Appendix: guidelines for nonsexist use of language in NCTE publications," pp. 181-191. [NCTE = National Council of Teachers of English; see bibliography.] Romm, Ethel Grodzins 1985. (Journal, American Bar Association.) [See bibliography.] Rubin, Joan 1977. "Why change language?" Honolulu County Committee on the Status of Women, Media Task Force for Equal Treatment of the Sexes in Media. Honolulu, Hawaii: Department of Corporation Counsel, 10 pages.

< previous page

page_175 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_176

next page > Page 176

Appendix B MLA Female Studies The Modem Language Association, New York, appointed the Commission on the Status of Women in 1969. One of their projects was a series of monographs with course outlines and bibliographies for programs in Women's Studies. The following was the course outline for linguistics, which was included in No. 2 of the series, with Florence Howe as editor. Other editors were: Sheila Tobias, Florence Howe and Carol Ahlum, Nancy Hoffman et al. See following bibliography. Linguistic Behavior of Male and Female MLA Female Studies, No. 2 1970 course outline [updated for 1971-1972] Mary Ritchie Key I Introduction II Other Languages of the World III Structural Features of Language Phonological Pronunciation Suprasegmental Patterns Grammatical Morphological Patterns Syntactic Patterns Grammatical Gender Semantic Grammatical Categories Gender and Sex Pronominal and Nominal Referents IV Nonverbal Correlates of Language Paralanguage and Kinesics

< previous page

page_176 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_177

next page > Page 177

V Male and Female Usage Language Skills and Education Styles of SpeechSocial Dialect Difference CONTEXT OF SITUATION PARTICIPANTS Vocabulary Differences Words male/female use Words used to refer to male/female Taboo words and euphemisms Status and Standard/Nonstandard Masculinity and Femininity Baby Talk Titles of Address, Proper Names, Greetings Male and Female Authors and Implications in Writing and Literature Literature Written for Male/Female Male and Female Language in Children's Books and Textbooks Bilingualism Implications in Teaching English as a Second Language DiscriminationTyranny of Language VI Language and Culture VII Language Change

Bibliography I General Furfey, Paul Hanly, "Men's and women's language," The American Catholic Sociological Review 5 (1944) pp. 218-223. Jespersen, Otto, Language: its nature, development, and origin. Chapter 13 "The woman," (1921) pp. 237-254. Kraus, Flora, "Die Frauensprache bei den primitiven Völkern," Imago 10.215 (1924) pp. 296-313. Pop, Sever, ed., "Le langage des femmes: enquête linguistique à l'échelle mondiale," Orbis 1.1 (1952) pp. 10-86; (second part) Orbis 2 (1953) pp. 7-34. Reik, Theodor, "Men and women speak different languages," Psychoanalysis 1-2 (Spring-Summer 1954) pp. 3-15.

< previous page

page_177 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_178

next page > Page 178

II Other Languages of the World Blood, Doris, "Women's speech characteristics in Cham," Asian Culture 3.3-4 (1962) pp. 139-143. Chamberlain, Alexander F., "Women's languages," American Anthropologist 14 (1912) pp. 579-581. Flannery, Regina, "Men's and women's speech in Gros Ventre," International Journal of American Linguistics 12.3 (1946) pp. 133-135. Haas, Mary R., "Men's and women's speech in Koasati," Language 20.3 (1944) pp. 142-149. Reprinted in Dell Hymes, Language in culture and society, pp. 228-233. Sapir, Edward, "Male and female forms of speech in Yana," in St. W. J. Teeuwen, ed. Donum Natalicium Schrijnen, 1929, pp. 79-85. Reprinted in David G. Mandelbaum, ed. Selected writings of Edward Sapir: in language, culture and personality (1968) pp. 206-212. III Structural Features of Language Colaclides, Peter, "The pattern of gender in Modem Greek," Linguistics: An International Review 5 (May 1964) pp. 6568. Frazer, James George, "A suggestion as to the origin of gender in language," Fortnightly (Review) 73 (January 1900) pp. 79-90. Furfey, Paul Hanly, "The semantic and grammatical principles in linguistic analysis," Studies in Linguistics 2.3 (Summer 1944) pp. 56-66. Hall, Robert A., Jr., "The 'neuter' in Romance: a pseudo-problem," Word 21.3 (December 1965) pp. 421-427. Jespersen, Otto, The philosophy of grammar, Chapter 17 "Sex and gender," (1924) pp. 226-243. Key, Mary Ritchie, "Linguistic behavior of male and female," Linguistics: An International Review 88 (August 1972) pp. 15-31. Maus, Marcel, "On language and primitive forms of classification." Journal de Psychologie: Normale et Pathologique 20 (1923) pp. 944-947. Reprinted in Dell Hymes, ed., Language in culture and society, pp. 125-127.

< previous page

page_178 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_179

next page > Page 179

Meillet, A., "Le genre feminin dans les langues Indo-Européennes," Journal de Psychologie: Normale et Pathologique 20 (1923) pp. 943-944. Reprinted as "The feminine gender in the Indo-European languages," Dell Hymes, ed., Language in culture and society, p. 124. Also in Meillet, Linguistique historique et linguistique générale (1926-1936) Vol. II, pp. 24-28. Musacchio, George L., "Milton's feminine pronouns with neuter antecedents," Journal of English Linguistics 2 (March 1968) pp. 23-28. Snegirev, I. L., "On a certain expression for feminine gender in the Zulu and Xosa languages," Iazyk I Myshlenie 3-4 (1935) pp. 281-284. See Margaret Schlauch, "Recent Soviet studies in linguistics," Science and Society: a Marxian Quarterly 1 (1936) pp. 152-167. Svartengren, T. Hilding, "The use of the personal gender for inanimate things," Dialect Notes 6 (1928-1939) pp. 7-56. IV Male and Female Usage Ackerman, Louise M., `Lady as a synonym for 'women'," American Speech 37.3 (1962) pp. 284-285. Goldberg, Philip, "Are women prejudiced against women?" Trans-Action 5.5 (April 1968) pp. 28-30. Hancock, Cecily Raysor," 'Lady' and 'woman'," American Speech 38.3 (October 1963) pp. 234-235. Key, Mary Ritchie, "The role of male and female in children's books," Wilson Library Bulletin 46.2 (October 1971) pp. 167-176. Shuy, Roger W., "Sex as a factor in sociolinguistic research," Mimeographed, Center of Applied Linguistics, 1969, 15 pages. Wentworth, Harold, and Smart Berg Flexner, Dictionary of American slang, "Preface" by Flexner, pp. vi-xv. [1960] 1967. V Language and Culture Altshuler, Nathan, "Linguistic forms as symbols of people," International Journal of American Linguistics 22.2 (1956) pp. 106-112.

< previous page

page_179 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_180

next page > Page 180

Trager, George L., "A scheme for the cultural analysis of sex," Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 18.2 (Summer 1962) pp. 114-118.

< previous page

page_180 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_181

next page > Page 181

Bibliography As I indicated earlier in my Introduction to the Second Edition, the audience that I am thinking of primarily is the generation of young adults who were born during the times when I wrote the 1975 edition. Every single one of you has some concern about being male or female; you all have male/female relationships in your school and work life, beyond your home life. What I am trying to say to you in these pages, is that you have an opportunity to look into these matters deeply; you have an opportunity to challenge your previous perspectives; and you have an opportunity to make your own voice heard. You should question everything you read. Ask the WH- questions, with a desire to discover the intention of the publication: Who wrote it? For whom was it written? Where was it published? When was it published? (Knowledge is transitory.) Why was it published? Assume that some of the ideas will be worthy of further study, some of the ideas will be as outdated as the fashions you wore five years ago, and some ideas will be seen to be junk. The problem with "junk" is that we do not always know the difference about things that might be useful to someone else, or even to you at another time. When you read, consider the Context of Situation,# which is a total of the WH- questions: Do not expect an idea of earlier times to be expressed in the way it would be today. When I compiled the bibliography on the linguistic behavior of male and female for the 1975 book, it was as complete as possible for that time. It included manuscripts and work in progress as signs of the times. I have left such manuscripts in the present edition because of # Chapter VII, "The Context of Situation in a theory of communication," in Paralanguage and Kinesics (Nonverbal communication), by Mary Ritchie Key. (Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, 1975) pp. 122-134.

< previous page

page_181 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_182

next page > Page 182

their historical significance; for example, Roger Shuy generously distributed his 1969 paper, which had wide influence, although it was not published until five years later. Those years of social change caused such activity that thrust the research and writings into a luxuriance of publishing, so that now it is virtually impossible to compile a comprehensive listing, without spending full time on the project. On the other hand, compiling a selective bibliography has it own obstacles. The matter of rediscovering the wheel comes into focus, after reviewing dozens of publications; it is difficult and sometimes impossible to decide whether a more recent publication really has something new to contribute to the understanding of the linguistic behavior of males and females. Out of the proliferation of titles, the following update can be considered selective. One of the purposes is to document the widespread participation, evidence of the many voices we are hearing in this outspoken era. I have tried to include authors from various age groups and various ethnic groups. I have tried to represent all nuances of topics and approaches. It is important to include varying theoretical and political positions. I have tried to be nonpartisan, because I do not think that any one person or group inevitably has ''the truth". There are always more than two sides of every argument in the intellectual debates. I urge you to read all sides and try to distinguish informed criticism from callow reactions. While you are reading, try to imagine other perspectives that might be represented in the research. I believe that reading and thinking deeply about opposing views is healthy to intellectual development. In this "instant" society, it is difficult to find time to read thoughtfully. While you are reading the different positions taken in the research, at times you will feel as though you are watching a ping-pong match, or a tennis gamewith your eyes darting back and forth. As you mature, you will experience the control of wisdom, that deters you from jumping on a bandwagon, with thoughtless abandon. But you are also human, with a great range of emotions and feelings. For myself, as a scholar, I have benefitted from reading opposing arguments; as a human, like you, I have run the gamut of emotions and attitudes: bemusement, anger, agreement, astonishment, pleasure, pain, satisfaction, fulfillment. I have included some items published in popular and news magazines, some of which were written by journalists. The amazing growth of such bibliographical entries indicates a wide appeal to a large

< previous page

page_182 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_183

next page > Page 183

public audience, which reflects a puzzlement, if not a hunger for better relationships between males and females. The end of the twentieth century is a time of hearing many voices, and for this reason, it is probably one of the most challenging and interesting periods in the history of human beings. It is a time of turning our heads to hear and see many perspectives being articulated beyond our own. I have tried to reach out and include entries from as many countries as possible, especially if the items reflected a cross-cultural approach. In the entries, usually I have written out fully the locations of publishers; I have not assumed that someone in China knows where Missoula is, without indicating the state. It is ironic that the present work reflects global interactions from an international community, but some universities are closing down their geography departments! The problem of accuracy is troublesome in these days of the exponential growth of journals, newsletters, and various kinds of publications that are laborious to locate. The Modem Language Association has an impeccable bibliographical operation, and one of their requirements is that a bibliographical entry must be personally audited. I regret that I have not been able to do this for every entry here. Therefore, some of the incomplete entries can be considered in the realm of "Working Bibliography." Most distressingly, publications have fallen victim to the difficulties of limited budgets, and editors do not have the resources to assign a professional bibliographer to bolster authors' references. One can empathize with editors and publishers, if we remind ourselves that a generation ago authors had editorial help in checking references. Many an author was saved from embarrassing, unwitting defects. That professional support is not available to authors today, and we are all left with our own mistakes to remain an eternal legacy. Nevertheless, there are some remedies that should be considered. Correct bibliographical practice requires that the data be taken from the title page, with deference to authors in the way they have given the information. The tendency to replace authors' names with initials is confusing, and it creates difficulties in finding the item in the computer systems of libraries. Scholarly publishing, above all, should have correct information; and publishers should not produce misleading title pages. For example, my copy of Charles Darwin's The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals was reprinted in 1965, with no indication of the original 19th century publication date.

< previous page

page_183 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_184

next page > Page 184

Dates are also a problem with journals, which often get off schedule. You may find a review of a book with a date on it that precedes the dale of the book reviewed! Also unacceptable is printing a future date in an entry that is "In Press/Preparation." Alas, the future is uncertain. In the following entries, I have used the term "review" to encompass notices of publications. Ideally, an editor will invite a review to be done by an expert, that is, someone who has already published on the topic. Practically, this does not happen; an astounding number of reviews published these days have been written by people who have otherwise never published on male/female language. Thus, you will come across reviews that are shallow, alongside those that are enlightening and that send you forward in a leap toward better understanding. Some reviews are written with a penchant to gain favor from a potential power-giver; some are written on the level of opinion polls. Some reviewers will tell you how to think; I want to tell you to think for yourselfintelligently and fairly. In order to do that, you must go back to the book reviewed before you make a judgment. Not all reviewers read accurately, and I think that all of us hope that readers will read what we have writtenNOT what other people say we have written. While the following bibliography is centered in the discipline of linguistics, it also includes items of nonverbal and sociolinguistic interest when they have communicative focus. It also contains some items that treat the still arguable and unsolved aspects of Nature and Nurture. The matter of grammatical gender is only touched upon; another bibliography could be constructed on just that aspect of language. Most of the entries are language oriented, but I have included a few more general references which have deeply influenced this book, and which contributed to changing the perspectives of males and females, such as de Beauvoir, Graves, Mead, Whorf, and Woolf. Also I have included a few references from literature when they dealt with the use of language as I have treated it in this book. Chapter footnotes are positioned at the end of the book, and not all of the footnote references are repeated in the bibliographyimportant as they might be for understanding the situation we are in nowadays. Citations can be located in the index. I express my appreciation to colleagues who updated their references. Special acknowledgment and thanks are due to Tom Bruneau, Kathleen Connors and Claes-Christian Elert for helping me

< previous page

page_184 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_185

next page > Page 185

find items that otherwise I would not have been able to locate. Grateful acknowledgment goes to Frederick S. Holley, of the Los Angeles Times for cooperating on the updating of the guidelines materials. In my 1975 edition, I recognized the value of librarians; in this volume I will reiterate my appreciation for them, but especially for Robert Singerman, bibliographer par excellence. Since I wrote the first edition, there has been significant recognition that the language of law is inadequate to represent all human beings; therefore I have added many entries that treat the problems of legal terminology. I express my thanks to the law schools of the University of Southern California (USC), University of Michigan, University of California, Berkeley (UCB), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), for contributing important references; and especially to Judith Resnik, of The Law Center of USC, for providing a copy of the report of the Ninth Circuit Gender Bias Task Force on The Effects of Gender in the Federal Courts. Finally, the production of this updated version has been made possible by collaboration with Deanna Deeley Spehn, a student in my classes during 1968 to 1970. She and her daughter, Michaela Katherine Spehn, have done editing and bibliographical research, respectively. It is a pleasure to publicly recognize this generation of friendship and congenial partnership. Journals Aphra: the Feminist Literary Magazine [named for Aphra Behn (1640-1689), ed. Elizabeth Fisher. New York: Faculty Press 1969-1976. Cultural Critique, ed. Donna Przybylowicz. New York: Oxford University Press. differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, eds. Naomi Schor and Elizabeth Weed. Founded in 1989 (Vol. 1). Pembroke Center for Teaching and Research on Women, Brown University.

< previous page

page_185 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_186

next page > Page 186

Gender and Society (Official publication of Sociologists for Women in Society). Founding editor, Judith Lorber. Founded March 1987 (Vol. 1.1). Present editor, Margaret L. Andersen. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications. International Journal of Women's Studies, ed. Sherri Clarkson. Founded in 1978 (Vol. 1.1, January/February). Montréal, Quebec, Canada: Eden Press Women's Publications. OSCLG News: Newsletter of the Organization for the Study of Communication, Language, and Gender, ed. Carol Ann Valentine. Founded in 1981. Tempe, Arizona: Arizona State University. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, ed. Sue Rosenberg Zalk. Founded 1975 (Vol. 1) by Phyllis A. Katz, editor. New York: Plenum. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, ed. Jean F. O'Barr. Founded in 1975 (Vol.1.1, Autumn) by Catharine R. Stimpson, editor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Women and Language, executive editor: Anita Taylor. George Mason University. Women and Language News [a newsletter], eds. Pam Tiedt and Pat Nichols. Stanford University: Linguistics Department. [Started in January 1976]. Transferred to University of Illinois, Urbana 1981-1989. Presently: Women and Language, q.v. Womenews, Vol. 5 (March 1980) San Francisco. Women's Studies in Communication, co-editors: Judy Bowker and Barbara Gayle. The Organization for Research on Women and Communication, of the Western Speech Communication Association (ORWAC). Since 1977 at Humboldt State University and the University of Oregon. Women's Studies International Forum, (formerly: Women's Studies International Quarterly), founding editor: Dale Spender. Founded in 1978 (Vol. 1). Elmsford, New York: Pergamon Press.

< previous page

page_186 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_187

next page > Page 187

Special Issues Annals: New York Academy of Sciences, Volume 327, 1979, Language, sex and gender: does "la différence" make a difference? eds. Judith Orasanu, Mariam K. Slater, and Leonore Loeb Adler. New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 121 pages. College English 40.8 (April 1979): 849-929, "Women and writing: writers, critics, teachers, students," ed. Donald Gray. Urbana, Illinois: official journal of the National Council of Teachers of English. Critical Inquiry 8.2 (Winter 1981): 171-402, "Writing and sexual difference," ed. Elizabeth Abel. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press. Cultural Critique 13 (Fall 1989): 1-278, "The construction of gender and modes of social division," eds. Donna Przybylowicz, Nancy Hartsock, and Pamela McCallum. Part II, Number 14 (Winter 1989-1990): 1-301 pages. Oxford University Press, in association with the Society for Cultural Critique, University of Minnesota. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 17 (1978): 1-114, "American minority women in sociolinguistic perspective," eds. Betty Lou Dubois and Isabel M. Crouch. The Hague: Mouton. Journal of Communication 28.1 (Winter 1978): 130-192, "What does 'she' mean?" ed. George Gerbner. Philadelphia: Annenberg School of Communications, University of Pennsylvania. The Journal of Social Issues 32.3 (1976): 1-228, "Sex roles: persistence and change," eds. Diane N. Ruble, Irene H. Frieze, and Jacquelynne E. Parsons. Ann Arbor, Michigan, 228 pages. Könsroller i Språk 2-3, 1978-1979 [Sex roles in language]. Sweden: Uppsala Universitet, Forskningskommitten i Uppsala, för Modem Svenska (=FUMS) [in Swedish]. McGill Law Journal 21.4 (Winter 1975): 477-707, "Women and the law," ed. Laura Falk Scott. Montreal, Canada. Obst 8-9: Sprache und Geschlecht [Language and Gender]: I (December 1978); II (January 1979). Beihefte 3, Bd III (Akten des Symposions, March 1979) Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (OBST).

< previous page

page_187 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_188

next page > Page 188

Orbis 1.1 (1952): 10-86, ed. Sever Pop. Louvain, Belgium L'Université Catholique de Louvain. Orbis 2 (1953): 7-34. Anon 1992. The AAUW report: How schools shortchange girls. Washington, D.C.: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, (Alice McKee, President), 8 pages. [See also Susan McGee Bailey, 1992 The AAUW report.] Anon 1974. Booklet for women who wish to determine their own names after marriage. Compiled by The Center for a Woman's Own Name. Barrington, Illinois, 59 pages. Anon 1972. "Down with Manglish?" Junior Scholastic (January 17): 3. [On pronouns; see Converse, Charles Crozat.] Anon 1993. The effects of gender in the Federal Courts: the final report of the Ninth Circuit Gender Bias Task Force. See Coughenour, John C., Chair, Task Force Committee. Anon 1972. 51% minority. Connecticut Conference on the Status of Women, National Education Association, USOE-072-2507, 71 pages. Anon 1972. "Guidelines for improving the image of women in textbooks," Sexism in Textbooks Committee of Women. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company, 9 pages. Anon n. d. [before 1975] "Included Out" [a short film cartoon on sexist language in religion, generic terms]. Mass Media Associates, The Associates, 1720 Chouteau Ave., St. Louis, Missouri 63103 Anon 1941. "Miscellany: II. Mk.," American Speech 16.3 (October): 229-230. Anon 1971. "Reply," American Speech 46.1-2 (Spring/Summer): 137. [On 'chairperson'.] Anon 1972. Sexism in Education. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Emma Willard Task Force on Education, 87 pages. Anon 1991. Gender issues in the communication classroom, special issue. Communication Education 40.1 (January).

< previous page

page_188 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_189

next page > Page 189

Abbott, Clifford 1984 "Two feminine genders in Oneida," Anthropological Linguistics 26.2 (Summer): 125-137. Abarbanel, Albert see Ellis, Albert Abel, Elizabeth, ed. 1982. Writing and sexual difference. Essays reprinted from Critical Inquiry, special issue (Winter 1981). Abu-Haidar, Farida 1989. "Are Iraqi women more prestige conscious than men? Sex differentiation in Baghdadi Arabic," Language in Society 18.4 (December): 471-481. Ackerman, Louise M. 1962. "'Lady' as a synonym for 'woman'," American Speech 37.3 (October): 284-285. Adam, Lucien 1879. "Du parler des hommes et du parler des femmes dans la langue Caraïbe," Memoires 1878. Paris: Academic de Stanislauas, 145-176. Adam, Lucien, and V. Henry 1880. Arte y vocabulario de la lengua chiquita, Paris: Bibliothéque Linguistique Américaine, vol. 6, vi-vii: 4-8. Adams, Karen L. 1992. "Accruing power on debate floors," Locating power: proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference, Vol. I, eds. Kira Hall, Mary Bucholtz, and Birch Moonwomon. Berkeley, California: Berkeley Women and Language Group, pp. 1-10. In press. "Must a politician talk like a 'lady', too?" The structuring of political discourse, eds. C. Farber, and A. Goldschlager, [29 pages manuscript.] See also Edelsky, Carole Adams, Karen L., and Carole Edelsky 1998. "Male and female styles in political debates," Linguistic change and contact: proceedings of the sixteenth annual conference on New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV-XVI), eds. Kathleen Ferrara, Becky Brown, Keith Walters, John Baugh. Austin, Texas: University of Texas, Texas Linguistics Forum, Vol. 30: 18-24.

< previous page

page_189 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_190

next page > Page 190

Adams, Karen L., and Aileen P. Nilsen Submitted. "Sense of entitlement: multifaceted views of address among academics." Adams, Karen L., and Norma C. Ware [1979] 1989. "Sexism and the English language: the linguistic implications of being a woman," in Women: a feminist perspective, ed. Jo Freeman, pp. 470-484. Palo Alto, California: Mayfield Publishing Company. Adams, Kathleen A. see MacNeilage, Linda A. Adburgham, Alison 1972. Women in print: writing women and women's magazines from the restoration to the accession of Victoria. London: George Allen and Unwin, 302 pages. Adler, Leonore Loeb see Orasanu, Judith Adler, Max K. 1978. Sex differences in human speech: a sociolinguistic study. Hamburg, Germany: Buske. Aebischer, Verena 1979. "Chit-chatwomen in interaction," Obst 9: Sprache und Geschlecht I. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (=OBST). Aebischer, Verena, Helga Andresen, Helmut Glück, Theodossia Pavlidon, eds. 1979. Obst, vol. III: Sprache und Geschlecht. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie (=OBST), pp. 99-112. Aebischer, Verena, and Claire-A. Forel, eds. 1983. Parlers masculins, parlers feminins? Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé, 200 pages. Aebischer, Verena, and Claire-A. Forel 1978. "Beiträge zum Thema Frauensprache aus der Schweiz und aus Frankreich" [Contributions to the topic of women's language from Switzerland and France]. Obst 8: Sprache und Geschlecht I. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (=OBST). Ahlum, Carol see Howe, Florence Aiken, Jr., Lewis R., and Richard L. Zweigenhaft 1978. "Signature size, sex, and status in Iran," Journal of Social Psychology 106.2 (December): 273-274.

< previous page

page_190 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_191

next page > Page 191

Allen, Harold B. 1985. "Sex-linked variation in the responses of dialect informants," "Part 1: Lexicon," Journal of English Linguistics 18.2 (October): 97-123. 1986. "Pan 2: Pronunciation," vol. 19.1: 3-24. 1986 ''Part 3: Grammar,'' vol. 19.2: 149-176. Al-Muhannadi, Muneera 1991. A sociolinguistic study of women's speech in Qatar, 282 pages. Dissertation, University of Essex. DAI 52-11A (May 1992): 3902-3903. Alpher, Barry 1987. "Feminine as the unmarked grammatical gender: buffalo girls are no fools," Australian Journal of Linguistics 7.2: (December): 169-187. Altshuler Nathan 1956. "Linguistic forms as symbols of people," International Journal of American Linguistics 22.2: 106-112. (See comments in H. A. Gleason, Jr., 1956. "Comparison of linguistic systems," International Journal of American Linguistics 22.4 (October): 273-275; William J. Samarin, 1967. Field Linguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 109.) Altus, William D. 1959. "Sexual role, the short story, and the writer," Journal of Psychology 47: 37-40. Al-Wer, Enam Essa 1991. Phonological variation in the speech of women from three urban areas in Jordan, 253 pages. Dissertation, University of Essex. DAI 52-11A (May 1992): 3903. Andersson, Lars G., and Peter J. Trudgill 1990. Bad language. London: Penguin and Basil Blackwell, 202 pages. [Includes references to sexism in language.] Andersson, T. 1976. "Manlig sjuksköterska I," Nordiska studier i filologi och lingvistik. Festskrift tillägnad Gösta Holm på 60-årsdagen den 8 juli 1976. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur 1-11. Andresen, Helga see Aebischer, Verena Anshen, Frank see Frank, Francine Wattman

< previous page

page_191 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_192

next page > Page 192

Appadurai, Arjun, Frank J. Korom, and Margaret A. Mills, eds. 1991. Gender, genre, and power in South Asian expressive traditions. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 489 pages. Argyle, Michael, Jean Ann Graham, and Marga Kreckel 1982. "The structure of behavioral elements in social and work situations," in Nonverbal communication today, ed. Mary Ritchie Key, 87-100. Berlin: Mouton. Argyle, Michael, Mansur Lalljee, and Mark Cook 1968. "The effects of visibility on interaction in a dyad," Human Relations 21.1 (February): 3-17 (15). Aries, Elizabeth 1976. "Interaction patterns and themes of male, female, and mixed groups," Small Group Behavior 7. l: 7-18. Arliss, Laurie P. 1991. Gender communication. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Arliss, Laurie P., and Deborah Borisoff 1993. Men and women communicating: challenges and changes. Orlando, Florida: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. Aronoff, Mark 1992. Review of Gender, by Greville Corbett. Language 68.3 (September): 605-610. Aronovitch, Charles D. 1976. "The voice of personality: stereotyped judgments and their relation to voice quality and sex of speaker," Journal of Social Psychology 99.2 (August): 207-220. Atkins, Bowman K. see O'Barr, William M. Atkinson, Donna L. 1987. "Names and rifles: maiden name retention and the use of Ms.," Journal of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association 9: 56-83. Atwood, E. Bagby 1950. "The pronunciation of 'Mrs.'," American Speech 25: 10-18. Austin, Ann M. Berghout, and T. J. Braeger 1990. "Gendered differences in parents' encouragement of sibling interaction: implications for the construction of a personal premise system," First Language 10.3: 181-197.

< previous page

page_192 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_193

next page > Page 193

Austin, William M. 1965. "Some social aspects of paralanguage," Canadian Journal of Linguistics 11.1: 31-39. Awberry, G. M. 1974. "Men and women in the Welsh language," Leeds University. Preliminary version, 12 pages. Babcock, Barbara, et al. 1971. Women and the law: a collection of reading lists. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: KNOW, Inc. 1975. Sex discrimination and the law: causes and remedies. Boston: Little, Brown, 1092 pages. Supplement, prepared by Wendy Webster Williams, 1987. Bachner, Jane see Stone, Janet Badami, Mary see Larmer, Larry E. Badinter, Elisabeth [1986] 1989. The unopposite sex.: the end of the gender battle, trans. Barbara Wright. New York: Harper & Row, 279 pages. Baecklund, Astrid 1956. "The names of women in medieval Novgorod," in For Roman Jakobson, 19-24 The Hague: Mouton. Bailey, Lee Ann, and Lenora A. Timm 1976. "More on women'sand men'sexpletives," Anthropological Linguistics 18.9 (December): 438-449. Bailey, Lucille Marie 1991. Sex-marked language differences: a linguistic analysis of lexicon and syntax in the female and male dialogue in the eight original plays of Lillian Hellman, 179 pages. Ph.D. Dissertation, Ball State University. DAI 52-06A (December 1991): 2124. Bailey, Susan McGee, principal author 1992. The AAUW report: how schools shortchange girls. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Center for Research on Women at Wellesley College, Publication No. CRW1, 116 pages. [See also Anon 1992, The AAUW report.] Baker, Robert, and Frederick Elliston, eds. 1975. Philosophy and sex. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books. Revised edition, 1984.

< previous page

page_193 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_194

next page > Page 194

Bakir, Murtadha 1986. "Sex differences in the approximation to standard Arabic: a case study," Anthropological Linguistics 28.1 (Spring): 3-9. Bank, Mirra 1979. Anonymous was a woman. New York: St. Martin's Press, 128 pages. Barnes, Linda Laube 1987. "An investigation of gender-bias and written language," The thirteenth LACUS forum 1986, ed. Ilah Fleming, 457-464. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Linguistic Association of Canada and the United States. Baron, Dennis [E.] 1981. "The epicene pronoun: the word that failed," American Speech 56.3 (Summer): 83-97. [Refers to a "bisexual pronoun".] 1984. "Is it [MIS] or [MIZ]?" Verbatim 11 (Autumn): 10. 1986. Grammar and gender. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 249 pages. 1987. "No way to treat a ladyor a gent,'' Righting Words 1 (January/February): 24-28. Reviewed by Peggy Smith in The Editorial Eye 144 (August, 1987): 5. 1991. "The once and future Ms.: a lesson in language planning," Speech Communication Association Conference, Atlanta, Georgia (November). 1992. "MLA's nonsexist stylebook" review of Language, gender, and professional writing, by Francine Wattman Frank et al. American Speech 67.1 (Spring): 94-99. 1993. "Watch your language," The Stag (journal of the Scientific and Technical Authors Group) 11 (Winter/Spring): 15-18. [An updated list of the epicene pronouns. See above, Baron 1981.] Baron, Naomi S. 1971. "A reanalysis of English grammatical gender," Lingua 27 (August): 113-140. Barron, Nancy [May] 1970. Grammatical case and sex role: language differences in interaction, 295 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri. DAI 31-11A (May 1971): 6155.

< previous page

page_194 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_195

next page > Page 195

1971. "Sex-typed language: the production of grammatical cases," Acta Sociologica 14.2: 24-42. Barry, Herbert, III, and Aylene S. Harper 1982. "Evolution of unisex names," Names 30.1 (March): 15-22. Bate, Barbara A. 1975. "Generic man, invisible women," University of Michigan Papers in Women's Studies 2.1: 8395. 1976. A rhetorical approach to the nonsexist language controversy: an exploratory study using interviews with selected university faculty, 192 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Speech Communication, University of Oregon. DAI 37-09A (March 1977): 5436. 1978. "Nonsexist language use in transition," Journal of Communication 28.1 (Winter): 139-149. 1988. Communication and the sexes. New York: Harper and Row. Bate, Barbara, and Anita Taylor, eds. 1988. Women communicating: studies of women's talk. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Company. Batliner, Anton 1984. "The comprehension of grammatical and natural gender: a cross-linguistic experiment," Linguistics 274: 831-856. Battistella, Edwin 1990. Review of Language, gender, and professional writing, by Francine Wattman Frank, et al., Language 66.1 (March): 190-191. Bayer, Ann 1970. "A women's lib exposé of male villainy," Life, August 7: 62A-64. Bean, Judith Mattson see Johnstone, Barbara Beardsley, Elizabeth L. 1977. "Traits and genderization," in Feminism and philosophy, eds. Mary Vetterling-Braggin, Frederick A. Elliston, and Jane English, 117-123. Totowa, New Jersey: Rowman, Littlefield. Beattie, G. W. 1981. "Interruption in conversational interaction, and its relation to the sex and status of the interactants," Linguistics 19.1-2 (v. 239-240): 15-35.

< previous page

page_195 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_196

next page > Page 196

Beatty, John 1979. "Sex, role, and sex role," Language, sex and gender, eds. Judith Orasanu et al., 41-49. Beauvoir, Simone de 1953. The second sex. New York: Knopf; Bantam, 1965, 705 pages. Bebout, Linda 1984. "Asymmetries in male-female word pairs," American Speech 59.1 (Spring): 13-30. Beck, Kay 1978. "Sex differentiated speech codes," International Journal of Women's Studies 1.6 (November/December): 566-572. Beere, Carole A. 1990. Sex and gender issues: a handbook of tests and measures. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press. Belk, Sharyn Suzette 1991. A meta-analysis of gender differences in self-disclosure, 180 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Austin, Texas: University of Texas. DAI 52-04B (October 1991): 2349. Bem, Daryl see Bern, Sandra Bern, Sandra, and Daryl Bern 1973. "Does sexbiased job advertising 'aid and abet' sex discrimination?" Journal of Applied Social Psychology 3.1. Bendix, Edward H. 1979. "Linguistic models as political symbols: gender and the generic 'he' in English," Language, sex and gender, eds. Judith Orasanu et al., 21-39. Benét, James see Tuchman, Gaye Benhamou, S. 1986. "Analyse dictionnairique de 'femme' et de 'homme' (A dictionary analysis of 'woman' and 'man')," Cahiers de Lexicologie 48.1: 27-67. Bennett, Suzanne, and Bernd Weinberg 1979. "Sexual characteristics of preadolescent children's voices," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 65.1 (January): 179-189. Berko, Jean see Gleason, Jean Berk

< previous page

page_196 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_197

next page > Page 197

Bernard, Jessie 1968. "Talk, conversation, listening, silence," in The sex game. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 135-164. 1972. The sex game. New York: Atheneum. 1979. "Discussion," Language, sex and gender, eds. Orasanu, Judith et al., 115-121. Berryman[-Fink], Cynthia L[ouise] 1978. Perceptions of male and female sex-appropriate and sex-inappropriate language, 131 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Bowling Green State University. DAI 39-07A (January 1979): 3915. See also Wheeless, Virginia Eman Berryman, Cynthia L., and Virginia A. Eman, eds. 1980. Communication, language, and sex: proceedings of the First Annual Conference. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House. Berryman, Cynthia L., and J. R. Wilcox 1980. "Attitudes towards male and female speech: experiments on the effects of stereotyped language," Western Journal of Speech Communication 44: 50-59. Bethel, Beth, and Bettie Home 1978. "The language of male-female humor in popular pulp," The Fourth LACUS forum 1977, ed. Michel Paradis, 175-184. Columbia, South Carolina: Hornbeam Press. Bing, Janet 1992. "Penguins can't fly and women don't count: language and thought," Women and Language 15.2:1114. Bird, Terry W. see Coughenour, John C. Birdwhistell, Ray L. 1970. "Masculinity and femininity as display," in Kinesics and context: essays on body motion communication, 39-46. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Bix, Brian 1993. Law, language, and legal determinancy. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press. Black, Maria, and Rosalind Coward 1981. "Linguistic, social and sexual relations: a review of Dale Spender's Man Made Language," Screen Education 39 (Summer): 69-85.

< previous page

page_197 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_198

next page > Page 198

Black, Mary B. [= Mary B. Black-Rogers] 1969. "A note on gender in eliciting Ojibwa semantic structures," Anthropological Linguistics 11.6 (June): 177-186. 1982. "Algonquian gender revisited: animate nouns and Ojibwa 'power'an impasse?" Papers in Linguistics 15.1: 59-76. Blakar, Rolv Mikkel 1975. "How sex roles are represented, reflected and conserved in the Norwegian language," Acta Sociologica 18.2-3: 162-173. 1975. Språk er makt, 2.1 uppl. Oslo, Norway: Pax. Blakely, Mary Kay see Kaufman, Gloria Blanchard, Irene 1970. "Genetic development of consonant sounds in children's speech," Acres du Xe Congres International des Linguistes 1967, 3:145-149. Bucharest. Blaubergs, Maija S. 1976. "On 'The nurse was a doctor'," Chapter 2, Woman's language. Views on language, eds. Reza Ordoubadian and Walburga yon Raffler Engel. Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Inter-University Publishing. 1978. "Changing the sexist language: the theory behind the practice," Psychology of Women Quarterly. Bliese, Nancy Wood 1977. "Sex-role stereotyping of adjectives," Bulletin: Women's Studies in Communication 1.2 (Summer). Dept. of Speech Communications, California State University, Los Angeles. Blood, Doris 1962. "Women's speech characteristics in Cham," Asian Culture 3.3-4: 139-143. Bly, Robert 1990. Iron John: a book about men. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley, 268 pages. See also Tannen, Deborah Boas, Franz, ed. 1911, 1922, 1934. Handbook of American Indian languages, vol. 1, 1911; vol. 2, 1922; vol. 3, 1934. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 40.

< previous page

page_198 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_199

next page > Page 199

Bodine, Ann 1973. "Sex differentiation in language," paper read at the Symposium on Women and Language, New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University. Later published in Language and sex, eds. Barrie Thorne, and Nancy Henley 1975, pp. 130-151. 1975. "Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: singular 'they', sex indefinite 'he', and 'he and she'," Language in Society 4.2 (August): 129-146. 1977. Review of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. Language in Society 6.1 (April): 104-110. Boe, S. Kathryn 1987. "Language as an expression of caring in women," Anthropological Linguistics 29.3 (Fall): 271285. Bogoras, Waldemar 1922. "Chukchee" in Franz Boas, Vol. 2, 665-666, q. v. Bolinger, Dwight 1980. "A case in point: sexism," in Languagethe loaded weapon: the use and abuse of language today, 89-104. London: Longman. Bondeson, Ulla "Argot och Kriminalisering," Språk och Samhålle, ed. Bengt Loman. CWK Gleerup Bokförlag Lund. Sweden: Lund University. [Sociolinguistic research on women in Swedish prisons]. Bonecutter, Brace Edward 1980. Differences in symbolic and interpersonal language use across income level, sex, and race, 133 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Illinois Institute of Technology. DAI 41-09B (March 1981): 3566-3567. Borisoff, Deborah see Arliss, Laurie P. Borker, David, and Olga K. Garnica 1980. "Male and female speech in dramatic dialogue: a stylistic analysis of Chekhovian character speech," Language and Style 13.4 (Fall): 3-28. Borker, Ruth A., and Daniel N. Maltz 1989. "Anthropological perspectives on gender and language," in Gender and anthropology: critical reviews for research and teaching, ed., Sandra Morgen, 411-437. Washington, D.C.: American Anthropological Association

< previous page

page_199 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_200

next page > Page 200

See also McConnell-Ginet, Sally Maim, Daniel N. Bornstein, Diane 198? As meeke as is a mayde: an annotated bibliography of didactic literature for women, A.D. 1001500. Bosmajian, Haig A. 1972. "The language of sexism," ETC 29.3 (September): 305-313. Reprinted in Reflections, pp. 1221. 1977. "Sexism in the language of legislatures and courts," in Sexism and Language, Aileen Pace Nilsen et al., pp. 77104. 1978. ''Obscenity, sexism, and freedom of speech," College English 39.7 (March): 812-819. See also Nilsen, Aileen Pace Boston, Gary 1992. "Academic presses questioned on sexist language," review of AAUP Questionnaire on the use of gender-biased language . . ." by Carol Kasper. American Speech 67.1 (Spring): 100-102. Bostrom, Robert N., and Alan P. Kemp 1969. "Type of speech, sex of speaker, and sex of subject as factors influencing persuasion," Central States Speech Journal (Winter): 245-251. Bourhis, Richard Y. see Elyan, Olwen Bradley, Patricia Hayes 1981. "The folk-linguistics of women's speech: an empirical examination," Communication Monographs 48: 73-90. Braegger, T.J. see Austin, Ann M. Berghout Braga, Maria Luisa et al. 1991. "Results of an integrated sociolinguistic study," by the Research Group on the Use of Language (PEUL), Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 89: 2546, (Special issue, "Sociolinguistics in Brazil," eds. Francisco Gomes de Matos, and Stella Maris Bortoni.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Brandt, John F. see Markel, Norman N. Bratkowsky, Joan G. [Indiana University] 1972. "A cross-linguistic comparison of designations for female human beings." Manuscript, 36 pages. 1973. "A cross-linguistic study of sex-marked genders." Manuscript, 46 pages.

< previous page

page_200 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_201

next page > Page 201

Brend, Ruth M. 1971. "Male-female differences in American English intonation," paper presented at the Seventh International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Montreal, Canada, manuscript, 5 pages. 1972. "Male-female intonation patterns in American English," Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 866-870. [University of Montreal and McGill University, 1971]. The Hague: Mouton. 1979. "Male and female intonation: a cause of British-American misunderstanding," International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Copenhagen. Breton, Raymond [1609-1679] 1665 (?) Grammaire Caraïbe. Reprinted, "Suivie du catéchisme dans la même langue. Nouvelle édition publiée conformément a l'originale," by L. Adam and Ch. Leclerc, 1877-1878, Paris: Bibliotheque Linguistique Americaine 3, 56 pages. 1666. Dictionaire Francais-Caraibe [sic], Auxerre. Reprinted by Jules Platzmann, Leipzig, Germany: B.G. Teubner, 1900. Brightman, R. see Straus, A. T. Brimelow, Peter 1994. "Gender politics," Forbes 153.6 (March 14): 46-47. [Discusses Warren Farrell's recent contributions, q.v.] Britto, Francis 1988. "Effects of feminism on English," Sophia Linguistica 26: 139-149. Brody, Miriam 1993. Manly writing: gender, rhetoric, and the rise of composition. Carbondale, Illinois: Illinois University Press, 247 pages.

Southern

Brooks, Maria Z., and Kenneth L. Nalibow 1970. "The gender of referentials in Polish," International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics 13: 136-142. Brotherton, Patricia L., and Robyn A. Penman 1977. "A comparison of some characteristics of male and female speech," Journal of Social Psychology 103.1 (October): 161-162.

< previous page

page_201 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_202

next page > Page 202

Brouwer, Dédé 1981. "Taal en sekse in feministisch-wetenschappelijk perspektief," in Sociolinguistiek en ideologie, eds. P. Van de Craen, and R. Willemyns. Brouwer, Dédé, Marinel Gerritsen, and Dorian de Haan 1979. "Speech differences between women and men: On the wrong track?" Language in Society 8.1 (April): 33-50. Brouwer, Dédé, Marinel Gerritsen, Dorian de Haan, and Annette van der Post 1979. "Eine Ubersicht zum Thema 'Sprache und Geschlecht' in den Niederlanden," [an overview of the subject "Language and gender" in the Netherlands]. Obst 9: Sprache und Geschlecht II. Brouwer, Dédé, Marinel Gerritsen, Dorian de Haan, and Annette van der Post 1978. Vrouwentaal en mannenprat: verschillen in taalgebruik en taalgedrag in relatie tot de maatschappelijke rolverdeling [The language of women and men: in relation to role specialization in society]. Amsterdam: Van Gennep, NES 128. Brouwer, Dédé, and Annertte van der Post 1976. Taal en sekse. University of Amsterdam: Publikaties van het Instituut voor Algemene Taalwetenschap 11 (January). Brown, Penelope 1976. "Women and politeness: a new perspective on language and society." Review of Language and woman's place, by Robin Lakoff. Reviews in Anthropology 3.3, 240-249. 1979. Language, interaction and sex roles in a Mayan community: a study of politeness and the position of women., 574 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. DAI 40-07A (January 1980): 4111. 1990. "Gender, politeness, and confrontation in Tenejapa," Discourse Processes 13.1: 123-141. Brownell, Winifred, and Dennis R. Smith 1973. "Communication patterns, sex and length of verbalization in speech of four-year-old children," Speech Monographs 40 (November): 310-316.

< previous page

page_202 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_203

next page > Page 203

Brownmiller, Susan 1984, Femininity, New York: Linden Press, Simon & Schuster, 270 pages (105-126). Bruer, John T. see Zuckerman, Harriet Bugental, Daphne E., Leonore R. Love, and Robert M. Gianetto 1971. "Perfidious feminine faces," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 17.3: 314-318. Bull, Tove 1991. "Women and men speaking: the roles played by women and men in the process of language shift," Working Papers on Language, Gender and Sexism 1: 11-24. 1993. "Språkshifte hos kvinner og menn i ei nordnorsk fjordsamebygd," Gå mot vinden: Festskrift til Åse Hjorth Lervik pi 60-årdagen, 2 juli 1993, eds. Gerd Bjarhovde, Synnøre des Bouvrie, and Torill Steinfeld, 190-211. Oslo: Emilia Press. Bull, Tore, and Toril Swan, Issue eds. 1992. "Language, sex, and society." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 94. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Bullough, Bonnie see Bullough, Veto L. Bullough, Vern L. 1979. The frontiers of sex research. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 190 pages. Bullough, Vern L., and Bonnie Bullough 1973. The subordinate sex: a history of attitudes toward women. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. Bullough, Vern L., Brenda Shelton and Sarah Slavin 1985. The subordinate sex: a history of attitudes toward women, revised edition. Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press, 370 pages. Bunzel, Ruth L. "Zuni," Handbook of American Indian Languages, ed. Franz Boas, q.v. vol. 3, pp. 385-515. (esp. 430438.) Burr, Elizabeth, Susan Dunn, and Norma Farquhar 1972. "Equal treatment of the sexes in social studies textbooks: guidelines for authors and editors," Los Angeles, California: Westside Women's Committee, 9 pages. 1972. "Women and the language of inequality," Social Education 36.8 (December): 841-845.

< previous page

page_203 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_204

next page > Page 204

1973. "Guidelines for equal treatment of the sexes in social studies textbooks." Los Angeles, California: Westside Women's Committee, 12 pages. See also Farquhar, Norma Burtt, H.E. see Landis, M. H. Busk, Kristine 1985. Gender differences in adolescents' use of sex-typed language variables and conversational patterns, 114 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University. DAI 46-12B (June 1986): 4421. Butler, Samuel [1897] 1967. The authoress of the Odyssey: where and when she wrote, who she was, the use she made of the Iliad, and how the poem grew under her hands, with a new introduction by David Grene. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Butturff, Douglas, and Edmund L. Epstein, eds. [1978] 1979. Women's language in America. Women's language and style. Akron, Ohio: Studies in Contemporary Language, No. 1, Language and Style Books. Bysiewicz, Shirley 1972. "Sex and the law," in 51% minority, 40-44. Connecticut Conference on the Status of Women, National Education Association /USOE-0-72-2507. Caldie, Roberta W. 1981. Dominance and language: a new perspective on sexism. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 118 pages. Callaghan, Catherine A. 1976. "Sexism in language," manuscript. Ohio State University, 26 pages. 1979. "The wanderings of the Goddess: language and myth in Western culture," Phoenix: New Directions in the Study of Man 3.2 (Fall/Winter): 25-37. Palo Alto, California: Phoenix Associates. 1986. "Patridominance and proto Utian words for 'man', woman', and' person'," Occasional papers on linguistics 13, ed. James E. Redden, 90- 100. Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University. [Data from Miwok-Costanoan languages of Central California.]

< previous page

page_204 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_205

next page > Page 205

Callary, R. E. [Northern Illinois University] 1973. "Dialectal variation in terms for men and women," paper read at the Midwest Regional American Dialect Society, Chicago. Cameron, Deborah 1985. Feminism and linguistic theory. London: MacMillan, 195 pages. 1992. "Naming of parts: gender, culture, and terms for the penis among American college students," American Speech 67.4 (Winter): 367-382. 1992. "New arrivals: the feminist challenge in language study," in New departures in linguistics, ed. George Wolf, 213235. New York: Garland. See also Coates, Jennifer Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs 1989. Man cannot speak for her. vol. 1: A critical study of early feminist rhetoric; vol. 2: Key texts of the early feminists, 559 pages. New York: Greenwood Press. Cannon, Garland, and Susan Roberson 1985. "Sexism in present-day English: is it diminishing?" Word 36.1 (April): 23-35. Cantrell, D. Dean 1974. " 'Herstory' of the language: master vs. mistress," Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin 40.3 (Spring): 32-35. Capek, Mary Ellen S., ed. 1987. A women's thesaurus: an index of language used to describe and locate information by and about women. New York: Harper & Row, 1052 pages. Carlson, J. Spencer, Stuart W. Cook, and Eleroy L. Stromberg 1936. "Sex differences in conversation," Journal of Applied Psychology 20: 727-735. Carter, Kathryn, and Carole Spitzack, eds. 1989. Doing research on women's communication: perspectives on theory and method. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing. Carter, Sarah, and Maureen Ritchie 1990. Women's studies: a guide to information sources. London, England: Mansell, 278 pages.

< previous page

page_205 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_206

next page > Page 206

Case, Susan Schick 1985. A sociolinguistic analysis of the language of gender relations, deviance, and influence in managerial groups [Intergroup language differences], 262 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo). DAI 46-07A (January 1986): 2006. Casey, Patricia L. see Hughes, Diana L. Chabrol, Claude 1971. Le récit féminin: contribution à l'analyse sémiologique du courrier du coeur et des entrevues ou enquêtes sur la femme dans la presse féminine actuelle. The Hague: Mouton, Approaches to Semiotics 15, 142 pages. Chamberlain, Alexander F. 1912. "Women's languages," American Anthropologist 14.3 (July-September): 579-581. Champigny, Robert 1972. Review of Le Ré Féminin, by Claude Chabrol. Language Sciences 23 (December): 42-43. Chandler, Joan L. see Kaiser, Susan B. Charrow, V. R. 1982. "Linguistic theory and the study of legal and bureaucratic language," in Exceptional language and linguistics, eds. Loraine K. Obler and Lise Menn, 81-101. New York: Academic Press. Cheney, Donna R. 1990. "Women as language users in a male world," The Journal of the Utah Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters 67: 149-162. Cherry, Kittredge 1987. Womansword: what Japanese words say about women. Tokyo, Japan/New York: Kodansha International, 150 pages. Cherry, Louise J. 1974. Sex differences in preschool teacher-child verbal interaction, 159 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. DAI 35-08A (February 1975): 5110.

< previous page

page_206 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_207

next page > Page 207

Cherry, Louise, and Michael Lewis 1978. "Differential socialization of girls and boys: implications for sex differences in language development," in The development of communication, eds. Natalie Waterson and Catherine Snow, 189-197. New York: Wiley. Cheshire, Jenny, and Nancy Jenkins 1991. "Gender issues in the GCSE oral English examination: Part II," Language and Education 5.1: 19-40. Childers, D. G., and Ke Wu 1991. "Gender recognition from speech, Part II: Fine analysis," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 90.4.1 (October): 1841-1856. See also Wu, Ke Clamons, Cynthia Robb 1989. "Modification of the gender system in the Wollegan dialect of Oromo," Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 19.2: 187-195. Clapp, Ouida H., ed. 1976. Responses to sexism. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). Cleve, Hrn. 1904. "Über die Frauensprache" [part of a larger article], Zeitschrift far Ethnologie 36: 460-463. Clifton, A. Kay see McMillan, Julie R. Coates, Jennifer 1986. Women, men, and language: a sociolinguistic account of sex differences in language. London: Longman, 178 pages. Coates, Jennifer, and Deborah Cameron, eds. 1989. Women in their speech communities: new perspectives on language and sex. London: Longman, 191 pages. [British authors.] Cohen, Marcel 1956. "L'entrée dans le groupe et le langage" [from Part II], Chapter I in Pour une sociologie du langage, 112-121. Paris: Paris Editions, Albin Michel. Colaclides, Peter 1964. "The pattern of gender in Modem Greek," Linguistics: an International Review 5 (May): 65-68.

< previous page

page_207 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_208

next page > Page 208

Cole, Jonathan R., and Harriet Zuckerman 1987. "Marriage, motherhood and research performance in science: women publish less than men, but marriage and family obligations do not generally account for the gender difference . . . ," Scientific American 256.2 (February): 119-125. See also Zuckerman, Harriet Cole, Phyllis, and Deborah Lambert 1983. "Gender and race in American literature: an exploration of the discipline and a proposal for two new courses," Working Paper No. 115. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Center for Research on Women, Wellesley College. Coleman, Larry G. see Hopper, Robert Coleman, Ralph O. 1971. "Male and female voice quality and its relationship to vowel formant frequencies," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 14.3 (September): 565-577. 1976. "A comparison of the contributions of two voice quality characteristics to the perception of maleness and femaleness in the voice," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 19.1 (March): 168-180. Collins, Ronald K. L. 1977. "Language, history and the legal process: a profile of the 'reasonable man'," Camden Law Journal 8.2 (Winter): 311-323. Collura, Giuseppa, and Claire-Antonella Forel 1978. "Entre le code et l'usage: les productions linguistiques féminines," in Sprache im Kontext, ed. M.-E. Conte, A. G. Ramat, and P. Ramat, 25-34. Tübingen, Germany: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Comrie, Bemard 1975. "On being polite to women in Slavic languages," Pragmatics Microfiche, No. 1.3 (G11-G14). University of Cambridge, England. Condor, Susan see Giles, Howard Condry, John, and Sandra Condry 1976. "Sex differences: a study of the eye of the beholder," Child Development 47.3 (September): 812-819. Condry, Sandra see Condry, John

< previous page

page_208 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_209

next page > Page 209

Conklin, Nancy Faires [Univ. of Michigan] 1973. "Perspectives on the dialects of women, "paper read at the Midwest Regional American Dialect Society, Michigan, 17 pages. 1974. "Toward a feminist analysis of linguistic behavior," Ann Arbor: University of Michigan papers in women's studies 1.1 (February): 51-73. 1978. "The language of the majority: women and American English," in A pluralistic nation: the language issue in the United States, eds. Margaret A. Lourie, and Nancy Faires Conklin, 222-237. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House. Connor, Jennifer J. see Jordan, Michael P. Connors, Kathleen 1971. "Studies in feminine agentives in selected European languages," Romance Philology 24.4 (May): 573-598. 1992. L'attribution du genre aux mots empruntés à l'anglais dans des langues romanes," Actes du XIXe Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes, vol. I: Linguistique théorique et linguistique synchronique. 1992. "Confusion in the non-acquisition of gender in French," in Mélanges Léon, ed. Philippe Martin, 85-96. Toronto, Canada: Éditions Mé1odie-Toronto. Converse, Charles Crozat 1884. "A new pronoun," The Critic and Good Literature 4 (August 2): 55 [letters to the editor]; For responses see The Critic and Good Literature 5 (August 16): 79-80. 1889. "That desired impersonal pronoun," The Writer 3: 247-248. Cook, Mark see Argyle, Michael Cook, Stuart W. see Carlson, J. Spencer Cooper, Robert L. 1984. "The avoidance of androcentric generics," International Journal of the Sociology of Language 50, special issue, "International Sociolinguistic Perspectives," ed. Joshua A. Fishman: 5-20. Cooper, William E. see Steckler, Nicole A. Corbett, Greville G. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 363 pages.

< previous page

page_209 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_210

next page > Page 210

Coser, Rose Laub 1960. ''Laughter among colleagues: a study of the social functions of humor among the staff of a mental hospital," Psychiatry 23.1 (February): 81-95. Cosper, Wilma Baker 1970. An analysis of sex differences in teacher-student interaction as manifest in verbal and nonverbal behavior cues, 157 pages. University of Tennessee. DAI 32-01A (July 1971): 302. Cotera, Martha P, compiler 1982. Multicultural women's sourcebook: materials guide for use in women's studies and bilingual multicultural programs, revised, ed. Nella Cunningham. Women's Educational Equity Act Program, U.S. Department of Education, Austin, Texas, 160 pages. Coughenour, John C., Proctor Hug, Jr., Marilyn H. Patel, Terry W. Bird, Deborah R. Hensler, M. Margaret McKeown, Judith Resnik, Henry Shields, Jr., Task Force Committee 1993. The effects of gender in the Federal Courts: the final report of the Ninth Circuit Gender Bias Task Force. Seattle, Washington: United States District Court, (July) 242 pages + Appendices A - F. Coupland, Nikolas, Howard Giles, and John Wiemann, eds. 1991. "Miscommunication" and problematic talk. Newbury Park: Sage, 374 pages. Cowan, H. K. J. 1976. "On gender differences and the origin of language," Current Anthropology 17.3 (September): 521-522. [Discussion on Jonas and Jonas, 522-526.] Coward, Rosalind see Black, Maria Cox, Gail Diane 1990. "Reports track discrimination: fourteen volumes chronicle how women are treated in court," The National Law Journal 12 (November): 26. Crawford, Mary, and Linda English 1984. "Generic versus specific inclusion of women in language: effects on recall," Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 13.5 (September): 373-381.

< previous page

page_210 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_211

next page > Page 211

Crewe, William J. 1977. Review of Language and sex, by Barrie Thorne and Nancy Henley; and Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. RELC Journal 8.1: (June): 89-92. A Journal of Language Teaching and Research in Southeast Asia, Regional Language Centre, Singapore. Crosby, Faye, and Linda Nyquist 1977. "The female register: an empirical study of Lakoff's hypotheses," Language in Society 6.3 (December): 313-322. Crouch, Isabel see Dubois, Betty Lou Curat, Hervé 1986. "Référence, accord et formation de syntagrne (Reference, agreement and formation of the noun phrase)," Langues et Linguistique 12.1: 1-26. Cutler, Anne, James McQueen, and Ken Robinson 1990. "Elizabeth and John: sound patterns of men's and women's names," Journal of Linguistics 26.2 (September): 471-482. (Linguistics Association of Great Britain) Cambridge University Press. Daly, John A. see Hopper, Robert Daly, Mary [1973] 1985. Beyond God the Father: toward a philosophy of women's liberation. Boston: Beacon Press, 225 pages. Daniels, Arlene Kaplan see Tuchman, Gaye Daumier, Honoré see Parturier, Françoise Davidson, Kenneth M., Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Herma Hill Kay 1974. Text, cases and materials on sex-based discrimination. St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing, 1031 pages. Davis, Boyd 1985. "Language, women, and bibliography," review of Women speaking, by Mary E. W. Jarrard and Phyllis R. Randall. American Speech 60.2 (Summer): 175-176. Davis, Lawrence M., and Charles L. Houck 1990. "Female regional speech and occupational classification: linguistic attitudes in Hoosierdom," American Speech 65.2 (Summer): 127-135. 1992. "Can she be prestigious and nice at the same time? Perceptions of female speech in Hoosierdom," American Speech 67.2 (Summer): 115-122.

< previous page

page_211 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_212

next page > Page 212

Davison, Alice, and Penelope Eckert, eds. 1990. The Cornell lectures: women in the linguistics profession. Linguistic Society of America, The Committee on the Status of Women in Linguistics, Washington, D.C., 255 pages. Dawe-Sheppard, Audrey, and John Hewson 1990. "Person and gender hierarchies in Micmac," Journal of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association 12: 1-12. Decross, Anne 1978. "L'effet feminite et le sujet linguistique," Langage et Société 3 (February): 78-92. Defazio, Victor Joseph 1971. The relationship between field articulation, language abilities and speech perception in male and female college students, 132 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, St. John's University. DAI 32-05B (November 1971): 2983. Denison, Iris Farrell 1988. Teacher perception of male and female principal communication style and personality utilizing powerless and regular language modes, 159 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia. DAI 49-12A: 3564. Denmark, Florence L. see Unger, Rhoda Kesler Densmore, Dana n.d. [before 1975]. "Speech is the form of thought," Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: KNOW, Inc., 7 pages. 1980. Syllabus sourcebook on media and women, ed. Washington, D.C.: Women's Institute for Freedom of the Press. DeStefano, Johanna S. 1975. "Women and language," in Views on language, eds. Reza Ordoubadian and Walburga von Raffler Engel, 66-77. Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Inter-University Press. 1979. "Sex differences in language: a cross-national perspective with emphasis on English," Language Sciences 1.2 (September): 316-324. Deutsch, Werner see Wijnen, Frank Dibble, Harold L. 1976. "More on gender differences and the origin of language," Current Anthropology 17.4 (December): 744. [Discussion on Jonas and Jonas, 745-749].

< previous page

page_212 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_213

next page > Page 213

Dike, Edwin B. 1937. "The suffix -ess," Journal of English and Germanic Philology 36: 29-34. Di Pietro, Robert J. see Nilsen, Aileen Pace 1972 Dixon, R. M. W. 1990. "The origin of 'mother-in-law vocabulary' in two Australian languages," Anthropological Linguistics 32.1-2 (Spring and Summer): 1-56. Dobris, Catherine A. 1989. "In the year of Big Sister: toward a rhetorical theory accounting for gender," in Doing research on women's communication, eds. Kathryn Carter and Carole Spitzack, 137-160. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex. Doerfer, Gerhard 1985. "Das Korana und die Linguistinik (The Korana language and feminist linguistics)," Sprachwissenschaft 10.2: 132-152. Downey, Peg 1979. "The invisible womanwhere is she/he? Graduate woman, March/April: 8-13. Washington, D. C.: American Association of University Women. Drake, Kirsten, Dorothy Marks, and Mary Wexford, eds. 1971. Women's work and women's studies. New York: The Women's Center, Barnard College. Distributed by KNOW, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 138 pages + index. Drew, Dan G., and Susan H. Miller 1977. "Sex stereotyping and reporting," Journalism Quarterly 54.1 (Spring): 142146. [Journal Typo 55.1] Driedger, E. A. 1976. "Are statutes written for men only?" McGill Law Journal 22 (Winter): 666-672. [Reply to Marguerite E. Ritchie.] Dubois, Betty Lou, and Isabel Crouch 1975. "The question of tag questions in women's speech: they don't really use more of them, do they?" Language in Society 4.3 (December): 289-294. Dubois, Betty Lou, and Isabel M. Crouch, eds. 1976. Conference on the sociology of the languages of American women. Papers in Southwest English 4, San Antonio, Texas: Trinity University Press, 196 pages.

< previous page

page_213 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_214

next page > Page 214

Dumas, Bethany K. 1992. "Deconstructing the patriarchal universe of discourse," review of Speaking freely, by Julia Penelope. American Speech 67.3 (Fall): 320-324. Dunn, Susan see Burr, Elizabeth see Farquhar, Norma Eakins, Barbara Westbrook, and R. Gene Eakins 1978. Sex differences in human communication. Boston: HoughtonMifflin. Eakins, R. Gene see Eakins, Barbara Westbrook Earnshaw, Doris, ed. 1994. California women speak: speeches of California women in public office. Davis, California: Alta Vista Publishing Company, 122 pages. Ebben, Maureen see Taylor, H. Jeanie Eble, Connie C. [Univ. of North Carolina] 1972. "How the speech of some is more equal than others," paper read at the Southeastern Conference on Linguistics (SECOL VIII), Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 14 pages. 1975. "Girl talk: a bicentennial perspective," in Views on language, eds. Reza Ordoubadian and Walburga von Raffler Engel, 77-86. Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Inter-University Press. 1976. "Etiquette books as linguistic authority,'' in The Second LACUS Forum 1975, ed. Peter A. Reich, 468-475. Columbia, South Carolina: Hornbeam Press. 1977. "If ladies weren't present, I'd tell you what I really think," in Papers in language variation, eds. David L. Shores, and Carole P. Hines, 295-301. University, Alabama: University of Alabama Press. 1985. Review of Language and the sexes, by Francine Frank and Frank Anshen. Journal of English Linguistics 18.2 (October): 198-200. Eckert, Penelope 1989. "The whole woman: sex and gender differences in variation," Language Variation and Change 1: 245-267. 1990. "Cooperative competition in adolescent 'girl talk'," Discourse Processes 13.1: 91-122.

< previous page

page_214 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_215

next page > Page 215

See also Davison, Alice McConnell-Ginet, Sally Eckert, Penelope, and Sally McConnell-Ginet 1992. "Communities of practice: where language, gender, and power all live," in Locating power: proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference, vol. I, eds. Kira Hall, Mary Bucholtz, and Birch Moonwomon, 89-99. Berkeley, California: Women and Language Group. 1992. "Think practically and look locally: language and gender as community-based practice," in Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 461-490. Edelsky, Carole 1976. "Recognizing sex-linked language," Language Arts 53.7 (October): 746-752. 1977. "Acquisition of an aspect of communicative competence: learning what it means to talk like a lady," in Child discourse, eds. Susan Ervin-Tripp, and Claudia Mitchell-Kernan, 225-243. New York: Academic Press. 1979. "Question intonation and sex roles,'' Language in Society 8.1 (April): 15-32. 1981. "Who's got the floor?" Language in Society 10.3 (December): 383-421. See also Adams, Karen L. Edelsky, Carole, and Karen [L.] Adams 1990. "Creating inequality: breaking the rules in debates," Journal of Language and Social Psychology 9.3: 171-190. Edwards, John R. 1979. "Social class differences and the identification of sex in children's speech," Journal of Child Language 6.1 (February): 121-127. Ehrenberg, Margaret 1989. Women in prehistory. London: British Museum Publications, 192 pages. Ehrenreich, Paul 1894. "Materialien zur Sprachenkunde Brasiliens: II, III, Die Sprache der Caraya (Goyaz)," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 26:2 20-37; 26:3: 49-60. Eifler, Deborah see Weitzman, Lenore J.

< previous page

page_215 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_216

next page > Page 216

Einarsson, Jan, and Tot G. Hultman 1984. Godmorgon pojkar och flickor: om språk och kön i skolan. Malmö, Sweden: Liber Förlag. [Treats sex and language in schools.] Ekka, Francis 1972. "Men's and women's speech in Kurux *," Linguistics 81 (April): 25-31. Elert, Claes-Christian 1985. "Mannens sprôk," in Mannen, ed. Erik Bylund, 27-36. Ingår Som Bidrag I. Bjästa: CEWEFörlaget. Elgin, Suzette Haden 1980. The gentle an of verbal self-defense. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 310 pages. 1981. The lonesome node. 1.1 (September/October). Huntsville, Arkansas: Ozark Center for Language Studies. [A newsletter.] 1982. Review of Women and men speaking, by Cheris Kramarae. Language 58.4 (December): 940-943. 1983. More on the gentle art of verbal self-defense. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 284 pages. Ell, Marilou 1972. "The voice of authority: women's intonation patterns," East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University. Ellis, Albert, and Albert Abarbanel, eds. [1961] 1967. The Encyclopedia of Sexual Behavior, vol. II. New York: Hawthorn Books. See Duncan MacDougald, Jr., 585-598. Elliston, Frederick [A.] see Baker, Robert Vetterling-Braggin, Mary Elyan, Olwen, Philip M. Smith, Howard Giles, and Richard Y. Bourhis 1978. "R.P.female accented speech: the voice of perceived androgyny?" in Sociolinguistic patterns in British English, ed. Peter Trudgill, 122-131. London: Edward Arnold. Eman, Virginia Ann 1977. An exploratory investigation of the relationship of sexual identity and use of sexually identified language, 191 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. DAI 38-10A (April 1978): 5793. See also Berryman, Cynthia L. Wheeless, Virginia Eman

< previous page

page_216 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_217

next page > Page 217

Ember, Carol R. 1978. "Men's fear of sex with women: a cross-cultural study," Sex Roles 4.5 (October): 657-678. Embleton, Sheila M. 1983. "Are personal-name-derived place names sexist?" in The ninth LACUS forum 1982, ed. John Morreall, 564-670. Columbia, South Carolina: Hornbeam Press. 1985. Review of Language and the sexes, by Francine Frank and Frank Anshen. Language 61.4 (December): 935. 1987. Review of A feminist dictionary, by Cheris Kramarae and Paula A. Treichler. Journal of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association 9: 161-164. Endicott, Jeffrey see Nemeth, Charlan Engebretson, A. Maynard see Monsen, Randall B. English, Jane see Vetterling-Braggin, Mary English, Linda see Crawford, Mary Enquist, Magnus, and Risa Rosenberg 1994. Review of The Red Queen: sex and the evolution of human nature, by Matt Ridley. Nature 367 (February): 697. Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs 1981. Women in law. New York: Basic Books. 2nd edition, 1993, Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. 1988. Deceptive distinctions: sex, gender, and the social order. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. Epstein, Edmund L. see Butturff, Douglas Erades, P. A. 1956. "Contributions to Modern English syntax: V. A note on gender," Moderna Språk 50: 2-11. Erickson, Donna see Sachs, Jacqueline Ervin, Susan M. [= Susan Ervin-Tripp] 1962. "The connotations of gender," Word 18.3 (December): 249-261. 1976. " 'What do women sociolinguists want?': prospects for a research field," in The sociology of the languages of American women, eds. Betty Lou Dubois, and Isabel M. Crouch, 3-16. Eubanks, Sheryle Bolton 1974. [published 1977] "Toward an androgynous language," Review article of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. American Speech 49.3-4 (Fall/Winter): 284-286.

< previous page

page_217 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_218

next page > Page 218

1976. "Sex-based language differences: a cultural reflection," in Views on language, eds. Reza Ordoubadian, and Walburga yon Raffler Engel, 109-120. Evans, Julian Lynne 1990. Gender differences in the language skills of normal and specifically language-impaired children, 178 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan. DAI 51-04B (October 1990): 1770. Ezergailis, Inta Miske 1975. Male and female: an approach to Thomas Mann's dialectic. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. 1982. Woman writersthe divided self: analysis of novels by Christa Wolf, Ingeborg Bachmann, Doris Lessing et al. Bonn: H. Grundmann. Fabre, Claudine, and Joëlle Réthoré 1985. "Une enquête sous conditions: discours de femmes dans une petite ville (An inquiry subject to conditions: the discourse of women in a small town), International Journal of the Sociology of Language 54: 79-97. (Special issue, "Sociolinguistics in France: current research in urban settings," ed. Andree Tabouret-Keller.) Faludi, Susan 1991. Backlash: the undeclared war against American women. New York: Crown Publishers. Farb, Peter [1974] 1975. Word play: what happens when people talk. New York: Alfred A. Knopf; Bantam edition, 422 pages. Farquhar, Norma, Susan Dunn, and Elizabeth Burr 1972. "Sex stereotypes in elementary and secondary education," Los Angeles, California: Westside Women's Committee, 8 pages. See also Burr, Elizabeth Farrell, Thomas J. 1979. "The female and male modes of rhetoric," College English 40.8 (April): 909-921. Farrell, Warren 1988. Why men are the way they are: the male-female dynamic. New York: Berkley Books, 411 pages.

< previous page

page_218 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_219

next page > Page 219

[1974] 1993. The liberated man; beyond masculinity: freeing men and their relationships with women. New York: Berkley Books. 1993. The myth of male power: why men are the disposable sex. New York: Simon & Schuster. [See Brimelow, Peter.] Farwell, Marilyn 1973. "Women and language, "in Women on the move: a feminist perspective, eds. Jean Ramage Leppaluoto, et al, 165-171. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: KNOW, Inc. Faust, Jean 1970. "Words that oppress," in Women speaking, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: KNOW, Inc., 2 pages. Faust, Norma 1963. "El lenguaje de los hombres y mujeres en Cocama," Peru Indigena 10.22-23:115-117. Fausto-Sterling, Anne 1985. Myths of gender: biological theories about women and men. New York: Basic Books, 258 pages. Fay, Elizabeth A. 1994. "Thoughts on the gendering of (French) tongues," review of Language and sexual difference, by Susan Sellers. Semiotica 98.3/4: 443-448. Feagin, Crawford 1980. "Women's place in nonstandard Southern White English: not so simple," in Language use and the uses of language, eds. Roger W. Shuy and Anna Shnukal. Colloquium on New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Ferrara, Kathleen see Johnstone, Barbara Fessler, Robert W. 1972. "Men and women: who talks most?" manuscript, College Park, Maryland: University of Maryland, 16 pages. Fichteliu-Malmberg, A., I. Johansson, Kerstin Nordin-Thelander 1982. "Språklig könsvariation i skolan I," in Skola, språk och kön, ed. K. Larsson. Lund, Sweden. Fierman, Ella Yensen 1982. Gender differences in assertive and yielding language behavior in groups, 111 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Humanistic Psychology Institute. DAI 42-12B: 4915.

< previous page

page_219 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_220

next page > Page 220

Fink, Robert 1985. "French adjective morphophonemic patterns: their generalization and representation," Linguistics 23.4: 567-596. Fischer, John L. 1958. "Social influences on the choice of a linguistic variant," Word 14.1 (April): 47-56. Reprinted in Dell Hymes, q. v., pp. 483-488. Fisher, Sue 1984. Review of Language, gender and society, eds. Barrie Thome, Cheris Kramarae, and Nancy Henley. Anthropological Linguistics 26.3 (Fall): 350-355. See also Todd, Alexandra Dundas Fiske, Shirley 1978. "Rules of address: Navajo women in Los Angeles," Journal of Anthropological Research 34.1 (Spring): 72-91. Flannery, Regina 1946. "Men's and women's speech in Gros Ventre," International Journal of American Linguistics 12.3:133-135. Flexner, Stuart Berg see Wentworth, Harold Flugel, J. C. 1969. The psychology of clothes. New York: International Universities Press, 257 pages. Fodor, István 1959. "The origin of grammatical gender," Lingua 8: 1-41, 186-214. Ford, Barry see Giles, Howard Forel, Claire-A. see Aebischer, Verena Collura, Giuseppa Francis, W. N[elson] 1989. Review of Grammar and gender, by Dennis Baron. Language 65.1 (March): 176-177. Frank, Francine Wattman 1978. "Women's language in America: myth and reality," in Women's language and style, eds. Douglas Butturff and Edmund L. Epstein, 47-61 q.v. . 1985. "El género gramatical y los cambios sociales," Español Actual 43: 27-50.

< previous page

page_220 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_221

next page > Page 221

1985. "Language planning and sexual equality: guidelines for non-sexist usage," in Sprachwandel und feministische Sprachpolitik, ed. Marlis Hellinger, 231-254, q.v. 1986. "El sexo como factor sociolingüístico: algunas consideraciones teóricas y metodo1ógicas," Actes del V Congreso Internacional de la Asociación de Lingüística y Filología de la América Latina (ALFAL). Caracas, Venezuela, 327337. 1989. "Planificación lingüística y cambio social," Seminario de estudios sobre la mujer, 45-52. Proceedings of the joint 1986 Seminar on Women's Studies, SUNY and Universidad de Costa Rica, San Jose, Costa Rica: Ministry of Culture. [Contains Appendix with list of "Guidelines for non-sexist usage".] Frank, Francine, and Frank Anshen 1983. Language and the sexes. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press [SUNY], 130 pages. Frank, Francine Wattman, and Paula A. Treichler 1989. Language, gender, and professional writing: theoretical approaches and guidelines for nonsexist usage. New York: Modem Language Association of America, 341 pages. [With contributions by H. Lee Gershuny, Sally McConnell-Ginet, and Susan J. Wolfe.] Frank, Jane 1990. "Gender differences in color naming: direct mail order advertisements," American Speech 65.2 (Summer): 114-126. Franken, Mary Weiking 1979. "From sex typing toward androgyny?" Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin (Summer). Frazer, Sir James George 1900. "A suggestion as to the origin of gender in language," Fortnightly (Review) 73 (January): 79-90. Frazier, Nancy, and Myra Sadker 1973 Sexism in school and society. New York: Harper & Row, 215 pages. Freed, Alice F. 197? "Sexism in language," Women: Advocate and Scholar. Conference, Montclair Slate College, New Jersey.

< previous page

page_221 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_222

next page > Page 222

Freeman, Jo n.d. [before 1975]. "The building of the gilded cage," Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: KNOW, Inc., 16 pages. [1975] 1979. Women: a feminist perspective. Palo Alto, California: Mayfield Publishing Company. Fried, Barbara 1979. "Boys will be boys will be boys: the language of sex and gender," in Women look at biology looking at women, eds. Ruth Hubbard, Mary Sue Henifin, and Barbara Fried, q. v. 38-59. Boston: G.K. Hall & Co., pp. 38-59. See also Hubbard, Ruth Friedan, Betty 1963. The feminine mystique. New York: Dell Publishing Company, 384 pages. Friedley, Sheryl A see Lont, Cynthia M. Friedman, Philip see Koenigsknecht, Roy A. Friend, Penelope, R. Kalin, and H. Giles 1979. "Sex bias in the evaluation of journal articles: sexism in England," British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 18: 77-78. Frieze, Irene H. see Ruble, Diane N. Froitzheim, Claudia 1977. Das Problem der geschlechtsspezifischen sprachvariation (eine vergleichende studie) [The problem of sex-specific language variation (a comparison)]. M. A. Thesis, Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Kö1n, Germany. 1980. Sprache und Geschlecht: Bibliographie, April. Trier, Germany: Linguistic Agency, Universität Trier. Froitzheim, Claudia, and B. Simmons 1981. Sprache und Geschlecht: Bibliographie II (series B, paper no 72). Trier, Germany: Linguistic Agency, Universität Trier. Fulkerson, David C. see MacKay, Donald G. Funk, Wilfred 1950. "Romantic stories of words about women," Chapter 15, in Word origins and their romantic stories, 247-253. New York: Grosset and Dunlap.

< previous page

page_222 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_223

next page > Page 223

Furfey, Paul Hanly 1944. "Men's and women's language," The American Catholic Sociological Review 5: 218-223. 1944. "The semantic and grammatical principles in linguistic analysis," Studies in Linguistics 2.3 (Summer): 56-66. Furman, Nelly 1978. "The. study of women in language," Review of The way women write, by Mary Hiatt. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture tout Society 4.1 (Autumn): 182-185. See also McConnell-Ginet, Sally Gal, Susan 1978. "Peasant men can't get wives: language change and sex roles in a bilingual community," Language in Society 7.1 (April): 1-16. 1989. "Between speech and silence: the problematics of research on language and gender," in Gear at the crossroads of knowledge: feminist anthropology in the postmodern era, ed. M. diLeonardo, 175-203. Berkeley: University of California Press. Gale, Wanda S. see McMillan, Julie R. Galeazzi, C. 1986. "Les dénominations des femmes dans deux corpus de presse féminine (1974 et 1984)" (The denominations of women in two corpuses of women's press (1974 and 1984)," Cahiers de Lexicologie 49.2: 53-94. Gardner, Gerald H. F. 1970. "The changing role of men in the changing world of women," paper read at the American Psychological Association, Miami, Florida. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: KNOW, Inc., 4 pages. Garnica, Olga K. see Borker, David Gary, Sandra 1972. "What are we talking about?" Ms. Magazine (December): 72-73, 99. Gathercole, Virginia C. 1989. "The acquisition of sex-neutral uses of masculine forms in English and Spanish," Applied Psycholinguistics 10.4 (December): 401-427.

< previous page

page_223 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_224

next page > Page 224

Genauer, Roberta Weissman 1976. Linguistic sexism and the relative status of females and males, 139 pages Ph.D. dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. DAI 37-12A (June 1977): 7725. George, Mary Lee 1973. "What's in a word?" and "Alternatives to sexist language," in Sexism in education, 27-28. 2930. Emma Willard Task Force on Education, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Gershuny, H. Lee see Nilsen, Aileen Pace Gerritsen, Marinel, and Eveline de Jong 1978. "Her language in his world: a quantitative investigation in language use of women and men in spoken Dutch." Paper presented at the 9th International Congress of Sociology, Uppsala, Sweden. See also Brouwer, Dédé Gerzon, Mark [1982] 1992 A choice of heroes: the changing faces of American manhood. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 279 pages. Gianetto, Robert M. see Bugental, Daphne E. Gilbert, Sandra M., and Susan Gubar 1989. No man's land: the place of the woman writer in the twentieth century, vol 2, New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 455 pages. Giles, Howard, and Patricia Marsh 1979. "Perceived masculinity, androgyny, and accented speech," Language Sciences 1.2 (September): 301-315. See also Coupland, Nikolas Elyan, Olwen Friend, Penelope Giles, Howard, Philip M. Smith, Barry Ford, Susan Condor, and Jitendra N. Thakerar 1980. "Speech style and the fluctuating salience of sex," Language Sciences 2.2 (September): 260-282. Gilley, Hoyt Melvyn, and Collier Stephen Summers 1970. "Sex differences in the use of hostile verbs," Journal of Psychology 76: 33-37. Gilligan, Carol 1982. In a different voice: psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

< previous page

page_224 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_225

next page > Page 225

Gilly, Mary ''Sex roles in advertising: a comparison of television advertisements in Australia, Mexico and the United States," Journal of Marketing Ginsberg, Frances Goodman 1980. Sex of speaker and sex of listener as factors affecting the input language of preschool teachers, 133 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Fordham University. DAI 41-04A (October 1980): 1487. Ginsburg, Ruth Bader 1974. Text, cases and materials on constitutional aspects of sex-based discrimination. St Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing, 129 pages. See also Davidson, Kenneth M. Glass, Lillian [1992] 1993. He says-she says: closing the communication gap between the sexes. New York: Putnam, A Perigee Book, 251 pages. Gleason, Jean Berko [= Jean Berko] n. d. "Code switching in children's language," manuscript, 14 pages. 1974. "Father's language" [lecture at Stanford University in the Child Language Lunches]. 1975. "Fathers and other strangers: men's speech to young children," in Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1975, ed. Daniel P. Dato, 289-297. Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press. Glesser, Goldine C., Louis A. Gottschalk, and Watkins John 1959. "The relationship of sex and intelligence to choice of words: a normative study of verbal behaviour," Journal of Clinical Psychology 15.2 (April): 182-191. Glicksberg, Charles I. 1971. The sexual revolution in Modern American literature. The Hague, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff, 257 pages. 1973. The sexual revolution in Modern English literature. The Hague, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff, 201 pages.

< previous page

page_225 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_226

next page > Page 226

Glück, Helmut 1979. "Der mythos yon den frauensprachen" [The myth of women's language]. Obst 9: Sprache und Geschlecht H. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (=OBST). See also Aebischer, Verena Goffman, Erving 1976. "Gender advertisements," Studies in the Anthropology of Visual Communication, vol. 3.2 (Fall), 154 pages. Washington, D. C.: Society for the Anthropology of Visual Communication. 1979. Gender advertisements. New York: Harper & Row, 84 pages. Goldberg, Philip 1968. "Are women prejudiced against women?" Trans-action 5.5 (April):28-30. Reprinted 1972 in Toward a sociology of women, ed. Constantina Safilios-Rothschild, 10-13. Lexington, Massachusetts: Xerox College Publishing. Goldberg, Susan, and Michael Lewis 1969. "Play behavior in the year-old infant: early sex differences," Child Development 40:21-31. Goldin, Claudia 1990. Understanding the gender gap: an economic history of American women. New York: Oxford University Press. Goldman, L. R. 1986. "A case of 'questions' and a question of 'case'," Text 6.4: 349-392. Goodwin, Marjorie Harness 1990. He-said-she-said: talk as social organization among Black children. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 371 pages. Gotteri, N. 1984. "The evasive neuter in Polish," Papers in Slavonic Linguistics 2:1-8, eds. F. E. Knowles, and J. I Press. Birmingham, England: University of Aston in Birmingham. Gottschalk, Louis A. see Glesser, Goldine C. Goulianos, Joan, ed. 1973. By a woman writt: literature from six centuries by and about women. Indianapolis, Indiana: Bobbs-Merrill Co., 379 pages.

< previous page

page_226 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_227

next page > Page 227

Graddol, David, and Joan Swann 1989. Gender voices. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell, 214 pages. Graham, Alma 1973. "The making of a nonsexist dictionary," Ms. Magazine (December): 12-14, 16. [On the making of the children's wordbook by American Heritage Publishing Company; see also Trombley, Barbara Jean.] 1974. "The making of a nonsexist dictionary," ETC 31.3 (March): 57-64. Graham, Jean Ann see Argyle, Michael Grahame, Kenneth 1899. "What they talked about," in The Golden Age, 133-139. New York: John Lane. Gramrose, Cherlyn S. see Kammer, Ann E. Grasserie, Raoul de la 1909. "De la gynoglose (langage de sexe à sexe)," in Des parler des différentes classes sociales, 330-334, Paris. Gravdal, Kathryn 1991. Ravishing maidens: writing rape in Medieval French literature and law. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 192 pages. Graves, Robert 1965. "Real women," in Mammon and the black goddess, 101-113. Garden City, New York: Doubleday. Gray, John 1992. Men are from Mars, women are from Venus a practical guide for improving communication and getting what you want in your relationships. New York: HarperCollins. Green, Kathryn, and Donald L. Rubin 1991. "Effects of gender inclusive/exclusive language in religious discourse," Journal of Language and Social Psychology 10.2: 81-98. Green, William H. 1977. "Singular pronouns and sexual politics," College Composition and Communication 28.2 (May): 150-153.

< previous page

page_227 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_228

next page > Page 228

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963. "Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements," in Universals of language, ed. Joseph H. Greenberg, 58-90. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press. 1978. "How does a language acquire gender markers?" in vol. 3, Universals of human language, 47-82. 1978. (General Editor) Universals of human language, volumes 1-4. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. Greene, Elsa 1972. "Emily Dickinson was a poetess," College English 34.1: 63-70. Greet, Germaine 1971. "Abuse," in The female eunuch, 259-269. New York: McGraw-Hill. Gregersen, Edgar A. 1979. "Sexual linguistics," in Language, sex and gender, eds. Judith Orasanu et al., 1-19, q.v. Grimshaw, Allen D. 1982. Review of The gentle art of verbal self-defense, by Suzette Haden Elgin. Language 58.3 (September):743. Grobler, Hilda n.d. "Linguistic sexism: considering 'masculinity' and 'feminity'." Manuscript, Republic of South Africa, University of Natal, 17 pages. Gubar, Susan see Gilbert, Sandra M. Gunderson, Doris V. 1972. "Sex roles in reading," ERIC ED 064 671 EDRS. Washington, D.C.: Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. Haan, Dorian de see Brouwer, Dédé Haas, Adelaide 1979. "The acquisition of genderlect," Language, sex and gender, eds. Orasanu, Judith et al., pp. 98-113 q.v. 1979. "Male and female spoken language differences: stereotypes and evidence," Psychological Bulletin 86.3: 616-626. See also Sherman, Mark A.

< previous page

page_228 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_229

next page > Page 229

Haas, Mary R. 1944. "Men's and women's speech in Koasati," Language 20.3 (July-September): 142-149. Reprinted in Dell Hymes, q. v., 228-233. Hacker, Sally L. see Schneider, Joseph W. Haederle, Michael 1993. "Estimating value of a man's life," Los Angeles Times, (May 28) E16-17. See also Letters to the editor, May 30, 1993, E6. Hage, Dorothy 1972. "There's glory for you," Aphra 3.3 (Summer): 2-14. Hager, Philip 1983. "She was upsetconviction is too," Los Angeles Times (June 20). 1989. "Judicial Council moves against sex bias," Los Angeles Times (January 21). Hall, Judith A. 1984. Nonverbal sex differences: communication accuracy and expressive style. Baltimore, Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 207 pages. Hall, Robert A., Jr. 1951. "Sex reference and grammatical gender in English," American Speech 26.3 (October): 170172. 1965. "The 'neuter' in Romance: a pseudo-problem," Word 21.3 (December): 421-427. Hall, Roberta M., and Bernice R. Sandler 1982. "The classroom climate: a chilly one for women?" Project on the Status and Education of WOMEN. Washington, D. C.: Association of American Colleges, 22 pages. 1984. "Out of the classroom: a chilly campus climate for women?" Project on the Status and Education of WOMEN. Washington, D. C.: Association of American Colleges, 20 pages. Halpern, Diane F. [1986] 1992. Sex differences in cognitive abilities, second edition. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, 308 pages.

< previous page

page_229 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_230

next page > Page 230

Hamayon, Roberte 1979. "Le pouvoir des hommes passe par la 'langue des femmes': variations mongoles sur le duo de la légitimité et de l'aptitude," L'Homme 19.3-4, Special issue. Paris: Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales. Hampares, Katherine J. 1976. "Sexism in Spanish lexicography?" Hispania 59.1 (March): 100-109. Hancock, Cecily Raysor 1963. " 'Lady' and 'Woman'," American Speech 38.3 (October): 234- 235. Handelman, Gwen Thayer 1993. "Sisters in law: gender and the interpretation of tax statutes," UCLA Women's Law Journal 3: 39-76. Harding, Susan 1975. "Women and words in a Spanish village," in Toward an anthropology of women, ed. Rayna R. Reiter, 283-308. New York: Monthly Review Press. Hardy, Donald E. 1991. Review of Speaking freely, by Julia Penelope. Language 67.3 (September): 660-661. Harnad, Stevan R. 1976. "On gender differences and language," Current Anthropology 17.2 (June): 327-328. [Discussion on Jonas and Jonas, 328-329.] Harper, Aylene S. see Barry, Herbert, III Harrington, John P. 1944. "Ten ways in which the study of South American languages illuminates linguistic knowledge," Acta Americana 2: 104-108. Haugen, Einar [Before 1978] [Article on language and sex] Vardagsskrift Till Jan Och Jens. Sweden: Uppsala Universitet. 1974. "Sexism and the Norwegian language," presented at the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study. Head, Brian 1977. "Sex as a factor in the use of obscenity," paper read at the summer meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Hawaii. Healy, Bernard see Rudes, Blair A.

< previous page

page_230 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_231

next page > Page 231

Heilbrun, Carolyn G. 1964 [1973]. Toward a recognition of androgyny, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 195 pages. 1979. Reinventing womanhood. New York: Norton, 244 pages. Heilman, Madeline E. 1975. "Miss, Mrs., Ms., or None of the above," American Psychologist 30: 516-518. Heinamaki, Orvokki see Skutnabb Kangas, Tove Heiskala, Risto 1991. "How to be a virtuous male/female: the politics of gender in advertisements in some Finnish magazines in 1955 and 1985." Semiotica 87.3-4: 381-409. Hejinian, Lyn, and Barrett Watten, eds. 1984. Women and Language. Poetics Journal 4 (May). Oakland, California, 143 pages. Hellinger, Marlis, ed. 1985. Sprachwandel und feministische Sprachpolitik: internationale Perspektiven. Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag. Henifin, Mary Sue see Hubbard, Ruth Henley, Nancy M. 1972. "The politics of much," Women: A Journal of Liberation 3.1: 7-8. 1973. "Power, sex, and nonverbal communication, "Berkeley Journal of Sociology 18: 1-26. 1973. "Status and sex: some touching observations," Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 2.2 (August): 91-93. 1977. Body politics: power, sex, and nonverbal communication. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 214 pages. See also Kramer, Cheris Mayo, Clara Thorne, Barrie Henley, Nancy M., and Cheris Kramarae 1991. "Gender, power, and miscommunication," in "Miscommunication" and problematic talk, eds. Nikolas Coupland, Howard Giles, and John Wiemann, 18-43. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

< previous page

page_231 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_232

next page > Page 232

Henley, Nancy, and Barrie Thorne 1977. "Womanspeak and manspeak: sex differences and sexism in communication, verbal and nonverbal," in Beyond sex roles, ed. Alice G. Sargent, 201-218., q.v. Henry, V. 1879. "Sur le parler des hommes et le parler des femmes dans la langue chiquita," Revue de Linguistique et de Philologie Comparée 12: 305-313. See also Adam, Lucien Hensler, Deborah R. see Coughenour, John C. Henton, Caroline 1992. "The abnormality of male speech," in New departures in linguistics, ed. George Wolf, 27-59. New York: Garland. Hentschel, Elke 1987. "Women's graffiti," Multilingua 6.3: 287-308. Herbert, Robert K. 1990. "Sex-based differences in compliment behavior," Language in Society 19.2 (June): 201-224. Herbert, Robert K., and B. Nykiel-Herbert 1986. "Explorations in linguistic sexism: a contrastive sketch," Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 21: 47-85. Hernando Balmori, Clemente 1967. "Habla mujeril," (33-45) and "Habla mujeril y varonil en lenguas diferenciadas de Suramérica," (61-75) Estudios de área lingüística indígena, Centro de Estudios Lingüísticos, vol. 3, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina, 75 pages. Brief notice in International Journal of American Linguistics 36.1 (January 1970): 54-56. Heslin, Richard see Nguyen, Tuan Hewson, John see Dawe-Sheppard, Audrey Heyn, Dalma 1992. The erotic silence of the American wife. New York: Turtle Bay Books. Hiatt, Mary P. 1976. "The sexology of style," Language and Style 9.2 (Spring): 98-107. 1977. The way women write. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 152 pages.

< previous page

page_232 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_233

next page > Page 233

1980. "Women's prose styles: a study of contemporary authors," Language and Style 13.4 (Fall): 36-45. Hill, Alette Olin 1986. Mother tongue, father time: a decade of linguistic revolt. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 162 pages. Hiller, Ulrich 1985. "Some sex-related differences in the use of spontaneous speech," Paper No. 140, Linguistic Agency, University of Duisburg [formerly Trier] (=LAUDT), 17 pages. Himanen, Ritva 1990. Kvinnliga ombudsmän och manliga sjuksköterskor: titlar och yrkesbeteckningar i nusvensk dagspress. Uppsala, Sweden: Hallgren & Fallgren. [Discussion of professional terms, e.g. 'male nurses'.] Hirschman, Lynette 1973. "Female-male differences in conversational interaction," paper read at the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego. 1974. "Analysis of supportive and assertive behavior in conversations," paper read at the Linguistic Society of America. Hoff, Berend J. see Taylor, Douglas R. Hoffman, Leonore, and Deborah Rosenfelt, eds. 1982. Teaching women's literature from a regional perspective. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 213 pages. Hoffman, Nancy, Cynthia Secor, and Adrian Tinsley, eds. 1972. Female studies VI: closer to the ground: women's classes, criticism, programs1972. The Commission on the Status of Women, Modern Language Association, New York. Old Westbury, New York: The Feminist Press, 235 pages. Hoffman, Nicholas von n. d.[before 1975]. "Misogyny in everyday life," Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: KNOW, Inc., 1 page. Hoff-Wilson, Joan 199111. Law, gender, and injustice: a legal history of U. S. women. New York: New York University Press. See also Sachs, Albie

< previous page

page_233 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_234

next page > Page 234

Hogan, Helen 1971. "The ethnography of speaking among the Ashanti," Texas working papers in sociolinguistics 1. Austin, Texas: University of Texas. Hogan, Patricia 1978. "A woman is not a girl and other lessons in corporate speech," in Women in management, ed. Bette Ann Stead. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Hokada, Elizabeth see Weitzman, Lenore J. Hole, Judith, and Ellen Levine 1971. "The politics of language," in Rebirth of feminism. New York: Quadrangle Books, 222-225. Hollien, Harry see Hollien, Patricia Hollien, Patricia and Harry Hollien 1976. "Sex differences in S.F.F. for prepubescent children," presented at the American Association of Phonetic Sciences convention. Holmes, Janet 1986. "Functions of you know in women's and men's speech," Language in Society 15.1 (March): 1-21. 1991. "Language and gender," Language Teaching: The International Abstracting Journal for Language Teachers and Applied Linguists 24.4 (October): 207-220. 1993. "Sex-marking suffixes in written New Zealand English," American Speech 68.4 (Winter): 357-370. Holmquist, Jonathan Carl 1991. "Semantic features and gender dynamics in Cantabrian Spanish," Anthropological Linguistics 33.1 (Spring): 57-80. Hook, Donald 1974. "Sexism in English pronouns and forms of address," General Linguistics 14.2: 86-96. Hopper, Robert, Larry G. Coleman, and John A. Daly 1980. "Expletives and androgyny," Anthropological Linguistics 22.3 (March): 131-137. Horne, Bettie see Bethel, Beth Houck, Charles L. see Davis, Lawrence M.

< previous page

page_234 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_235

next page > Page 235

Houdebine, Anne-Marie 1977. "Les femmes et la langue," Review article of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key; and Language and woman's place, by Robin Lakoff. Tel Quel 74:84-95 (Special issue, "Recherches féminines,") Paris: Seuil. 1979. "La différence sexuelle et la langue," Langage et Société 7:3-30. Paris: M.S.H. 1979. "La difference de sexe et la phonologie," Dilbilim 4: 52-64. Revue du département de français de l'Ecole sup. des langues étrangères. Istanbul: University of Istanbul. 1984. "La féminisation des noms de métiers: prob1ématique d'une recherche linguistique," Medias et Langage 19/20: 61-63, Paris. 1984. "Femmes et langue/sexe et langage," Communication au colloque Femmes, féminisme, recherche, Toulouse, December 1982. Published in the Actes (du colloque), Paris. 1986. "Féminisation des noms de métiers, ou politique et éthique linguistiques," Actes du XIIème Colloque International de Linguistique Fonctionnelle, Alexandrie, 132-136. 1987. "Le français au féminin (French in the feminine)," La Linguistique 23.1: 13-34. 1989. "De la femme dans les discours: construction idéologique et analyses sémiologiques," International colloquy of American, French (Paris VII), Yugoslavian, etc. universities, Dubrovnik. In Femmes, sujets des discours, M. Marini, 51-76. Cahiers du CEDREF, Paris VII, 1990. 1990. "Sexualité et identité ou du codage de la difference sexuelle," (de la diversité de la nomination dans les langues; études d'anthropologie linguistique et psychonalytique). Paris, Colloque AIHUS, XIXème rencontres. In Mythes, sexualité, culture, eds. d'André Durandeau, and Charline Vasseur-Fauconnet, 199-232. Paris: l'Harmattan. 1990. "L'une n'est pas l'autre ou genre et sexe en français contemporain," Actes du Colloque in Genre et Langage, 107136. Université de Nanterre (1989). 1990. "La diversité langagière des êtres humains," in Langages: de la cellule à l'homme, ed. P. Brenot, 123-167; discussion 168-181. Paris: l'Harmattan, pp. 123-167.

< previous page

page_235 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_236

next page > Page 236

1992. ''Sur la féminisation des noms de métiers en français contemporain: etat des lieux après la circulaire," Recherches Féministes 5.1: 153-159. Québec: Université Laval. Houston, Marsha, and Cheris Kramarae 1991. "Women speaking from silence: methods of silencing and of resistance," Discourse and Society 2.4 (October): 387-399. Houwer, Annick de 1987. "Nouns and their companionsor how a three-year-old handles the Dutch gender system," Belgian Journal of Linguistics 2: 55-73. Hovdhaugen, Even 1986. "Genera verborum quot sunt? Observations on the Roman grammatical tradition," Historiographia Linguistica 13.2-3: 307-321. Howard, Pamela 1972. "Watch your language, men," More: A Journalism Review 2.2 (February): 3-4, New York. Howden Joan 1993. "Male and female conversational style in America," Journal of Tsuda College 25 (March), Japan. Howe, Florence, ed. 1970. Female studies II. The Commission on the Status of Women, Modern Language Association, New York. Distributed by KNOW, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 165 pages. Howe, Florence, and Carol Ahlum, eds. 1971. Female Studies III. The Commission on the Status of Women, Modern Language Association, New York. Distributed by KNOW, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 181 pages. Hrdy, Sarah Blaffer 1981. The woman that never evolved. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Hu, Mingyang 1991. "Feminine accent in the Beijing vernacular: a sociolinguistic investigation," Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 26.1 (February): 49-54.

< previous page

page_236 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_237

next page > Page 237

Hubbard, Ruth 1976. "Sexism in science," Radcliffe Quarterly (March): 8-11. Hubbard, Ruth, Mary Sue Henifin, and Barbara Fried, eds. 1979. Women look at biology looking at women: a collection of feminist critiques. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Schenkman, 268 pages. Huber, Joan 1976. "On the generic use of male pronouns," The American Sociologist 11.2 (May): 89. [Response to James J. Kilpatrick. "And some are more equal than others," 85-6]. Hug, Proctor, Jr. see Coughenour, John C. Hughes, Diana L., and Patricia L. Casey 1986. "Pronoun choice for gender-unspecified agent words: developmental differences," Language and Speech 29.1: 59-68. Hughes, Helen E., ed. 1977. Review of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. The Creative Woman 1.1: 4. Park Forest South, Illinois: Governors State University. Hughes, Marija Matich 1971. "And then there were two: a woman's right to her name," Hastings Law Journal 23.1 (November): 233-247. Hultman, Tor G., and M. Westman 1977. Gymnasistsvenska. Lund, Sweden. See also Einarsson, Jan Hume, Elizabeth, and Bonnie S. McElhinny, eds. 1993. The COSWL (Committee on the Status of Women in Linguistics) collection of language and gender syllabi. Washington, D.C.: Linguistic Society of America. Hymes, Dell, ed. 1964. Language in culture and society: a reader in linguistics and anthropology. New York: Harper and Row, 764 pages. Ide, Asako 1992. Women's language as a linguistic weapon: a study of the speech of women executives in Japan. Dissertation, Japan Women's University.

< previous page

page_237 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_238

next page > Page 238

Ide, Sachick 1979. Onna no kotoba, otoko no kotoba [Language of women, language of men]. Tokyo: Nihon Keizai Tusinsha. 1980. "Eigo to nihongo no naka no joseigo [Language of women in English and Japanese]," Kotoba [Words] 4: 21-25. 1982. "Japanese sociolinguistics: politeness and women's language," Lingua 57.2-4: 357-385. Ide, Sachiko, Naomi Hanaoka McGloin, eds. 1990. Aspects of Japanese women's language. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers, 163 pages. Irigaray, Luce 1987. "L'ordre sexuel du discours (The sexual organization of speech)," Langages 85: 81-123. Isino, Hirosi 1980. "Yoronchosa ni miru kotoba no danjosa [Gender differences in Japanese as observed in opinion polls]," Kotoba [Words] 4: 34-37. István, Fodor 1959. "The origin of grammatical gender I," Lingua 8: 1-41. 1959. "The origin of grammatical gender," Lingua 8: 186-214. Ivic *, Milka 1989. "Neka zapazanja* o broju i rodu u srpskohrvatskom jeziku (Some observations on number and gender in Serbocroatian)," Juznoslovenski* filolog 45: 27-44. Jackson, Marianne Quinn 1982. Sex and role differences in the use of female register, 167 pages. Yeshiva University. DAI 43-01B (July): 294. Jacobs, Neil G. 1990. "Northeastern Yiddish gender-switch: abstracting dialect features regionally," Diachronica 7.1: 69-100. Jacobus, Mary, ed. 1979. Women writing and writing about women. Oxford University Women's Studies Committee, Oxford Women's Series 3. London: Croom Helm, 201 pages. Jakobson, Roman 1960. "The gender pattern of Russian," Studii si Cercetari* Lingvistice 11.3: 541-543.

< previous page

page_238 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_239

next page > Page 239

James, Henry 1907. "The speech of American women," Harper's Bazaar 41.4: 113-117. Janeway, Elizabeth 1980. Powers of the weak. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 350 pages. Jarrard, Mary Elizabeth W., and Phyllis R. Randall 1982. Women speaking: an annotated bibliography of verbal and non-verbal cornmunition 1970-1980. New York: Garland Publishing, 478 pages. Jaworski, Adam 1986. A linguistic picture of women's position in society: a Polish-English contrastive study. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 1987. Review of Linguistic sex roles in conversation: social variation in the expression of tentativeness in English, by Bent Preisler. Multilingua 6.2: 197-207. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 1989. "On gender and sex in Polish," International Journal of the Sociology of Language 78:83-92 (Special issue, "Sociolinguistics in Poland," ed. Karol Janicki.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Jeffrey, Mildred 1976. "Language and sex stereotyping," in Responses to sexism, ed. Ouida Clapp. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English. Jenkins, Mercilee M., and Cheris Kramarae 1981. "A thief in the house: women and language," in Men's studies modified, ed. Dale Spender, 11-22. Elmsford, New York: Pergamon Press. See also Kramarae, Cheris Jenkins, Nancy see Cheshire, Jenny Jespersen, Otto [1921] 1964. "The Woman," Chapter 13, in Language: its nature, development, and origin, 237-254. New York: W. W. Norton. [1924] 1965. "Sex and gender," Chapter 17, in The philosophy of grammar, 226-243. New York: W. W. Norton. [1933] 1964. "Gender," Chapter 19, in Essentials of English grammar, 188-196 University of Alabama Press.

< previous page

page_239 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_240

next page > Page 240

Jochnowitz, George 1982. "Everybody likes pizza, doesn't he or she?" American Speech 57.3 (Fall): 198-203. Joesting, Joan 1983. "The psychology of sex differences in the use of masculine and feminine pronouns in written English," The USF Quarterly 22: 1-2, 30, 38, 43, 46. Johansson, I. see Fichteliu-Malmberg, A. John, Vera P. see Soskin, William F. Johnson, Carole Schulte, and Inga Kromann Kelly 1978. " 'He' and 'she': changing language to fit a changing world," in Women in management, ed. Bette Ann Stead, 173-178. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Johnson, Donna M., and Duane H. Roen 1992. "Complimenting and involvement in peer reviews: gender variation," Language in Society 21.1 (March): 27-57. Johnson, Margaret Estes 1980. Sex typed language, 113 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College. DAI 41-04B (October 1980): 1484. Johnstone, Barbara, Kathleen Ferrara, and Judith Mattson Bean 1992. "Gender, politeness, and discourse management in same-sex and cross-sex opinion-poll interviews," Journal of Pragmatics 18.5 (November): 405-430. Jolly, Eric J. 1978. "Sex role stereotyping in ASL," presented at the American Sociological Association, San Francisco, California. Jonas, A. David see Jonas, Doris F. Jonas, Doris F, and A. David Jonas 1975. "Gender differences in mental function: a clue to the origin of language," Current Anthropology 16.4 (December): 626-630. See also Cowan, H. K. J. Dibble, Harold L. Harnad, Stevan R. Jones, Charles 1967. "The grammatical category of gender in Early Middle English," English Studies 48: 289-305. 1988. Grammatical gender in English: 950 to 1250. London: Croom Helm, 240 pages.

< previous page

page_240 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_241

next page > Page 241

Jong, Eveline de see Gerritsen, Marinel Jordan, Michael P. 1992. "Sensitive avoidance of sexist pronouns in written English," in The eighteenth LACUS forum 1991, 445-455. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Linguistic Association of Canada and the United States. Jordan, Michael P., and Jennifer J. Connor 1987. "Avoiding sexist pronouns," Technostyle 6.3. Jorden, Eleanor Harz 1974. "Female speech: persisting myth and persisting reality," in The Report of the Second U.S.Japan Joint Sociolinguistic Conference, 103-107. Tokyo: Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. Jugaku, Hisako 1980. "'Onna no kotoba' no rekisiteki haikei [Historical background of language of women]," Kotoba [Words] 4: 9-15. 1988 Nihongo to onna [The Japanese language and women]. Tokyo: Iwanamishinsho. Kagan, Jerome 1964. "Acquisition and significance of sex typing and sex role identity," in Review of Child Development Research, vol. 1, eds. Martin L. Hoffman and Lois Wladis Hoffman, 137-167. Chicago: Russell Sage Foundation. Kaiser, Susan B., Howard G. Schutz, and Joan L. Chandler 1987. "Cultural codes and sex-role ideology: a study of shoes," American Journal of Semiotics 5.1: 13-33. Kalin, R. see Friend, Penelope Kammer, Ann E., Cherlyn S. Granrose, and Jan B. Sloan 1979. Science, sex, and society: the project for the advancement of women in science careers. "Language," by Mary Ritchie Key [reprinted material] 339-352. Women's Educational Equity Act Program, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Printed by Education Development Center, Newton, Massachusetts. Kaplan, Cora 1976. "Language and gender," Papers on patriarchy, 21-37. Lewes, Sussex: Women's Publishing Collective.

< previous page

page_241 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_242

next page > Page 242

Karlsson, Inger 1986. "Glottal wave forms for normal female speakers," Journal of Phonetics 14.3-4 (October/December): 415-419. 1991. "Female voices in speech synthesis," Journal of Phonetics 19.1: 111-120. Karst, Kenneth L. 1989. Belonging to America: equal citizenship and the constitution. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 328 pages (esp. 105-124). Kasper, Carol 1988. AAUP questionnaire on the use of gender-biased language in university press publications and public documents. New York: Association of American University Presses, New York Task Force on Bias-Free Language, 11 pages. Kassai, Georges 1975. "Quelques observations à propos du langage des femmes," 22-25. Actes du IIe Colloque de Linguistique Fonctionnelle. Clermont-Ferrand. Kaufman, Gloria, and Mary Kay Blakely, eds. 1980. Pulling our own strings: feminist humor & satire. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 192 pages. Kauvar, Elaine M. 1979. "Comment on Nelly Furman's 'The study of women in language,'" Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 5.2 (Winter): 366. Kay, Herma Hill [See Davidson, Kenneth M., Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Herma Hill Kay, 1974.] 1992. Text, cases, and materials on sex discrimination, q.v. third edition, Supplement. 1991. [bibliography of feminist legal theory] Iowa Law Review 77.1 (October): 87-177. Kaye, Alan S. 1977, Review of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. Lingua 42.2-3: 231-234.

< previous page

page_242 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_243

next page > Page 243

Kean, Mary-Louise 1979. "Comment on McConnell-Ginet's 'Intonation in a man's world'," with a reply by McConnellGinet. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 5.2 (Winter): 367-372. Keenan, Elinor [1974] 1989. "Norm-makers, norm-breakers: uses of speech by men and women in a Malagasy community," in Explorations in the ethnography of speaking, eds. Richard Baumann and Joel Sherzer, 125-143. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Kekelis, Linda S. 1976. "Comparisons of the linguistic styles of men and women," Manuscript, San Francisco State University, 16 pages. Kelly, Edward Hanford 1969. "A 'bitch' by any other name is less poetic," Word Study 45.1 (October): 1-4. Springfield, Massachusetts: G. & C. Merriam. Kelly, Inga Kromann see Johnson, Carole Schulte Kemp, Alan P. see Bostrom, Robert N. Kendall, Martha B. 1978. Review of Male and female language [sic], by Mary Ritchie Key. International Journal of American Linguistics 44.3 (July): 253-254. Keroes, Jo 1990. "But what do they say? Gender and the content of student writing," Discourse Processes 13.2: 243257. Kerr, James R. 1977. "Why we need a woman on the supreme court," Alumnus 5.3 (June): 7-10, 18. Edwardsville, Illinois: Southern Illinois University. Kessler, Suzanne J., and Wendy McKenna 1978. Gender: an ethnomethodological approach. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 233 pages. Kester, Judy n. d. [before 1975]. "Why women talk that way: cultural influences on male-female verbal behavior," California State University, San Jose, 25 pages.

< previous page

page_243 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_244

next page > Page 244

Kett, Merriellyn, and Viriginia Underwood 1978. How to avoid sexism: a guide for writers, editors, and publishers. Chicago, Illinois: Lawrence Ragan Communications. Key, Mary Ritchie 1970a. "Linguistic behavior of male and female" [course outline and bibliography], Female studies: No. 2, 118-120, ed. Florence Howe. Commission on the Status of Women, Modern Language Association, New York. Distributed by KNOW, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 1970b. "Linguistic behavior of male and female," paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Dialect Society, New York. 1971. "The role of male and female in children's booksdispelling all doubt," Wilson Library Bulletin 46.2 (October): 167-176. Reprinted in Contemporary readings in child psychology, eds. E. Mavis Hetherington, and Ross D. Parke, 422-429, 1977, New York: McGraw-Hill. Reprinted in Woman: dependent or independent variable? eds. Rhoda Kesler Unger and Florence L. Denmark, 56-70, 1975. See also Gene Marine, 1972; Lois Swift, and David W. Swift, 1976. 1972. "Linguistic behavior of male and female," Linguistics: An International Review 88 (August): 15-31. 1973. "The language of male and female," presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, California (December). 1974. "Report of innovative projects in university instruction, 'The Proper Study of Humankind'," [to Angus E. Taylor, Vice-President, Academic Affairs.] University of California Regent's Grant, 8 pages. 1975. "Dialects of nonverbal behavior," Chapter VIII, in Paralanguage and kinesics (nonverbal communication), 135161. Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press. 1975. Male/Female language: with a comprehensive bibliography. Metuchen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press, 200 pages.

< previous page

page_244 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_245

next page > Page 245

1977. "The linguistic discoveries of Catherine the Great," in The Third LACUS Forum 1976, eds. Robert J. Di Pietro and Edward L. Blansitt, Jr., 39-45. Columbia, South Carolina: Hornbeam Press. 1977. "Males, females, and linguistic and cultural categories," in Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics, Linguistics and Anthropology, 37-42. Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press. 1977. Foreword to "Language, history and the legal process: a profile of the 'Reasonable Man'," by Ronald K. L. Collins, Rutgers-Camden Law Journal 8.2 (Winter): 311. 1980. Catherine the Great's linguistic contribution. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: Linguistic Research, Inc., 200 pages. 1980. Review of Words and women, by Casey Miller and Kate Swift. American Speech 55.2 (Summer): 124-129. 1981. Review of The way women write, by Mary Hiatt. Style 15.4 (Fall): 456-457. In preparation: "The communicative devices of male and female." Khosroshahi, Fatemeh 1989. "Penguins don't care, but women do: a social identity analysis of a Whorfian problem," Language in Society 18.4 (December): 505-525. Kimball, Geoffrey 1987. "Men's and women's speech in Koasati: a reappraisal," International Journal of American Linguistics 53.1 (January): 30-38. 1990. "A further note on Koasati 'men's' speech," International Journal of American Linguistics 56.1 (January): 158162. Kimmel, Michael S., ed. 1987. Changing men: new directions in research on men and masculinity. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, 320 pages. Kimura, Doreen 1985. "Male brain, female brain: the hidden difference," Psychology Today (November): 50-52, 54, 56-58. 1989 Speech and language, [selections, introduction by Doreen Kimura.] Boston, Massachusetts: Birkhauser.

< previous page

page_245 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_246

next page > Page 246

King, Ruth 1984. Review of Language, gender and society, eds. Barrie Thorne, Cheris Kramarae, and Nancy Henley. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 29.1 (Spring): 81-83. Kissling, Elizabeth, and Cheris Kramarae 1991. ''Stranger compliments: the interpretation of street remarks," Women's Studies in Communication 14.1 (Spring): 75-91. Klajn, Ivan 1984-1985. "On conceptual neuter," Zbornik Matice srpske za filologiju i lingvistiku 27/28: 347-354. Klann, Gisela 1978. "Weibliche spracheidentität, sprache und kommunikation yon frauen," [Women's speechidentity, speech, and communication among women]. Obst 8: Sprache und Geschlecht I. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (=OBST). Kline, Judith see Swatos, William Koenigsknecht, Roy A., and Philip Friedman 1976. "Syntax development in boys and girls," Child Development 47.4 (December): 1109-1115. Kolba, Ellen D. 1976. "Analyzing sex and gender," in Responses to sexism, ed. Ouida Clapp. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). Kolodny, Annette [1978] 1979. "'To render home a paradise': women on the new world languagescape," in Women's language and style, eds. Douglas Butturff and Edmund L. Epstein. Komarovsky, Mirra 1946. "Cultural contradictions and sex roles," American Journal of Sociology 52.3 (November): 184-189. 1973. "Cultural contradictions and sex roles: the masculine case," American Journal of Sociology 78.4 (January): 873884. Konishi, Toshi see MacKay, Donald G. Koppelman Cornillon, J. 1973. "Teaching about sexist language in a first year college composition course," paper read at the Midwest Modern Language Association.

< previous page

page_246 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_247

next page > Page 247

Korom, Frank J. see Appadurai, Arjun Korsmeyer, Carolyn 1977. "The hidden joke: generic uses of masculine terminology," in Feminism and philosophy, eds. Mary Vetterling-Braggin, Frederick A. Elliston and Jane English, pp. 138-153. Kotker, Zane 1980. "The 'feminine' behavior of powerless people," Savvy 1.3: 36-42. Kramer, Cheris [=Kramarae] 1973. "Women's rhetoric in New Yorker cartoons: patterns for a Mildred Milquetoast," paper presented at the Speech Communication Association Convention, 13 pages. 1974. "Wishy washy mommy talk" Psychology Today 8: 83-85. 1974. "Women's speech: separate but unequal?'' Quarterly Journal of Speech 60.1 (February): 14-24. 1975. "Sex-related differences in address systems," Anthropological Linguistics 17.5 (May): 198-210. 1975. Women's and men's perception of female and male speech. Ph. D. Dissertation, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois: University of Illinois. 1977. "Perceptions of female and male speech," Language and Speech 20.2: 151-161. Kramer, Cheris, Barrie Thorne, and Nancy Henley 1978. "Perspectives on language and communication," [review essay]. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 3.3 (Spring): 638-651. Kramarae, Cheris [=Kramer] 1980. The voices and words of women and men, ed. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 1981. "Women and men speaking: frameworks for analysis," special issue of Women's Studies International Quarterly, ed. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House, 194 pages. 1982. "Gender: how she speaks," in Attitudes towards language variation: social and applied contexts, eds. Ellen Bouchard Ryan and Howard Giles, 84-98. London: Edward Arnold. 1986. "A feminist critique of sociolinguistics," Journal of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association 8: 1-22.

< previous page

page_247 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_248

next page > Page 248

1987. "Present problems with the language of the future," Women's Studies 14.2: 183-186. 1988. "Censorship of women's voices on radio," in Gender and discourse: the politics of talk, eds. Sue Fisher and Alexandra Todd, 243-254. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex. 1988. "'I have been a disappointed woman': Lucy Stone and others on education and language study," Center Review: Annual Magazine of the Center for the Study of Women in Society, 13-16. Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon. 1988. Technology and women's voices, ed. New York: Routledge, 246 pages. 1990. "Changing the complexion of gender in language research," in Handbook of language and social psychology, eds. Howard Giles and W. Peter Robinson, 345-361. New York: Wiley & Sons. In press "Harassment and everyday life,'' in Women making meaning, ed. Lana Rakow. London: Routledge. See also Henley, Nancy M. Houston, Marsha Jenkins, Mercilee M. Kissling, Elizabeth Taylor, H. Jennie Thorne, Barrie Treichler, Paula A. Kramarae, Cheris, and Mercilee Jenkins 1987. "Women take back the talk," in Women and language in transition, ed. Joyce Penfield, 137-156. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press (SUN-Y). Kramarae, Cheris, Muriel R. Schulz, and William M. O'Barr, eds. 1984. Language and power. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publishers, 320 pages. Kramarae, Cheris, and Paula A. Treichler 1990. "Power relationships in the classroom," in Gender in the classroom: power and pedagogy, eds. Susan L. Gabriel and Isaiah Smithson, 41-59. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. Kramarae, Cheris, and Paula A. Treichler, with assistance of Ann Russo 1985. A feminist dictionary. Boston: Pandora Press, 587 pages.

< previous page

page_248 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_249

next page > Page 249

1986. A feminist dictionary. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Reissued 1993, with title: Amazons, Blue Stockings, and Crones, Harper, 587 pages. Kramsch, Claire see McConnell-Ginet, Sally Kraus, Flora von 1924. "Die Frauensprache bei den primitiven Völkern," Imago 10.215: 296-313. Krause, Fritz 1911. In den Wildnissen Brasiliens: Bericht und Ergebnisse der Leipziger Araguaya-Expedition 1908. Leipzig: R. Voigtländer, 60-61, 342-344, 416-457. [Carayan language family.] Kreckel, Marga see Argyle, Michael Kröll, Heinz 1953. "Termes désignant les seins de la femme en portugais," Orbis 2: 19-32. Kroskrity, Paul V. 1983. "On male and female speech in the Pueblo Southwest," International Journal of American Linguistics 49.1 (January): 88-91. Krötzsch-Viannay, Monique 1979. "Sexisme et lexicograp ie. les mots 'femme' et 'homme' dans le dictionnaire [Sexism and lexicography: the words 'woman' and 'man' in the dictionary]. Obst 9: Sprache und Geschlecht II. Kupers, Terry Allen 1993. Revisioning men's lives: gender, intimacy, and power. New York: Guilford Publications, 200 pages. Kurzon, Dennis 1989. "Sexist and nonsexist language in legal texts: the state of the art," International Journal of the Sociology of Language 80:99-113. (Special issue, "Current issues in language planning and language education," ed. Florian Coulmas.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. La Barre, Weston 1980. "Social cynosure and social structure," in Culture in context: Selected writings of Weston La Barre, 203-214. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.

< previous page

page_249 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_250

next page > Page 250

1984. Muelos: a stone age superstition about sexuality. New York: Columbia University Press, 140 pages. La Belle, Jenijoy 1988. Herself beheld: the literature of the looking glass. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 202 pages. Lakoff, George 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 614 pages. Lakoff, Robin [Tolmach] = Robin T. Lakoff 1973. "Language and woman's place," Language in Society 2.1 (April): 45-80. 1974. "You are what you say," Ms. Magazine 3.1 (July): 65-67. 1975. Language and woman's place. New York: Harper Colophon Books, 85 pages. 1977. "Language and sexual identity," review article of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. Semiotica 19.1-2: 119-130. 1977. ''Woman's language as paradigm in a grammar of style," Language and Style 10.4: 222-247. 1979. "Stylistic strategies within a grammar of style," in Language, sex and gender, eds. Judith Orasanu et al., 51-78 q.v. 1986. "You say what you are: acceptability and gender-related language," in Dialect and language variation, eds. Harold B. Allen, and Michael D. Linn, 403-414. Orlando: Academic Press. 1990. Talking power: the politics of language in our lives. HarperCollins, Basic Books, 324 pages. 1993. Review of Aspects of Japanese women's language, by Sachiko Ide, and Naomi Hanaoka McGloin. Multilingua 12.1: 95-99. Lakoff, Robin Tolmach, and Deborah Tannen 1979. "Communicative strategies in conversation: the case of Scenes From a Marriage." Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. 1984. "Conversational strategy and metastrategy in a pragmatic theory: the example of Scenes from a Marriage," Semiotica 49.3-4: 323-346.

< previous page

page_250 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_251

next page > Page 251

LaLiberté, Thérèse 1976. "La langue et le sexe: les femmes ne patient pas le même français, a que les hommes," Chateleine (March). Lalljee, Mansur see Argyle, Michael Lambert, Deborah see Cole, Phyllis Lamphere, Louise see Rosaldo, Michelle Zimbalist Lance, Donald M. 1985. "A study of sex-marked language," paper read at the Midwest American Dialect Society, St. Louis, Missouri, 6 pages. 1993. "Investigating sex-marked language," in Language variation in North American English: research and teaching, eds. A. Wayne Glowka, and Donald M. Lance, 242-247. New York: Modem Language Association of America. Landis, M. H., and H. E. Burtt 1924. "A study of conversations," Journal of Comparative Psychology 4: 81-89. Langenfelt, Gösta 1951. "She and her instead of it and its," Anglia 70.1: 90-101. Lapadat, Judy, and Maureen Seesahai 1977. "Male versus female codes in informal contexts," Sociolinguistics Newsletter 8.3 (Fall): 7-8. Missoula, Montana: University of Montana. Larmer, Larry E., and Mary Badami, eds. 1982. Proceedings of the 2nd and 3rd conferences on communication, language and gender. Madison: University of WisconsinExtension. Lasch, Richard 1907. "Über Sondersprachen und ihre Entstehung: I. Frauensprachen," Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Vienna. Mitteilungen 37: 89-101. Laureys, G. 1978. "Kvinnan i lexikonet I," in Papers from the Fourth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, ed. K. Gregersen, 11-16. Hindsgavl: Odense University Press. Lawrence, Barbara 1975. "Four-letter words CAN hurt you," in Philosophy and sex, eds. Robert Baker and Frederick Elliston, 31-33. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books.

< previous page

page_251 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_252

next page > Page 252

Lawson, Edwin D. 1971. "Semantic differential analysis of men's first names," Journal of Psychology 78.2 (July): 229240. 1974. "Women's first names: a semantic differential analysis," Names 22.2 (June): 52-58. 1980. ''First names on the campus: a semantic differential analysts," Names 28.1 (March): 69-83. Lawson, Sarah 1980. "Words and women: a transatlantic view." Review of Words and women, by Casey Miller and Kate Swift. American Speech 55.2 (Summer): 129-131. 1983. "Girl in British newspapers," American Speech 58.1 (Spring): 84-85. 1984. "More on sexism and language," review of Man made language, by Dale Spender. American Speech 59.4 (Winter): 369-372. Lazerson, Barbara Hunt 1986. "Talking like a lady; talkin' to a chick; etc." review of Language and the sexes, by Francine Frank and Frank Anshen. American Speech 61.2 (Summer): 160-165. Leathers, Dale Gordon 1986. "Female-male interaction," Chapter 13, in Successful nonverbal communication: principles and applications. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. Lebrun, Yvan 1978-1979. "Language and sexuality," Language Sciences 1.2 (September): 294-300. Lee, Motoko Y. 1976. "The married woman's status and role as reflected in Japanese: an exploratory sociolinguistic study," Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 1.4 (Summer): 991-999. LeMaster, Barbara Celeste 1990. The maintenance and loss of female and male signs in the Dublin deaf community [Ireland], 341 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, DAI 51-09A (March): 3057. Lennert, Midge, and Norma Willson 1973. A woman's new worm dictionary. Lomita, California: 51% Publications.

< previous page

page_252 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_253

next page > Page 253

Lent, John A., compiler 1991. Women and mass communications: an international annotated bibliography. Bibliographies and Indexes in Women's Studies 11. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 481 pages. Lenz, Ilse 1979. "Fühlen, Einfühlen und weibliche Sprache: Zu Sprache, Klasses, Sexus and Beziehungsarbeit in Japan," ["Feeling, empathy and female speech: work on language, class, sex and relationships in Japan]. Obst 9: Sprache und Geschlecht II. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (=OBST). Leo, John 1984. "Big thoughts about small talk," Time (September 17): 98. Lerner, Gerda 1986. The creation of patriarchy. New York: Oxford University Press, 318 pages. Lerner, Harriet E. 1976. "Girls, ladies, or women? The unconscious dynamics of language choice," Comprehensive Psychiatry 17.2 (March/April): 295-299. Létoublon, Francoise 1988. "Le soleil et la lune, l'eau et le fell scion Meillet, de la grammaire comparée à l'anthropologie (Sun and moon, water and fire in the work of Meillet: from comparative grammar to anthropology)," Histoire, Epistémologie, Langage 10.2: 127-139. Levine, Ellen see Hole, Judith Lévy, Ernest-Henri 1924. "Langue des homme et langue des femmes en Judéo-Allemand," Melanges: offerts à M. Charles Andler par ses amis et ses eleves. Publications de la Faculté des lettres de l'université de Strasbourg, Fasc. 21: 197-215. Levy, Yonata 1988. "On the early learning of formal grammatical systems: evidence from studies of the acquisition of gender and countability," Journal of Child Language 15.1 (February): 179-187.

< previous page

page_253 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_254

next page > Page 254

Lewis, Michael 1972. "Culture and gender roles: there's no unisex in the nursery," Psychology Today (May): 54-57. See also Cherry, Louise Goldberg, Susan Lieberman, Marcia R. 1972. " 'Some day my prince will come': female acculturation through the fairy tale," College English (December): 383-395. Lieberman, Philip see Sachs, Jacqueline Likomanova, Iskra, and Violeta Mileva 1989. "Za njakoi osobenosti na sastestvitelnite * imena za lica ot zeiski* pol v slavjanskite ezici (On some peculiarities of nouns designating female individuals in the Slavonic languages)," Contrastive Linguistics 14.2: 5-11. Loden, Marilyn, and Judy B. Rosener 1991. Workforce America! Managing employee diversity as a vital resource. Homewood, Illinois: Business One Irwin. Lont, Cynthia M., and Sheryl A. Friedley, eds. 1989. Beyond boundaries: sex and gender diversity in communication, Fairfax, Virginia: George Mason University Press, 356 pages. Lopata, Helene Z., and Barrie Thorne 1978. "On the term 'sex roles'," Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 3.3 (Spring): 718-721. Love, Leonore see Bugental, Daphne E. Lundberg, Patricia Lorimer 1988. "Still more on sex, gender, and language," review of Grammar and gender, by Dennis E. Baron. American Speech 63.2 (Summer): 169-175. Lybrand, Donna Gale 1982. Gender-specific speech features: a sociolinguistic inquiry into the language of males and females in an Andalusian Agro-town (Spain), 147 pages. Ph. D. dissertation, Dallas, Texas: Southern Methodist University. DAI 43.6A (December 1982): 2018. Macaulay, Ronald K. S. 1978. "The myth of female superiority in language," Journal of Child Language 5.2: (June) 353-363.

< previous page

page_254 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_255

next page > Page 255

1994. "Sex differences," Chapter 17, in The social art: language and its uses, 95-100. New York: Oxford University Press. MacCannell, Juliet Flower, ed. 1990. The other perspective in gender and culture: rewriting women and the symbolic. Irvine Studies in the Humanities. New York: Columbia University Press. MacDougald, Duncan, Jr. [1961] 1967. "Language and sex," in The Encyclopedia of Sexual Behavior, vol. II, eds. Albert Ellis and Albert Abarbanel, 585-598. New York, New York Hawthorn Books. MacKay, Donald G., and David C. Fulkerson 1979. "On the comprehension and production of pronouns," Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18.6 (December): 661-673. MacKay, Donald G., and Toshi Konishi 1980. "Personification and the pronoun problem," Women's Studies International Quarterly 3.2-3: 149-163. MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1979. Sexual harassment of working women: a case of sex discrimination. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 312 pages. 1992. "Pornography as discrimination and defamation," Boston University Law Review 71.5 (November): 793-815. 1993 Only words. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 152 pages. MacNeilage, Linda A., and Kathleen A. Adams 1982. Assertiveness at work: how to increase your personal power on the job. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. McCawley, James D. 1976. Review of Language and woman's place, by Robin Lakoff. Reason (August): 40-42. McConnell-Ginet, Sally 1975. "Our Father tongue: essays in linguistic politics," Diacritics 5.4: 44-50. [Discussion of Robin Lakoff, Language and woman's place, q.v.] 1978. "Intonation in a man's world," Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 3.3 (Spring): 541-559.

< previous page

page_255 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_256

next page > Page 256

1979. "Prototypes, pronouns, and persons," in Ethnolinguistics: Boas, Sapir and Whorl Revisited, ed. Madeleine Mathiot, 63-83. The Hague: Mouton. 1979. Reply to Mary Louise Kean. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 5 (Winter): 371-372. 1979. Review of The way women write, by Mary P. Hiatt. Language in Society 8.3 (December): 466-469. 1980. "Difference and language: a linguist's perspective," in The future of difference, eds. H. Eisenstein, and A. Jardine, 157-166. Boston: G. K. Hall. Reissued in paperback, Rutgers University Press, 1985. 1980. "Women's minds and lives: making linguistic connections," Human Ecology Forum 11.1: 12-15. 1983. Review of Language, sex and gender, eds. Judith Orasanu et al.; and Sexist language, ed. Mary VetterlingBraggin. Language 59.2 (June): 373-391. 1984. "Making language work for women," in Women in the courtroom: sharpening our litigation skills, 1-40. Seattle, Washington: Northwest Women's Law Center, Proceedings of Continuing Legal Education Seminar. 1984. "The origins of sexist language in discourse," Discourses in reading and linguistics, vol. 433, eds. S. J. White and V. Teller, 123-136. New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1985. "Feminism in linguistics," in For Alma Mater: theory and practice in feminist scholarship, eds. P. A. Treichler, C. Kramarae, B. Stafford, 159-176. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. 1988. "Language and gender," Linguistics: the Cambridge survey, vol. IV, ed. Frederick J. Newmeyer, 75-99. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1988. Review of Language, gender, and sex in comparative perspective, by Susan U. Philips, Susan Steele, and Christine Tanz. Language 64.4 (December): 778-781. 1990. "Feminist linguistics: a whirlwind tour," in Proceedings of the 1989 Conference on the Status of Women in Linguistics, eds. P. J. Eckert and A. Davison. Stanford, California. Distributed through ERIC Clearinghouse. 1991. "Talking politics," Women's Review of Books 8.6 (March): 12-13.

< previous page

page_256 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_257

next page > Page 257

1992. "Sex and language," International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, vol. 3, ed. William Bright, 425-427. New York: Oxford University Pres. See also Butturff, Douglas R., and Edmund L.Epstein Eckert, Penelope Kean, Mary-Louise Thorne, Barrie, Cheris Kramarae, and Nancy Henley McConnell-Ginet, Sally, Ruth Borker, and Nelly Furman, eds. 1980. Women and language in literature and society New York: Praeger, 352 pages. Reissued, [redesigned cover] 1986, Greenwood. Japanese translation, 1991. McConnell-Ginet, Sally, and Penelope Eckert In press. "Communities of practice: where language, gender, and power all live." Proceedings of 1992 Berkeley Conference on Women and Language: Locating Power. McConnell-Ginet, Sally, and Claire Kramsch 1992. "(Con)textual approaches to language study," in Text and context: cross-disciplinary perspectives on language study, eds. C. Kramsch and S. McConnell-Ginet, 3-26. Lexington, Massachusetts: D. C. Heath. McElhinny, Bonnie S. 1989. Review of Women and language in transition, by Joyce Penfield. Language 65.4 (December): 906-907. See also Hume, Elizabeth McGloin, Naomi Hanaoka see Ide, Sachiko McGrath, Diane see McMillan, Julie R. McGuire, Michael T. see Masters, Roger D. McGuirk Beltran, Jeanne 1984. Speaker perception as a function of speaker gender, linguistic behavior, and gender schema of the perceiver, 136 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Adelphi University, The Institute of Advanced Psychological Studies, DAI 45-09B (March 1985): 3114. McKenna, Wendy see Kessler, Suzanne J. McKeown, M. Margaret see Coughenour, John C. McKissick, Dorothy 1973. "Language, sex roles and women's self concept," Dept. of Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles, 25 pages.

< previous page

page_257 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_258

next page > Page 258

McMillan, Julie R., A. Kay Clifton, Diane McGrath, and Wanda S. Gale 1977. "Women's language: uncertainy or interpersonal sensitivity and emotionality?" Sex Roles 3.6 (December): 545-559. McMullen, Linda M, and Deborah D. Pasloski 1992. "Effects of communication apprehension: familiarity of partner, and topic on selected 'Women's Language' features," Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 21.1 (January): 17-30. McQueen, James see Cutler, Anne Maggio, Rosalie 1988. The nonsexist word-finder: a dictionary of gender-free usage. Boston, Massachusetts: Beacon Press, 210 pages. 1991. The dictionary of bias-free usage: a guide to nondiscriminatory language. Phoenix, Arizona: Oryx Press. 1992. The bias-free word finder: a dictionary of nondiscriminatory language. Boston, Massachusetts: Beacon Press [paper], 293 pages. Maier, Lonni 1979. "Geschlechtsspezifisches Sprachverhalten als Gegenstand der Soziolinguistik" [gender-specific speech behavior as a subject in sociolinguistics]. Obst 9: Sprache und Geschlecht II. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (=OBST). Makay, Donna Leigh 1992. The impact of sex and gender on powerful/powerless language use and perceptions of credibility during an ongoing dyadic conversation, 141 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, DAI 53-09A (March 1993): 3045. Malone, Sister Helen Daniel 1954. An analysis and evaluation of phonemic differences in the speech of boys and girls at the kindergarten, first, second, and third grade levels. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan. Malone, Joseph L. 1985. "On the feminine pronominalization of Irish and English boat nouns," General Linguistics 25.3: 189-198.

< previous page

page_258 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_259

next page > Page 259

Maltz, Daniel N., and Ruth A. Borker 1982. "A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication," in Language and social identity, ed. John J. Gumperz, 196-216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. See also Borker, Ruth A. Mann, Richard D. see Strodtbeck, Fred L. Marcoux, Dell R. 1973. "Deviation in English gender," American Speech 48.1-2 (Spring-Summer): 98-107. Marine, Gene 1972. A male guide to women's liberation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston [especially Chapter 9, on children's books, pp. 98-110], 312 pages. Mating, Joel M. n.d. "Speech variation in Acoma Keresan," dittoed paper, Southern Illinois University, 20 pages. 1975. Speech variation in Acoma Keresan. Lisse, The Netherlands: Peter de Ridder Press. Markel, Norman N., Layne D. Prebor, and John F. Brandt 1972. "Biosocial factors in dyadic communication: sex and speaking intensity," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 23.1: 11-13. Marks, Dorothy see Drake, Kirsten Marsh, Patricia see Giles, Howard Marshall, Joan K. 1977. On equal terms: a thesaurus for nonsexist indexing and cataloging. New York: Neal-Schuman, 152 pages. Martens, Martha 1975. Review of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. Dallas, Texas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Notes on Linguistics 12: 24-27. Martinet, André 1962. A functional view of language. New York: Oxford University Press, 165 pages (esp. 15-19). 1971. "Feminine gender," lecture at University of California, Berkeley. Martyna, Wendy 1978. Review of Language and sex, by Barrie Thorne and Nancy Henley, eds. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 3.3 (Spring): 704.

< previous page

page_259 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_260

next page > Page 260

1978. Using and understanding the generic masculine: a social-psychological approach to language and the sexes. Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University. 1978. "What does 'he' mean? Use of the generic masculine," Journal of Communication 28.1 (Winter): 131-138. Annenberg School of Communication, University of Pennsylvania. 1980. "Beyond the 'he'/'man' approach: the case for nonsexist language," Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 5.3 (Spring): 482-493. 1980. "Language and the sexes: a computerized information file." Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz, (Winter), 17 pages. Masters, Roger D., and Michael T. McGuire, eds. 1994. The neurotransmitter revolution: serotonin, social behavior, and the law. Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press. Mathiot, Madeleine 1975. "Referential gender in American English: Who is sexist?" Presented at the American Anthropological Association, San Francisco, manuscript, 43 pages. 1979. Referential gender in American English: Who is sexist? The Hague: Mouton 1979. (assisted by Marjorie Roberts) "Sex roles as revealed through referential gender in American English," in Ethnolinguistics: Boas, Sapir and Whorl revisited, ed. Madeleine Mathiot, 1-47. The Hague: Mouton. Mattingly, Ignatius G. 1966. "Speaker variation and vocal-tract size," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 39.6 (June): 1219. Mattingly, Martha Ann 1969. Dimensions of male and female linguistic style differences as revealed on the four picture test, 260 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Duquesne University, DAI 30-07B (January 1970): 3390. Matumoto, Tutomu 1976. Onna no kotobasi [Chronicle of language of women]. Tokyo: Yuzankaku.

< previous page

page_260 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_261

next page > Page 261

Maurer, D[avid] W. 1976 [published 1979]. "Language and the sex revolution: World War Ithrough World War II," American Speech 51.1 (Spring-Summer): 5-24. Mauss, Marcel 1923. "On language and primitive forms of classification" [translation], Journal de Psychologie: Normale et Pathologique 20: 944-947. Reprinted in A. Meillet, Linguistique historique et linguistique generale, Paris, 1938-1948, and Dell Hymes, q.v., pp. 125-127. Maynor, Natalie 1981. "Males, females, and language propriety," Journal of English Linguistics 15 (March): 17-20. Mayo, Clara, and Nancy M. Henley, eds. 1981. Gender and nonverbal behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag, 284 pages. Mead, Margaret [1935] 1968. Sex and temperament: in three primitive societies. New York: Dell, Laurel Edition, 306 pages. [1949] 1967. Male and female: a study of the sexes in a changing world. New York: William Morrow. Meade, Robert D. see Whittaker, James O. Meditch, Andrea 1975. "The development of sex-specific speech patterns in young children," Anthropological Linguistics 17.9 (December): 421-433. Meillet, A. 1923. "The feminine gender in the Indo-European languages" ("Le genre feminin dans les langues IndoEuropéennes"), Journal de Psychologie: Normale et Pathologique 20: 943-944. Reprinted: Meillet, A., Linguistique historique et linguistique generale. Paris, 1926-1936, vol. II: 24-28; also in Dell Hymes, q.v., 124. Melzi, Robert C. 1978. "The lexicography as a mirror of society: the broadening role of women in society as revealed by some French, Italian, and Spanish dictionaries 1900-1970," presented at the 5th International Congress of Linguistics, Montreal, Canada.

< previous page

page_261 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_262

next page > Page 262

Menkel-Meadow, Carrie 1987. ''Excluded voices: new voices in the legal profession making new voices in the law," University of Miami Law Review 42: 30-33. 1992. "The power of narrative in empathetic learning: post-modernism and the stories of law," review of The alchemy of race and rights, by Patricia J. Williams. UCLA Women's Law Journal 2: 287-307. Menzel, Peter see Tyler, Mary Meredith, Mamie J. 1930. "'Doctresses,' 'Authoresses,' and others," American Speech 5.6 (August): 476-481. 1951. "The language of feminine fashions," American Speech 26.3 (October): 231-232. Mertens, Heinrich S. 1974. "Frauensprachen in Amerika," Ethnologia Americana 11: 547. Meseguer, Alvaro Garcia 1977. Lenguaje y discriminación sexual [Language and sexual discrimination]. Madrid, Spain: Artes Gráficas Iberoamericanas, 358 pages. 2nd edition, 1984, Barcelona: Montesinos. Metz-Gockel, Sigrid 1978. [Women's studies abstracta bibliography (in German)] Obst 8: Sprache und Geschlecht I. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (=OBST). Meyers, Miriam Watkins 1990. "Current generic pronoun usage: an empirical study," American Speech 65.3 (Fall): 228-237. 1993. "Teaching about sex variation in language," in Language variation in North American English: research and teaching, eds. A. Wayne Glowka, and Donald M. Lance, 235-241. New York: Modern Language Association of America. Michalsen, Tonje, and Svatopluk tech, Jr. 1962. "A few remarks on the so-called emotive feminine in Czech," ScandoSlavica 8: 182-190. Mileva, Violeta see Likomanova, Iskra

< previous page

page_262 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_263

next page > Page 263

Miller, Casey, and Kate Swift [sic] 1972. "One small step for genkind," The New York Times Magazine (April 16): 36, 99-101, 106. Reprinted as "Is language sexist?" in Cosmopolitan (September 1972): 89-92, 96. 1976. Words and women. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 197 pages. 1977. Review of Sexism and language, by Aileen Pace Nilsen et al.; and Responses to sexism, ed. Ouida Clapp. Verbatim: The Language Quarterly 4.2 (September): 12-13. 1980. The handbook of nonsexist writing. New York: Lippincott & Crowell, 134 pages. 1988. The handbook of nonsexist writing, second edition. New York: Harper & Row, 182 pages. 1991. Words and women: new language in new times, updated. New York: HarperCollins, 218 pages. Miller, Kate, and Casey Swift [sic] 1972. "De-sexing the English language," Ms: The New Magazine for Women, preview issue (Spring): 7. Miller, Susan H. see Drew, Dan G. Mills, Anne E. 1986. The acquisition of gender: a study of English and German. Springer Series in Language and Communication 20. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 173 pages. 1986 "Acquisition of the natural-gender rule in English and German," Linguistics 24.1 (v.281): 31-45. Mills, Jane 1989. Womanwords: a dictionary of words about women. New York: The Free Press, 291 pages. Mills, Margaret A. see Appadurai, Arjun Milroy, Lesley 1986. "Social network and linguistic focusing," in Dialect and language variation, eds. Harold B. Allen, and Michael D. Linn, 367-380. New York: Academic Press. 1992. "New perspectives in the analysis of sex differentiation in language," in Sociolinguistics today: international perspectives, eds. Kingsley Bolton, and Helen Kwok, 163-179. London: Routledge.

< previous page

page_263 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_264

next page > Page 264

Mishler, Elliot G. 1975. "Studies in dialogue and discourse: II. types of discourse initiated by and sustained through questioning," Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 4.2 (April): 99-121. Mithers, Carol Lynn 1980. "When you talk does he listen? And if not, why not?" Mademoiselle (March): 200-201, 238. Moe, Albert F. 1961. "'Man' as a form of direct address," American Speech 36.2 (May): 136-137. 1963. "'Lady' and 'Woman': the terms' use in the 1880s," American Speech 38.4 (December): 295. Money, John 1977. "Destereotyping sex roles," Society 14.5 (July-August): 25-28. Money, John, and Patricia Tucker 1975. Sexual signatures: on being a man or a woman. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 250 pages. (esp. 84, 108-118) Monsen, Randall B, and A. Maynard Engebretson 1977. "Study of variations in the male and female glottal wave," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 62.4 (October): 981-993. Montgomery, Barbara M., and Robert W. Norton 1981. "Sex differences and similarities in communicator style," Communication Monographs 48.2 (June): 121-132. Moonwomon, Birch 1989. "Another look at the role of female speakers in sound change," in Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, eds. Kira Hall et al, 238-247. University of California, Berkeley. Moore, Samuel 1921. "Grammatical and natural gender in Middle English," Publications of the Modern Language Association 36: 79-103. Morgan, William W. 1979. "Images of men and maleness: a thematic approach to teaching women writers," College English 40.8 (April): 899-905.

< previous page

page_264 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_265

next page > Page 265

Morgen, Sandra, ed. 1989. Gender and anthropology: critical reviews for research and teaching. Washington, D.C.: American Anthropological Association, 462 pages. Mulford, Randa 1985. "Comprehension of Icelandic pronoun gender: semantic versus formal factors," Journal of Child Language 12.2 (June): 443-453. Muraro, Luisa 1987. "Le penseur neutre était une femme (The neuter thinker was a woman)," Langages 85: 35-40. Murphy, M. Lynne, ed. 1992. Women's linguistic innovation, Special Issue, Women and Language 15.1 (Spring): 1-61. Murray, Jessica 1972. "Male perspective in language," Women: A Journal of Liberation 3.1: 46-50. Musacchio, George L. 1968. "Milton's feminine pronouns with neuter antecedents," Journal of English Linguistics 2 (March): 23-28. Nadler, Lawrence B., Marjorie Keeshan Nadler, and William R. Todd-Mancillas, eds. 1987. Advances in gender and communication research. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America. Nadler, Marjorie Keeshan see Nadler, Lawrence B. Nakamura, Momoko 1986. "Sexual object vs. being in female terms," Sophia Linguistica 20/21: 385-392. Nalibow, Kenneth L. 1973. Genus versus sexus: professional titles, working titles and surnames for women in contemporary standard Polish. Bern: Herbert Lang; Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 1973. "The opposition in Polish of genus and sexus in women's surnames," Names 21.2 (June): 78-81. Abstract in 1973 MLA Abstracts of articles in scholarly journals, vol. III (1975): 24. New York: Modern Language Association. See also Brooks, Maria Z.

< previous page

page_265 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_266

next page > Page 266

Nash, Harvey 1958. "Assignment of gender to body regions," The Journal of Genetic Psychology 92: 113-115. Neapolitan, Denise M. 1987. "Sex differences in baby talk: the effect of language environment on communication and cooperation," The thirteenth LACUS forum 1986, 465-476. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Linguistic Association of Canada and the United States. Nelson, Audrey A. 1978. "Sex and proxemics: an annotated bibliography," Bulletin: Women's studies in communication 2.1 (Summer): 17-28. Dept. of Speech Communication, ORWC, California State University, Los Angeles. Nemeth, Charlan, Jeffrey Endicott, and Joel Wachtler 1976. "From the '50's to the '70's: women in jury deliberations," Sociometry 39.4: 293-304. Newton, Judith L., Mary P. Ryan, and Judith R. Walkowitz, eds. 1983. Sex and class in women's history. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 270 pages. Ng, Sik Hung 1991. "Evaluation by females and males of speeches worded in the masculine, feminine, or genderinclusive reference form," International Journal of Applied Linguistics 1.2: 186-197. Nguyen, Michele L. see Nguyen, Tuan Nguyen, Tuan, Richard Heslin, and Michele L. Nguyen 1975. "The meanings of touch: sex differences," Journal of Communication 25.3 (Summer): 92-103. Nichols, Patricia C. 1972. "Gender in English: syntactic and semantic functions," manuscript, California State University, San Jose, 12 pages. 1976. Linguistic change in Gullah: sex, age and mobility. Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University. 1978. "Dynamic variation theory as a model for the study of language and sex." Paper read at the Ninth World Congress of Sociology, Uppsala, Sweden, 10 pages. 1980. "Planning for language change," San Jose Studies 6.2 (May): 18-25.

< previous page

page_266 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_267

next page > Page 267

1987. Review of A feminist dictionary, by Cheris Kramarae and Paula A. Treichler. Dictionaries: Journal of the Dictionary Society of North America 9: 267-271. Nicholson. Margaret 1957. A dictionary of American-English usage: based on Fowler's Modern English usage. New York: Oxford University Press, 671 pages. Niederman, Sharon see Octigan, Mary Niedzwiecki, Patricia 1993. Women and language. Women of Europe Supplements 40. European Commission. Directorate-General Information, Communication, Culture, Audiovisual Women's Information Service, 55 pages. Nilsen, Aileen Pace n. d. [before 1975]. "Sexism and language," 5 pages. 1971. "Women in children's literature," College English (May) 1972. "Comment and Rebuttal," College English 33.4: (January) 471-474. [Comment by Robert J. Di Pietro.] 1972. "A semantic analysis of words in modern American English which display transparent incorporation of the features +masculine and +feminine." University of Iowa. 1972. "Sexism in English: a feminist view," Female studies VI: 102-109. Old Westbury, New York: The Feminist Press. 1973a. "The correlation between gender and other semantic features in American English," paper read at the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego. 1973b. "Grammatical gender and its relationship to the equal treatment of males and females in children's books." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Iowa, 193 pages. 1978. "Sexism in English: a feminist view," in Language awareness, eds. Paul Eschholz, Alfred Rosa, and Virginia Clark, 217-227. New York: St. Martin's Press. Reprinted 1986, 301-310. 1980. Changing words in a changing world. Newton, Massachusetts: Education Development Center, 68 pages. 1984. "Greetings and salutations in a new age," Language in Society 13: 245-247. 1984. "Winning the great he/she battle," College English 46.2 (February): 151-157.

< previous page

page_267 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_268

next page > Page 268

1985. "'Vive la difference!' and communication processes," English Journal 74.3 (March): 46-51. 1987. "Guidelines against sexist language: a case history," in Women and language in transition, ed. Joyce Penfield, 3752. State University of New York Press (SUNY). 1990. ''Sexism in English: a 1990s update," in Subject and strategy: a rhetoric reader, eds. Paul Escholz, Alfred Rosa, and Virginia Clark, 277-289. [Reprinted 20 times; inquire of author.] 1990. "Virginity: a metaphor we live by," Humor 3.1: 3-15. In Press. "Gender, politics, and English teachers," Arizona English Bulletin: 8-11. See also Adams, Karen L. Nilsen, Don Nilsen, Alleen Pace, Haig Bosmajian, H. Lee Gershuny, and Julia P. Stanley 1977. Sexism and language. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE), 203 pages. Nilsen, Don and Aileen Nilsen n. d. [before 1975]. "Topless topography," Arizona State University, 4 pages. 1987. "Humor, language, and sex roles in American culture," Language and humor (Special issue) ed. Mahadev L. Apte, International Journal of the Sociology of Language 65: 67-78. Nissen, Uwe Kjaer 1986. "Sex and gender specification in Spanish," Journal of Pragmatics 10.6 (December): 725-738. Nordin-Thelander, Kerstin see Fichteliu-Malmberg, A. Norton, Robert W. see Montgomery, Barbara M. Nowaczyk, Ronald H. 1982. "Sex-related differences in the color lexicon," Language and Speech 25.3: 257-265. Nuessel, Frank H., Jr. 1977. "Resource guide: sexism in language texts," Language Sciences 46 (August): 22-23. Nykiel-Herbert, B. see Herbert, Robert K. Nyquist, Linda see Crosby, Faye

< previous page

page_268 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_269

next page > Page 269

O'Barr, William M. 1982. Linguistic evidence: language, power, and strategy in the courtroom. New York: Academic Press. See also Kramarae, Cheris O'Barr, William M., and Bowman K. Atkins 1980. "'Women's language' or 'powerless language'? Women and language in literature and society, eds. Sally McConnell-Ginet et al., pp. 93-110. Octigan, Mary, and Sharon Niederman 1979. "Male dominance in conversations," Frontiers: a Journal of Women Studies 4.1 (Spring): 50-54. O'Donnell, Holly Smith 1973. "Sexism in language," Elementary English 50.7 (October): 1067-1072. O'Donovan, Katherine 1985. Sexual divisions in law. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Oftedal, Magne 1973. "Notes on language and sex," Norwegian Journal of Linguistics [formerly Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap] 27.1: 67-75. Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko 1971. "The status of women and speech variation in Japana problem and method in sociolinguistics," paper read at the American Anthropologist Association, New York. Oksaar, Els 1976. Berufsbezeichnungen im heutigen Deutsch: Soziosemantische Untersuchungen mit deutschen und schwedischen experimentellen Kontrastierungen. Sprache der Gegenwart 25. Düsseldorf: Pädagogischer Verlag Schwann. Oliver, Marion M., and Joan Rubin 1975. "The use of expletives by some American women," Anthropological Linguistics 17.5 (May): 191-197. Olsen, Tillie 1970. "Silences: when writers don't write," Women: A Journal of Liberation 2.1 (Fall): 43-44. [1965] 1978. Silences. New York: Delacorte Press, 330 pages.

< previous page

page_269 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_270

next page > Page 270

Orasanu, Judith, Madam K. Slater, and Leonore Loeb Adler, eds. 1979. Language, sex and gender: does la différence make a difference? New York: New York Academy of Sciences, Annals, vol. 327, 121 pages. Ordoubadian, Reza 1979. "Sexism and language structure," in The fifth LACUS forum 1978, eds. Wolfgang Wü1ck, and Paul L. Garvin, 415-421. Columbia, South Carolina: Hornbeam Press. Ordoubadian, Reza, and Walburga yon Raffler Engel, eds. 1976. Views on language. Chapter 2, "Woman's language." Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Southeastern Conference on Linguistics, Inter-University Press, pp. 65-120. O'Reilly, Jane 1978. "Women apologize, even when they are not to blame. Here's how to stop," Vogue (November): 152. Ortner, Sherry B, and Harriet Whitehead, eds. 1981. Sexual meanings: the cultural construction of gender and sexuality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 435 pages. Paddock, Harold 1988. "The actuation problem for gender change in Wessex versus Newfoundland," in Historical dialectology: regional and social, ed. Jacek Fisiak, 377-395. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Palmer, Joyce C. 1994. Review of Backlash: the undeclared war against American women, by Susan Faludi. Women's Caucus for Art 5.1 (Spring): 7-8. Parlee, Mary Brown 1979. "Conversational politics," Psychology Today 12.12 (May): 48-56. 1984. "Getting a word in sex-wise," Across the board 21.9 (September): 7-10. Parsons, Elsie Clews 1913 [1972]. "Sex dialects," in The old-fashioned woman: primitive fancies about the sex, 149166. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. Parsons, Jacquelynne E. see Ruble, Diane N.

< previous page

page_270 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_271

next page > Page 271

Parturier, Françoise 1974. Daumier: Lib women (Bluestockings and Socialist women); Preface 7-23. Paris: Leon Amiel, 135 pages, 50 plates, [by Honoré Daumier]. Pasloski, Deborah D. see McMullen, Linda M. Patel, Marilyn H. ee Coughenour, John C. Patton, Bobby R., and Bonnie Ritter Patton 1976. Living together. . .female/male communication. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Patton, Bonnie Ritter see Patton, Bobby R. Pauwels, Anne 1987. Women and language in Australian and New Zealand society. Sydney, Australia: Australian Professional Publications. 1991. Non-discriminatory language. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Publishing Service. Pavlidon, Theodossia see Aebischer, Verena Pearson, Judy C., Lynn H. Turner, and William R. Todd-Mancillas 1991. Gender and communication, 2nd edition. Dubuque, Iowa: William C. Brown. Peisach, Estelle Cherry 1965. "Children's comprehension of teacher and peer speech," Child Development 36: 467-480. Penelope, Julia [= Julia Penelope Stanley] 1990. Speaking freely: unlearning the lies of the fathers' tongues. New York: Pergamon Press, 283 pages. See also Stanley, Julia Penelope Penfield, Joyce, ed. 1987. Women and language in transition. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press (SUNY). 208 pages. Peng, Fred C. C. 1981. Male/female differences in Japanese [in Japanese]. Tokyo, Japan: The East-West Sign Language Association, 244 pages. 1982. "Sex-differentiation in language variation: a sociolinguistic contribution to the language sciences," Language Sciences 4.2 (October): 131-154. Penman, Robyn A. see Brotherton, Patricia L.

< previous page

page_271 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_272

next page > Page 272

Pérez-Pere'ira, Miguel 1991. "The acquisition of gender: what Spanish children tell us," Journal of Child Language 18.3 (October): 571-590. Perry, Linda A.M., Lynn H. Turner, and Helen M. Sterk 1992. Constructing and reconstructing gender: the links among communication, language, and gender. SUNY Series in Feminist Criticism and Theory. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 310 pages. Peters, Robert 1977. Radio review of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. Radio KPFK, January 7, 1977, Los Angeles, California. Pfeiffer, John 1985. "Girl talkboy talk," Science 85 6.1 (February): 58-63. Philips, Susan U. 1980. "Sex differences and language," Annual Review of Anthropology 9 (October): 523-544. Palo Alto, California: Annual Reviews, Inc. Philips, Susan U., Susan Steele, and Christine Tanz, eds. 1987. Language, gender, and sex in comparative perspective. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Philipsen, Gerry 1975. "Speaking 'like a man' in Teamsterville: culture patterns of role enactment in a suburban neighbourhood," Quarterly Journal of Speech 61 (February): 13-22. Pigott, Margaret B. 1979. "Sexist roadblocks in inventing, focusing, and writing," College English 40. 8 (April): 922927. Pillon, Agnesa 1986. "Hommes actifs et femmes passives: des rô1es sexuels aux attitudes et aux conduites interactionnelles," Werk-inuitvoering. Momentopname van de sociolinguistiek in Belgie en Nederland, J. Creten, G. Geerts, and K. Jaspaert, eds., 275-288. Leuven-Amersfoort, Acco. 1987. "Le sexe du locuteur est-il un facteur de variation linguistique? Revue critique (Is the sex of the speaker a factor in linguistic variation? A critical review)," La Linguistique 23.l: 35-48.

< previous page

page_272 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_273

next page > Page 273

Pop, Sever, ed. 1952. "Le langage des femmes: enquête linguistique à l'échelle mondiale," Louvain: Orbis 1.1: 10-86; Part 2, Orbis 2 (1953): 7-34. Porter, Roy 1993. Review of Nature's body, by Londa Schiebinger. Nature 366 (November 25): 387. Post, Annette van der see Brouwer, Dédé Pottier, Bernard 1972. "Langage des hommes et langage des femmes en Cocama (Tupi)," in Langues et techniques, nature et société, eds. Jacqueline M. C. Thomas and Lucien Bernot, 385-387. Paris: Klincksieck. Prebor, Layne D. see Markel, Norman N. Preisler, Bent 1986. Linguistic sex roles in conversation: social variation in the expression of tentativeness in English. Contributions to the Sociology of Language 45. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 347 pages. Prideaux, Gary D. see Ursel, Karen Pristin, Terry 1991. "Feminists make their legal case," Column One, Los Angeles Times (March 15):A1, A42-43. Pusch, Luise, and Senta Trömel-Plötz, eds. 1980, 1981. Linguistische Berichte 69 (October 1980): Language, sex, and power I. Linguistische Berichte 71 (February 1981): Language, sex, and power II. Braunschweig/Weisbaden, Germany: Verlag Vieweg. Quincy, Alpha 1972. "Sexism appearing in science materials tentatively adopted by the State Board of Education in San Diego, September 14, 1972," [summary of the Report to the Commission] California, 11 pages. Quirk, Randolph 1977. "The straitjacket of gender." Review of Words and women, by Casey Miller and Kate Swift. London: Times Literary Supplement (October 28, 1977): 1264.

< previous page

page_273 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_274

next page > Page 274

Raffler Engel, Walburga von see Ordoubadian, Reza Ramsey, Sheila J. 1981. "The kinesics of femininity in Japanese women," Language Sciences 3.1 (April): 104-123. Randall, Phyllis R. 1985. "Language and Gender in Society." Review of Women and men speaking, by Cheris Kramarae. American Speech 60.1 (Spring): 81-85. 1985. "Sexist language and speech communication texts: another case of benign neglect," Communication Education 34: 128-134. See also Jarrard, Mary Elizabeth W. Récatas, Basile 1934. "La femme et le bilinguisme," Chapter III, L'état actuel du bilinguisme chez les MacédoRoumains du Pinde et le rôle de la femme dans le langage. Paris: Librairie E. Droz, 18-28. Reik, Theodor 1954. "Men and women speak different languages," Psychoanalysis 1-2 (Spring-Summer): 3-15. Reinisch, June Machover, Leonard A. Rosenblum, and Stephanie A. Sander, eds. 1987. Masculinity/femininity: basic perspectives. Kinsey Institute Series 1. New York: Oxford University Press, 364 pages. Rekdal, Olaug, and Tove Skutnabb-Kangas 1979. "Kvinnerspective på språk," [A female perspective on language], in Gråt Inte-Forska, ed. Karin Westman Berg, 49-69. Stockholm, Sweden: Prisma. See also Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove Resnik, Judith 1988. "On the bias: feminist reconsiderations of the aspirations for our judges," University of Southern California, Southern California Law Review 61.6 (September): 1877-1944. See also Coughenour, John C. Réthoré, Joëlle see Fable, Claudine Rhome, Frances Dodson [Purdue University] 1972. "Manglish: what's it all about?" paper read at the Midwest Modern Language Association, St. Louis, 23 pages.

< previous page

page_274 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_275

next page > Page 275

Rich, Elaine 1977. "Sex related differences in colour vocabulary," Language and Speech 20:. 404-409. Rich, Adrienne 1979. On lies, secrets, and silence. New York: W. W. Norton, 310 pages. Ridley, Matt 1993. The Red Queen: sex and the evolution of human nature. London: Viking. Rine, Helen E. see Schwartz, Martin F. Ritchie, Marguerite E. 1975. "Alice through the statutes," McGill Law Journal 21 (Winter): 685-707. [On Canadian law.] Ritchie, Maureen, comp. 1980. Women's Studies: a checklist of bibliographies. London: Mansell, 107 pages. See also Carter, Sarah Rizzo, Diane see Weitzman, Lenore Roberson, Susan see Cannon, Garland Robertson, Nan 1992. The girls in the balcony: women, men, and the New York Times. New York: Random House, 274 pages. Robinson, Ken see Cutler, Anne Rodríguez Gonzáles, Félix 1984. "The gender of acronyms (el género de las siglas)," Revista Española de Lingüística 14.2: 311-366. Roen, Duane H. see Johnson, Donna M. Rogers, Margaret 1987. "Learners' difficulties with grammatical gender in German as a foreign language," Applied Linguistics 8.1 (Spring): 48-74. Romaine, Suzanne 1989. Review of Language, gender and sex in comparative perspective, eds. Susan Philips, S. Steele, and C. Tanz. Multilingua 8.1: 81-83. Romeo, Luigi 1979. Ecce Homo! A lexicon of man. Amsterdam: Benjamins. [Alphabetic listing of words for 'man'.]

< previous page

page_275 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_276

next page > Page 276

Romm, Ethel Grodzins 1985. "Avoiding sexist language, quaint and otherwise," ABA Journal: The Lawyer's Magazine (American Bar Association), (May): 126. 1985. "More ways to write sex-neutral language," ABA Journal: The Lawyer's Magazine, (American Bar Association) (June): 126. Rosaldo, Michelle Zimbalist 1977. Review of Sex and language [sic] [Language and sex], by Barrie Thorne and Nancy Henley. Language in Society 6.1 (April): 110-113. Rosaldo, Michelle Zimbalist, and Louise Lamphere, eds. 1974. Women, culture, and society. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 352 pages. 1979 [translated into Portuguese.] A mulher, a cultura e a sociedade. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Paz e Terra. Rosenberg, Risa see Enquist, Magnus Rosenblum, Leonard A. see Reinisch, June Machover Rosener, Judy B. 1990. "Ways women lead," Harvard Business Review 68.6 (November/Decemher): 119-125. 1994. "Redefining male workplace roles takes time but beats a gender war," Los Angeles Times (February 27): D2, D6. See also Loden, Marilyn Rosenfeld, Howard M. 1966. "Approval-seeking and approval-inducing functions of verbal and nonverbal responses in the dyad," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4.6: 597-605. Rosenfelt, Deborah Silverton, ed. 1973. Female studies VII: going strong: new courses/new programs. Old Westbury, New York: The Feminist Press. 1976. Strong women: an annotated bibliography of literature for the high school classroom. Old Westbury, New York: Feminist Press. See also Hoffman, Leonore Ross, Alan S. C. 1936. "Sex and gender in the Lindisfarne gospels," Journal of English and Germanic Philology 35: 321-330. Ross, Catherine see Weitzman, Lenore J.

< previous page

page_276 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_277

next page > Page 277

Roszak, Betty, and Theodore Roszak, eds. 1969. [Anon] "No 'chicks,' 'broads,' or 'niggers' for Old Mole," Masculine/feminine: readings in sexual mythology and the liberation of women, 291-293. New York: Harper and Row. Roszak, Theodore see Roszak, Betty Rothschild, Joan 1986. "Turing's man, Turing's woman, or Turing's person? gender, language, and computers." Working Paper, No. 166, Wellesley, Massachusetts: Center for Research on Women, Wellesley College, 13 pages. Rothstein, Robert A. 1973. "Sex, gender and the October revolution," in A festschrift for Morris Halle, eds. Stephen Anderson and Paul Kiparsky. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Roulis, Eleni 1991. The relative effect of a gender-linked language effect and a sex role stereotype effect on readers' responses to male and female argumentative-persuasive writing, 92 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, DAI 52-05A (November 1991): 1670. Roussel, Roy 1986. The conversation of the sexes: seduction and equality in selected 17th and 18th century texts. New York: Oxford University Press, 178 pages. Royen, Gerlach 1929. Die nominalen Klassifikations-Systeme in den Sprachen der Erde: Historisch-kritische Studie, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung des Indogermanischen. Anthropos, Bibliothek Linguistische Band IV, Vienna, 1030 pages. [Review by Uhlenbeck, q. v.]. Rubin, Donald L. see Green, Kathryn Rubin, Joan 1977. "Why change language?" Honolulu County Committee on the Status of Women, Media Task Force for Equal Treatment of the Sexes in Media. Honolulu, Hawaii: Department of Corporation Counsel, 10 pages. See also Oliver, Marion M.

< previous page

page_277 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_278

next page > Page 278

Ruble, Diane N., Irene H. Frieze, and Jacquelynne E. Parsons, eds. 1976. ''Sex roles: persistence and change," special issue, The Journal of Social Issues 32.3: 1-228. Ann Arbor, Michigan. Rudes, Blair A., and Bemard Healy 1979 "Is she for real?: The concepts of femaleness and maleness in the gay world," in Ethnolinguistics: Boas, Sapir and Whorf revisited, ed. Madeleine Mathiot, 49-61. The Hague: Mouton. Ruether, Rosemary Radford, ed. 1974. Religion and sexism: images of woman in the Jewish and Christian traditions. New York: Simon and Schuster. Ruke *;-Dravina, Velta 1951. "Ka*; latvietem* rakstit* uzvardus*?" [Family name-forms for females] Latvju Zinas 491: 3,5. Rundquist, Suellen 1992. "Indirectness: a gender study of flouting Grice's maxims," Journal of Pragmatics 18.5 (November): 431-449. Russ, Joanna 1983. How to suppress women's writing. Austin: University of Texas Press, 159 pages. Ryan, Mary Patricia 1975. Womanhood in America: from colonial times to the present. New York: New Viewpoints, 496 pages. See also Newton, Judith L. Ryder, Mary R. 1989. "Feminism and style: still looking for the quick fix," Style 23.4 (Winter): 530-544. Ryen, Else [Before 1978]. [Article on language and sex] Vardagsskrift Till Jan och Jens [Festschrift for Jan and Jells, two 30 year-old professors]. Sweden: Uppsala Universitet. Rysman, Alexander 1977. "How the 'gossip' became a woman," Journal of Communication 27.1: 176-180.

< previous page

page_278 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_279

next page > Page 279

Saada, Lucienne 1970. "Le langage des femmes Tunisiennes," in Mßlanges Marcel Cohen: etudes de linguistique, ethnographie et sciences connexes offertes par ses amis et ses éléves a l'occasion de son 80ème anniversaire, ed. David Cohen, 320-325. The Hague: Mouton. Sachs, Albie, and Joan Hoff-Wilson 1978. Sexism and the law: a study of male beliefs and legal bias in Britain and the United States. Law in Society Series. Oxford, England: M. Robertson, 257 pages Sachs, Jacqueline, Philip Lieberman, and Donna Erickson 1973. "Anatomical and cultural determinants of male and female speech," in Language attitudes: current trends and prospects, eds. Roger W. Shuy and Ralph W. Fasold, 74-84. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Sadker, Myra see Frazier, Nancy Safarjan, Paula Tinder 1980. Sex stereotypes as natural language categories, 197 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers State University, DAI 41-04B (October): 1571. Saint-Jacques, Bernard 1973. "Sex, dependency and language," La Linguistique 9.1: 89-96. Sakai, Yuko 1986. "Motion of gender (II): Italian and Spanish in the lexicon of plants," Sophia Linguistica 20/21: 411420. 1988. "Motive of gender (IV): French and Spanish in the names of plants," Sophia Linguistica 23/24: 149-158. Sanches, Mary [University of Texas] n.d. [before 1975]. "The acquisition of sex-role marking in the speech of Japanese children." Sanchez, Sylvia Yolanda 1985. The effects of attitudes toward sex role concepts, language, and gender on levels of masculinity and femininity, 227 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Houston, DAI 46-12A (June 1986): 3589-3590. Sander, Stephanie A. see Reinisch, June Machover

< previous page

page_279 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_280

next page > Page 280

Sandler, Bernice 1972. "Women in the curriculum," The Project on the Status and Education of Women. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges, 12 pages. See also Hall, Roberta M. Sapir, Edward [1915] 1968. "Abnormal types of speech in Nootka," Geological Survey, Memoir 62, Anthropological Series No. 5. Ottawa, Canada: Government Printing Bureau. Reprinted 1968, in Selected writings of Edward Sapir: in language, culture and personality, ed. David G. Mandelbaum, 179-196. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968. [1929] 1968. "Male and female forms of speech in Yana," in Donum natalicium schrijnen, St. W. J. Teeuwen, ed., 7985. Nijmegan-Utrecht: Dekker and Van de Vegt. Reprinted in Selected writings of Edward Sapir (see above), 206-212. Saporta, Sol 1974. "Language in a sexist society," paper read at the Modern Language Association, New York, 8 pages. 1976. "The sexism of language and the language of sexism," Linguistic studies offered to Joseph Greenberg, Vol. I, ed. Alphonse Juilland. Saratoga, California: Anma Libri. 1979. "Sexistische Sprache und die Kompetenz-Performanz-Unterscheidung [Sexist language and the competenceperformance controversy]. Obst 9: Sprache und Geschlecht II. Universität Osnabrück, Germany. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprach Theorie (=OBST). Sapper, Carl 1897. "Mittelamericanische Caraiben," International Archiv far Ethnographie 10: 53-60. Sargent, Alice G. 1977. Beyond sex roles. New York: West Publishing, 489 pages. Sause, Edwin F. 1976. "Computer content analysis of sex differences in the language of children," Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 5.3 (July): 311-324.

< previous page

page_280 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_281

next page > Page 281

Saville-Troike, Muriel 1988. "A note on men's and women's speech in Koasati," International Journal of American Linguistics 54.2 (April): 241-242. Scheflen, Albert E. 1965. "Quasi-courtship behavior in psychotherapy," Psychiatry 28: 245-257. Schiebinger, Londa 1993. Nature's body: gender in the making of modern science. Boston: Beacon, 289 pages. Schlauch, Margaret 1936. "Recent Soviet studies in linguistics," Science and Society: A Marxian Quarterly 1: 152-167. [Discusses Snegirev, q.v., and feminine gender in the Zulu and Xosa languages.] Schneider, Joseph W., and Sally L. Hacker 1973. "Sex role imagery and use of the generic 'man' in introductory texts: a case in the sociology of sociology," The American Sociologist 8 (February): 12-18. Scholz, F. 1965. "Genre, Genus und Person im Russischen," Die Welt der Slaven 10: 281-304. Schrøder, Kim see Vestergaard, Torben Schuell, Hildred 1946. "Sex differences in relation to stuttering: part 1," Journal of Speech Disorders 11.4 (December): 277-298. Schuhmacher, von Walter Wilfried 1975. "Frauen- und Männersprachen," Ethnologia Americana 12.3 (September/October): 649-651. Schulz, Muriel R. 1974. "The semantic derogation of woman," manuscript, 28 pages. 1974. "Woman as 'Other' in language," manuscript, 17 pages. 1975. "How serious is sex bias in language?" College Composition and Communication, 163-167. 1989 [appeared in 1993]. Review of Grammar and gender, by Dennis Baron; Women, men and language, by Jennifer Coates; A feminist dictionary, by Cheris Kramarae, and Paula A. Treichler. Journal of English Linguistics 22.2: 240243.

< previous page

page_281 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_282

next page > Page 282

See also Kramarae,Cheris Wodak, Ruth Schutz, Howard G. see Kaiser, Susan B. Schwartz, Martin F. 1968. "Identification of speaker sex from isolated, voiceless fricatives," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 43.5 (May): 1178-1179. Schwartz, Martin F, and Helen E. Rine 1968. "Identification of speaker sex from isolated whispered vowels," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 44.6: 1736-1737. Scott, Kathryn P. 1980. "Perceptions of communication competence: what's good for the goose is not good for the gander," Women's Studies International Quarterly 3.2-3: 199-208. Secor, Cynthia see Hoffman, Nancy Seesahai, Maureen see Lapadat, Judy Seiler, Hansjakob 1987. "Genus und Pragmatizität (Gender and pragmaticity)," Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure 41: 193-203. 1987. "Roman Jakobson on gender and linguistic fictions," in Language, poetry and poetics: the generation of the 1890's: Jakobson, Trubetzkoy, Majakovsky, eds. Krystyna Pomorska, Elzbieta Chodakowska, Hugh McLean, and Brent Vine, 113-121. Proceedings of the First Roman Jakobson Colloquium. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Sellers, Susan 1991. Language and sexual difference: feminist writing in France. New York: St. Martin's Press, 196 pages. Semorile, Robin see Tiedt, Pamela Serafini, Denise see Wheeless, Virginia Eman Shapiro, Barry see Shapiro, Evelyn Shapiro, Evelyn, and Barry Shapiro 1979. The women say: the men say: women's liberation and men's consciousness: issues in politics, work, family, sexuality, and power. New York: Dell Publishing Company, 290 pages.

< previous page

page_282 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_283

next page > Page 283

Shapiro, Fred R. 1985. "Historical notes on the vocabulary of the women's movement," American Speech 60.1 (Spring): 3-16. Shear, Marie 1981. "The doe in the clearing," review of The handbook of nonsexist writing, by Casey Miller and Kate Swift. American Speech 56.4 (Winter): 301-305. Sheehan, Joseph G. 1979. "Level of aspiration in female stutterers: changing times," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 44.4: 479-486. Sheldon, Amy 1990. "Pickle fights: gendered talk in preschool disputes," Discourse Processes 13.1: 5-31. Shenker, Israel 1971, "Is it possible for a woman to manhandle the King's English?" New York Times (August 29): 58. Sheridan, Jessie, ed. 1973. An intelligent woman's guide to dirty words: English words and phrases reflecting sexist attitudes toward women in patriarchal society, vol. I, The Feminist English Dictionary. Comp. by the Feminist Writers Workshop, commentaries by Ruth Todasco, Jessie Sheridan, Ellen Morgan, Kathryn Starr. Chicago, Illinois: Young Women's Christian Association, Loop Center, 58 pages. Sherman, Mark A., and Adelaide Haas 1984. "Man to man, woman to woman," Psychology Today (June): 72-73. Sherzer, Joel 1972. "Araucanian, South America," Texas working papers in sociolinguistics, Special number, Prolegomena to typologies of speech use, ed. by Regna Darnell, 43-46. Austin, Texas: University of Texas. Shibamoto, Janet S. 1980. Language use and linguistic theory: sex-related variation in Japanese syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Davis. 1981. "Sex-related variation in the production of predicate types in Japanese," Language Sciences 3.2 (October): 257282. [With many references in the Japanese language.]

< previous page

page_283 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_284

next page > Page 284

1982. "Contributions of sociolinguistics to the language sciences: language and sex," Languages Sciences 4.2 (October): 115-129. 1985. Japanese women's language. New York: Academic Press, 190 pages. Shimanoff, Susan B. 1977. "Man ¹ human: empirical support for the Whorfian hypothesis," Bulletin: Women's Studies in Communication 1.2 (Summer). Shields, Henry, Jr. see Coughenour, John C. Shoemaker, Randall 1979. "Persons gain new importance as Pentagon banishes mankind," The Federal Times, 24. Showalter, Elaine 1977. A literature of their own: British women novelists from Brontë to Lessing. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Shuman, Amy 1993. Review of He-said-she-said, by Marjorie Goodwin. Language 69.1 (March): 163-165. Shuster, Janet 1973. "Grammatical forms marked for male and female in English," Chicago. 1974. "Verb forms of 'power and solidarity': sex as the basis of power," manuscript, 11 pages. Shuy, Roger W. 1969. "Sex as a factor in sociolinguistic research," Arlington, Virginia: Center for Applied Linguistics, mimeograph, 15 pages. Published, 1974, in Language in its social setting, ed. William W. Gage, 74-83. Washington, D.C.: The Anthropological Society of Washington. Silberstein, Sandra 1980. Bibliography: women and language. Michigan occasional papers in women's studies (Winter) Occasional Papers, No. 12. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 67 pages. Silva Correia, João da [1927] 1935. A linguagem da mulher. Lisbon, Portugal: Academia das Ciências de Lisboa, Biblioteca de Altos Estudios, 149 pages.

< previous page

page_284 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_285

next page > Page 285

Silveira, Jeanette 1972. "Thoughts on the politics of touch," Women's Press 1.13 (February): 13. Eugene, Oregon. Silverstein, M. 1985. "Language and the culture of gender: at the intersection of structure, usage, and ideology, in Semiotic mediation: sociocultural and psychological perspectives, eds. E. Mertz, and R. J. Parmentier, 219-259. Orlando: Academic Press. Simmons, B. see Froitzheim, Claudia Sims, Christine P., and Hilaire Valiquette 1990. "More on male and female speech in (Acoma and Laguna) Keresan," International Journal of American Linguistics 56.1 (January): 162-166. Sklar, Elizabeth S. 1989. "So male a speech: linguistic adequacy in eighteenth-century England," American Speech 64.4 (Winter): 372-379. [Comments on Dennis Baron, Grammar and gender, q.v. .] Skutnabb-Kangas, Tore 1978. "Sex-roles in language, viewpoints on the initial project's plan," Könsroller I Sprak 2. Uppsala Universitet, Sweden. See also Rekdal, Olaug Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, and Orvokki Heinamaki 1979. "When this very prestigious researcher met Mrs. Average Housewife, or Where have all the women gone. . ." Nordic Linguistic Bulletin 3.3: 4-19. Also in Journal of Pragmatics (December, 1979): 507-519. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, and Olaug Rekdal [Before 1978]. [Article on language and sex] Vardagsskrift Till Jan och Jens. Sweden: Uppsala Universitet. Slater, Madam K. see Orasanu, Judith Sloan, Jan B. see Kammer, Ann E. Smith, D. R. see Brownell, W. Smith, Elsdon C. 1977. Review of Mrs. Man, by Una Stannard. Names 25.4 (December): 239-241. Smith, Janet S. 1992. "Women in charge: politeness and directives in the speech of Japanese women," Language in Society 21.1 (March): 59-82.

< previous page

page_285 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_286

next page > Page 286

Smith, L Jerome 1979. "Male and female ways of speaking: elaborately restricted codes in a CB speech community," [Citizens' Band radio.] Papers in Linguistics 12.1/2:163-184. Linguistics Reseach Inc.: Edmonton, Canada. Smith, Philip M. 1979. "Sex markers in speech," in Social markers in speech, eds. Klaus R. Scherer, and Howard Giles, 109-146. London: Cambridge University Press. 1980. Language variables in intergroup relations: the voices of masculinity and femininity. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Bristol. 1985. Languages, the sexes, and society. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 211 pages. See also Elyan, Olwen Giles, Howard Smith, Stevenson 1939. "Age and sex differences in children's opinion concerning sex differences," Journal of Genetic Psychology 54: 17-25. Snegirev, I. L. 1935. "Ob odnom vyrazenii * 'Zenskogo* roda' v jazykay Zulu i Kosa" [On a certain expression for feminine gender in the Zulu and Xosa languages], Iazyk i Myshlenie 3-4: 281-284. [See Margaret Schlauch, q.v. .] Sontag, Susan 1972. "The double standard of aging," Saturday Review (September 23): 29-38. Sorrels, Bobbye D. 1983. The nonsexist communicator: solving the problems of gender and awkwardness in Modern English. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 356 pages. Soskin, William F., and Vera P. John 1963. "The study of spontaneous talk," in The stream of behavior, ed. Roger G. Barker, 228-281. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Souchier-Bert, Monique 1977. "Anthropologie des couleurs et langage féminin," Langage et Société (April).

< previous page

page_286 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_287

next page > Page 287

Sparti, Antonino Di 1977. Condizione femminile et linguaggio. Palermo. Spears, Joanne 1977. "Biblical language," The Friendly Woman, (Fall): 8-12. Old Chatham, New York: Powell House. Spender, Dale 1980. Man made language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1981. Men's studies modifed: the impact of feminism on the academic disciplines, ed. Elmsford, New York: Pergamon Press, 248 pages 1989. The writing or the sex? or, Why you don't have to read women's writing to know it's no good. New York: Pergamon Press, 220 pages. Spitzack, Carole see Carter, Kathryn Spitzer, Leo 1927. "Puxi, eine kleine Studie zur Sprache einer Mutter: I," Jahrbuch füur Philologie 3: 35-54; II, 101115; III, 170-183, Munich. Staley, Constance M[arie] 1978. "Male-female use of expletives: a heck of a difference in expectations," Anthropological Linguistics 20.8 (November): 367-380. 1981. Quantitative and qualitative sex-related language differences in children: a sociolinguistic study of male and female communication, 161 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder, DAI 42-04A (October 1981): 1619. Stanchfield, Jo M. 1970 (?) "The sexual factor in language development and reading." Chicago, Illinois: Stone Educational Publications, 13 pages. 1973. Sex differences in learning to read. Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, 34 pages. Stanley, Julia Penelope [= Julia Penelope] 1972. "The semantic features of the machismo ethic in English," paper read at the American Dialect Society, New York, 23 pages. 1977. "Paradigmatic woman: the prostitute," in Papers in language variation: SAMLA-ADS collection, eds. David L.

< previous page

page_287 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_288

next page > Page 288

Shores, and Carole P. Hines, 303-321. University, Alabama: University of Alabama Press. 1978. ''Sexist grammar," College English 39.7 (March): 800-811. See also Nilsen, Aileen Pace Penelope, Julia Stannard, Una 1973. Married women v. husbands' names: the case for wives who keep their own name. San Francisco, California: Germainbooks, 55 pages. 1977. Mrs. Man. San Francisco, California: Germainbooks, 386 pages. [See review by Elsdon C. Smith, 1977.] Stead, Bette Ann 1977. "The semantics of sex discrimination," in Women in management, ed. Bette Ann Stead. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 1978. Women in management, ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 362 pages. Steadman, J. M., Jr. 1938. "Affected and effeminate words," American Speech 13.1 (February): 13-18. tech Jr., Svatopluk see Michalsen, Tonje Steckler, Nicole A., and William E. Cooper 1980. "Sex differences in color naming of unisex apparel," Anthropological Linguistics 22.9 (December): 373-381. Steele, Susan see Philips, Susan U. Steinmetz, Donald 1986. "Two principles and some rules for gender in German: inanimate nouns," Word 37.3 (December): 189-217. Stene, Aasta n.d. [before 1954]. "The animate gender in modern colloquial English," Norsk tidskrift for sprogvidenskap 7: 350-355. Sterk, Helen M. see Perry, Lindy A. M. Stem, Rhoda 1976. "Sexism in foreign language textbooks," Foreign Language Annals 9.4 (September): 294-299. Sternburg, Janet, ed. 1991. The writer on her work, vol. 2: new essays in new territory. New York: W. W. Norton, 235 pages.

< previous page

page_288 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_289

next page > Page 289

Stewart, Lea P., and Stella Ting-Toomey, eds. 1987. Communication, gender, and sex roles in diverse interaction contexts. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex, 264 pages. Stix, Harriet 1980. "Women lawyers and courtroom image," Los Angeles Times (March 6): Section V, 6. [In the article, Sharon R. Veach is referred to, but with the wrong spelling. See Veach in bibliography.] Stoke, Stuart M., and Elmer D. West 1931. "Sex differences in conversational interests," Journal of Social Psychology 2 (February): 120-126. Stone, Janet, and Jane Bachner 1977. Speaking up: a book for every woman who wants to speak effectively. New York: McGraw-Hill. Stopes, Charlotte Carmichael [1841-1929] 1908. The Constitutional basis of women's suffrage. Edinburgh, Scotland: Darien Press. Strainchamps, Ethel 1971. "Our sexist language," Chapter 16, in Woman in sexist society: studies in power and powerlessness, eds. Vivian Gornick and Barbara K. Moran, 240-250. New York: Basic Books. Straka, Georges 1952. "Quelques observations phonétiques sur le langage des femmes," Orbis 1: 335-357. Straus, A. T., and R. Brightman 1982. "The implacable raspberry," Papers in Linguistics 15: 97-137. Strodtbeck, Fred L. 1951. "Husband-wife interaction over revealed differences," American Sociological Review 16: 468-473. Strodtbeck, Fred L., and Richard D. Mann 1956. "Sex role differentiation in jury deliberations," Sociometry 19.1 (March): 3-11. Stromberg, Eleroy L. see Carlson, J. Spencer Suardiaz, Delia E. 1973. Sexism in the Spanish language. Seattle: University of Washington, Studies in Linguistics and Language Learning, vol. XI, 98 pages.

< previous page

page_289 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_290

next page > Page 290

Sugito, Seiju 1989. "Shakaikozo no henka to joseigo [Social structural changes and language of women]," Gengo [Language] 18.6 (June): 60-61. Sullivan, William J. 1981. "English as a (non-)sexist language," in The seventh LACUS forum 1980, eds. James E. Copeland, and Philip W. Davis, 444-456. Columbia, South Carolina: Hornbeam Press. 1983. "Sex, gender, and sexism in English," in The linguistic connection, ed. Jean Casagrande, 261-301. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America. 1988. "Sociolinguistic rules and dynamicity: insights from Polish modes of address,'' in The fourteenth LACUS forum 1987, ed. Sheila Embleton, 446-451. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Linguistic Association of Canada and the United States. Summers, Collier Stephen see Gilley, Hoyt Melvyn Surridge, Marie E. 1985. "Le genre grammatical des composées en français (The grammatical gender of compounds in French)," Canadian Journal of Linguistics 30.3 (Fall): 247-271. 1986. "Genre grammatical et dérivation lexicale en français (Grammatical gender and lexical derivation in French)," Canadian Journal of Linguistics 31.3 (Fall): 267-283. 1989 "Le facteur sémantique dans l'attribution du genre aux inanimés en français (The semantic factor in the attribution of gender to inanimate nouns in French)," Canadian Journal of Linguistics 34.1 (March): 19-44. Susnik Branka [= Branislava] J., ed. 1962. "Vocabularios inéditos de los idiomas Emok-Toba y Choroti, recogidos por el Dr. Max Schmidt," Boletin de la Sociedad Científica del Paraguay y del Museo Etnográfico 6: 1-32, Asunción, Paraguay. Sussman, Nan Michelle 1977. The effects of culture, sex of subject, and language on interpersonal distancing, 76 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kansas, DAI 38-12B (June 1978): 6252. Sutherland, Maryjane 1977. The impact of feminism on American English, Honors thesis, Worcester, Massachusetts: Clark University.

< previous page

page_290 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_291

next page > Page 291

Sutton, William A. n.d. [before 1975]. "Guidelines relating to sexual fairness in language." Muncie, Indiana: Ball State University. 1972. "Unnecessarily destructive language," manuscript, 14 pages. 1973. ''Sexual fairness in language," Muncie, Indiana: Ball State University, 12 pages. Svartengren, T. Hilding 1927. "The feminine gender for inanimate things in Anglo-American," American Speech 3.2 (December): 83-113. 1928-1939. "The use of the personal gender for inanimate things," Dialect Notes, vol. 6: 7-56. 1954. "The use of feminine gender for inanimate things in American colloquial speech," Moderna Språk 48: 261-292. Swacker, Marjorie 1973. "Speaker-sex: a sociolinguistic variable," paper read at the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, California, 9 pages. Swan, Toril see Bull, Tove Swann, Joan 1992. Girls, boys, and language. Language in Education Series. Oxford, England: Blackwell, 261 pages. See also Graddol, David Swatos, William, and Judith Kline 1978. "The lady is not a whore: labeling the promiscuous woman," International Journal of Women's Studies 1.2 (March/April): 159-166. Swift, David W. see Swift, Lois Swift, Kate see Miller, Casey Swift, Lois, and David W. Swift 1976. "Women's education," in American education: a sociological view, ed. David W. Swift, 369-399. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin. Swigart, Leigh 1992. "Women and language choice in Dakar: a case of unconscious innovation," Women and Language 15.1 (Spring): 11-20. Symons, Donald 1979. The evolution of human sexuality. Oxford University Press.

< previous page

page_291 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_292

next page > Page 292

Tagliavini, Carlo 1938. "Modificazioni del linguaggio nella parlata delle donne," in Scritti in onore di Alfredo Trombetti. Milan: Ulrico Hoepli Editore, 87-142. Takahara, Kumiko 1991. "Female speech patterns in Japanese," International Journal of the Sociology of Language 92: 61-85 (Special issue, "New Perspectives on Linguistic Etiquette," ed. Florian Coulmas.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Takamizu, Takae see Yamasawa, Kayoko Tannen, Deborah 1982. "Ethnic style in male-female conversation," in Language and social identity, ed. John J. Gumperz, 217-231. Cambridge University Press. 1989. "Interpreting interruption in conversation," CLS 25: Papers from the 25th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Part Two: Parasession on Language in Context, eds. Bradley Music, Randolph Graczyk, and Caroline Wiltshire, 266-287. Chicago, Illinois. 1990. ''Gender differences in conversational coherence: physical alignment and topical cohesion," in Conversational organization and its development, ed. Bruce Dorval, 167-206. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex. 1990. "Rethinking power and solidarity in gender and dominance," in General session and parasession on the legacy of Grice, ed. Kira Hall et al, 519-529. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting, Berkeley Linguistics Society. 1990. You just don't understand: women and men in conversation. New York: William Morrow, 319 pages. #1 National Bestseller, paperback; New York: Ballantine, 331 pages. 1993. Gender and conversational interaction, ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 327 pages. In press. Gender and discourse. Oxford University Press See also Lakoff, Robin Tolmach Tannen, Deborah, and Robert Bly 1994 (?) "Men and women: talking together," Mystic Fire [Video.]

< previous page

page_292 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_293

next page > Page 293

Tanner, Nancy Makepeace 1981. On becoming human. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tanz, Christine see Philips, Susan U. Tavris, Carol 1992. The mismeasure of woman. New York: Simon and Schuster, 399 pages. Taylor, Allan R. 1982. "'Male' and 'female' speech in Gros Venue," Anthropological Linguistics 24.3 (Fall): 301-307. Taylor, Anita see Bate, Barbara Taylor, Douglas [R.] 1951. "Sex gender in Central American Carib," International Journal of American Linguistics 17.2: 102-104. 1970. [personal correspondence]. Taylor, Douglas R., and Berend J. Hoff 1980. "The linguistic repertory of the Island-Carib in the seventeenth century: the men's languagea Carib pidgin?" International Journal of American Linguistics 46.4 (October): 301-312. Taylor, H. Jeanie, Cheris Kramarae, and Maureen Ebben 1993. Women, information technology and scholarship ed.Urbana, Illinois: Center for Advanced Study, University of Illinois, 127 pages. [Deals with language and sexual harrassment on the Internet.] Templin, Mildred C. 1966 [1969]. "The study of articulation and language development during the early school years," in The genesis of language: a psycholinguistic approach, eds. Frank Smith and George A. Miller, 173-186. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Thakerar, Jitendra N. see Giles, Howard Thelander, Kerstin 1986. Politikerspråk i könsperspektiv. Ord och stil Språkvårdssamfundets skrifter 17. Malmö, Sweden: Liber Förlag, 182 pages. [The language of politiciansmale and female.]

< previous page

page_293 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_294

next page > Page 294

Thompson, Nile [Robert] 1984. "Female indicators in the Twana language," Working papers of the Linguistics Circle 4.2: 331-336. Canada: Department of Linguistics, University of Victoria. 1985. Twana baby talk and its theoretical implications. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, 291 pages. Thorne, Battle 1972. "Girls who say yes to guys who say no: women in the draft resistance movement," paper read at the American Sociological Association. 1976. Review of Language and woman's place, by Robin Lakoff. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 1.3 (Part I, Spring): 744-746. See also Henley, Nancy M. Kramer, Cheris opata, Helene Z. Thorne, Barrie, and Nancy Henley 1973. "Sex differences in language, speech, and nonverbal communication: an annotated bibliography," duplicated, 45 pages. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Department of Sociology. Revised, November 1973, 57 pages. 1975. Language and sex: difference and dominance, eds. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House, 311 pages. Thorne, Barrie, Cheris Kramarae, and Nancy Henley, eds. 1983. Language, gender and society. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House, 342 pages. Tiedt, Iris M. 1973. "Sexism in language: an editor's plague," Elementary English 50.7 (October): 1073-1074. Tiedt, Pamela 1975. Possible sources of linguistic input for the acquisition of sex appropriate language by children. M.A. Thesis, Stanford University. Tiedt, Pamela, and Robin Semorile 1973. "Semantic discrepancies," Elementary English 50.7 (October): 1065-1066, 1074. Timm, Lenora [A.] 1976. Review of Language and woman's place, by Robin Lakoff. Lingua 39.3: 244-252.

< previous page

page_294 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_295

next page > Page 295

1978. "Not mere tongue-in-cheek: the case for a common gender pronoun in English," International Journal of Women's Studies 1.6 (November/December): 555-565. See also Bailey, Lee Ann Ting-Toomey, Stella see Stewart, Lea P. Tinsley, Adrian see Hoffman, Nancy Titze, Ingo R. 1989. "Physiologic and acoustic differences between male and female voices," The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 85.4 (April): 1699-1707. Tobias, Sheila, ed. 1970. Female studies: No. 1: a collection of college syllabi and reading lists. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: KNOW, Inc., 67 pages. 1992. Breaking the science barrier: how to explore and understand the sciences. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Todd, Alexandra Dundas, and Sue Fisher, eds. 1988. Gender and discourse: the power of talk. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex, 304 pages. Todd-Mancillas, William R. 1981. "Masculine generics = sexist language: a review of literature and implications for speech communication professionals," Communication Quarterly 29: 107-115. See also Nadler, Lawrence B. Pearson, Judy C. Toth, Emily 1970. "How can a woman MAN the barricades?: or Linguistic sexism up against the wall," Women: A Journal of Liberation 2.1 (Fall): 57. n.d. "The politics of linguistic sexism," manuscript, 7 pages. Trabelsi, Chedia 1991. "De quelques aspects du langage des femmes de Tunis." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 87: 87-98 (Special issue, "Sociolinguistics of the Maghreb" ed. Moha Ennaji.)

< previous page

page_295 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_296

next page > Page 296

Trager, George L. 1962. "A scheme for the cultural analysis of sex," Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 18.2 (Summer): 114-118. Trebilcot, Joyce 1982. "Two forms of androgynism," in "Femininity," "Masculinity,'' and "Androgyny": a modern philosophical discussion, ed. Mary Vetterling-Braggin, 161-169. Totowa, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams. Treichler, Paula A. 1984. "Escaping the sentence: diagnosis and discourse in 'The Yellow Wallpaper'," Tulsa Studies in Women's Literature 3.1/2 (Spring/Fall): 61-77. Response: volume 4.2 (Fall 1985): 323-330. 1986. "Language, feminism, theory: an annotated bibliography," Women and Language 10.1: 5-36. 1986. "Teaching feminist theory," in Theory in the classroom, ed. Cary Nelson, 57-128. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. See also Frank, Francine Wattman Kramarae, Cheris Treichler, Paula A., and Cheris Kramarae 1983. "Women's talk in the Ivory Tower," Communication Quarterly 31.2 (Spring): 118-132. Treichler, Paula A, and Ellen Wartella 1986. "Interventions: feminist theory and communication studies," Communication 9: 1-18, Gordon and Breach Science Publishers. Trible, Phyllis 1973. "Depatriarchalizing in Biblical interpretation," Journal of the American Academy of Religion 41.1 (March): 30-48. Trilling, Diana [1964] 1967. "The image of women in contemporary literature," in The woman in America, ed. Robert Jay Lifton, 52-71. Boston: Beacon Press. Trombley, Barbara Jean n.d. [before 1975]. "Dictionaries, language, and discrimination," pamphlet, Houghton Mifflin, [on the American Heritage School Dictionary], 6 pages. [See also Graham, Alma.]

< previous page

page_296 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_297

next page > Page 297

Trömel-P1ötz, Senta 1978. "Linguistik und Frauensprache," Linguistische Berichte 57: 49-68. 1979. Frauensprache in unserer Welt der Männer. Konstanz, Germany: Konstanzer Universitätreden. 1982. Frauensprache: Sprache der Veränderung. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer, 219 pages. 1984. Gewalt durch Sprache: Die Vergewaltigung von Frauen in Gesprächen. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer. See also Pusch, Luise Trommelen, Mieke and Wim Zonneveld 1986. "Dutch morphology: evidence for the right-hand head rule," Linguistic Inquiry 17.1 (Winter): 147-169. Trudgill, Peter 1972. "Sex, covert prestige and linguistic change in the urban British English of Norwich," Language in Society 1.2 (October): 179-195. 1974 [1987]. "Language and sex," in Sociolinguistics: an introduction, 84-102. Middlesex, England: Penguin. Revised 1983. 1974. The social differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 13, London: Cambridge University Press, 211 pages. 1978. Sociolinguistic patterns in British English, ed. London: Arnold Press, 186 pages. 1983. "Social identity and linguistic sex differentiation: explanations and pseudo-explanations for differences between women's and men's speech," Chapter 9, in On dialect: social and geographical perspectives, 161-168. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Reprinted, New York: New York University Press, 1984. 1986. "Social identity and linguistic sex differentiation," in Dialect and language variation, eds. Harold B. Allen, and Michael D. Linn, 395-402. New York: Academic Press. 1992. Introducing language and society. London: Penguin, 79 pages. [Includes entries on genderlect, covert prestige, and relevant topics.] See also Andersson, Lars G.

< previous page

page_297 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_298

next page > Page 298

Tschudi, Finn 1979. "Language, sex, and graffiti," Latrinalia, ed. Ø. Arntzen, and R. Eneretvedt. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsförlaget [Oslo University Press]. [In Norwegian.] Tuchman, Gaye, Arlene Kaplan Daniels, and James Benét, eds. 1978. Hearth and home: images of women in the mass media. New York: Oxford University Press, 333 pages. Tucker, Patricia see Money, John Tucker, Susie I. 1967. "Women's usage," in Protean shape: a study in eighteenth-century vocabulary and usage, 78-80. London: University of London, The Athlone Press. Tunick, George 1993. "Why should women be like men?" Los Angeles Times (February 1): B7. Turner, Lynn H. see Pearson, Judy C. Perry, Linda A. M. Tyler, Mary, and Peter Menzel 1978. "Sex-based language differences: thoughts on theory construction," in Systems in Sociocultural development. General Systems Research, Tallahassee, Florida: Florida State University. Uhlenbeck, C. C. 1932. Review of Gerlach Royen, Die nominalen Klassifikations-systeme in den Sprachen der Erde, International Journal of American Linguistics 7.1-2: 94-96. [See Royen, Gerlach.] Underwood, Virginia see Kett, Merriellyn Unger, Rhoda Kesler, and Florence L. Denmark, eds. 1975. Woman: dependent or independent variable? New York: Psychological Dimensions, 828 pages. Urla, Jackie 1990. Review of Language, gender, and sex, by Susan Philips et al. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 15.2 (Winter): 412-414.

< previous page

page_298 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_299

next page > Page 299

Ursel, Karen, and Gary D. Prideaux 1990. "Gender differences in language use: the role of the addressee," in The sixteenth LACUS forum 1989, ed. Michael P. Jordan, 470-477. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Linguistic Association of Canada and the United States. Vachek, Josef 1964. "Notes on gender in Modem English," Sborník Prací Filosofické Fakulty Brnenské * University A 12: 189-194. Valeckiené, A. 1991. "Funkciné gramatika ir lietuviu kalba (Functional grammar and Lithuanian)," Lituanistica 3.7: 5967. Valentine, Tamara M. 1988. "Developing discourse types in non-native English: strategies of gender in Hindi and Indian English," World Englishes 7.2 (Summer): 143-158. Valiquette, Hilaire see Sims, Christine P. Van Riper, William R. 1979. "Usage preferences of men and women: did, came and saw," American Speech 54.4 (Winter): 279-284. Varda One 1971. "Manglish," mimeograph. Venice, California: Everywoman Publishing Co., 7 pages. Veach, Sharon R. 1980. "Linguistics and women attorneys in the courtroom." Paper presented at the 11th National Conference on Women and the Law, San Francisco, California. [See Stix.] Velle, Weiert 1992. Review of Sex differences in cognitive abilities, by Diane F. Halpern. Language Origins Society (LOS) Forum 15 (Fall): 33-36. Vestergaard, Torben, and Kim Schrøder 1985. The language of advertising. Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 182 pages. Vetterling-Braggin, Mary, ed. 1981. Sexist language: a modern philosophical analysis. Totowa, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams and Company, 329 pages.

< previous page

page_299 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_300

next page > Page 300

Vetterling-Braggin, Mary, Frederick A. Elliston, and Jane English, eds. 1977. Feminism and philosophy. Part III, "Sexism in ordinary language," 105-170. Totowa, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams, & Company, 452 pages. Villacís Mora, María Cecilia 1986. Gender and control of conversational topics: the myth and the realitya study among university students in Quito, Ecuador. M.A. Thesis, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada: Trent University, 264 pages. Violi, Patrizia 1987. "Les origines du genre grammatical (The origins of grammatical gender)," Langages 85: 15-34. Wachtler, Joel see Nemeth, Charlan Walkowitz, Judith R. see Newton, Judith L. Walum, Laurel Richardson 1977. Review of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key; Language and women's place [sic], by Robin Lakoff; and Language and sex, by Barrie Thorne and Nancy Henley. Sex Roles 3.5 (October): 499-501. Wandor, Michelene, ed. 1983. On gender and writing. London: Pandora Press. Ware, Norma n.d. "Sex and the self/other continuum: some first thoughts on the relationship between two organizing principles in language and culture," 17-28. See also Adams, Karen L. Warshay, Diana Wortman 1972. "Sex differences in language style," in Toward a sociology of women, ed. Constantina Safilios-Rothschild, 3-9. Lexington, Massachusetts: Xerox College Publishing. 1979. "The effects of marital status and age on sex differences in language style," in Language and society: anthropological issues, eds. William C. McCormack and Stephen A. Wurm, 221-229. IXth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences. The Hague: Mouton. Wartella, Ellen see Treichler, Paula A. Watkins, John see Glesser, Goldine C. Watten, Barrett see Hejinian, Lyn Weinberg, Bernd see Bennett, Suzanne

< previous page

page_300 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_301

next page > Page 301

Weiner, Annette B. 1992. Inalienable possessions: the paradox of keeping-while-giving. Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 232 pages. Weisman, Leslie Kanes 1992. Discrimination by design: a feminist critique of the man-made environment. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. Weitz, Shirley 1977. Sex roles: biological, psychological, and social foundations. New York: Oxford University Press, 283 pages. Weitzman, Lenore J., Deborah Eifler, Elizabeth Hokada, and Catherine Ross 1972. "Sex-role socialization in picture books for preschool children," American Journal of Sociology 77.6 (May): 1125-1150. Weitzman, Lenore, and Diane Rizzo 1974 (?) "Images of males and females in elementary school textbook: a slide show," [Three carousels, tape, and script to accompany.] Old Westbury, New York: Feminist Press. Wentworth, Harold, and Smart Berg Flexner, eds. 1960. "Preface" (by Flexner) to Dictionary of American slang. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, pp. vi-xv. Wescott, Roger W. 1974. "Women, wife-men, and sexist bias," Verbatim: The Language Quarterly 1.2: 1. West, Candace [= Candy West] 1978. Communicating gender: a study of dominance and control in conversation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. 1979. "Against our will: male interruptions of females in cross-sex conversations," in Language, sex and gender, eds. Judith Orasanu et al., 79-97 q.v. See also Zimmerman, Don H. West, Candace, and Don H. Zimmerman 1977. "Women's place in everyday talk: reflections on parent-child interaction" Social Problems 24.5 (June): 521-529.

< previous page

page_301 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_302

next page > Page 302

1983. "Small insults: a study of interruptions in cross-sex conversations between unacquainted persons," in Language, gender and society, eds. Barrie Thorne et al, 102-117. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House. 1985. "Gender, language, and discourse," in Handbook of discourse analysis, vol. IV, ed. T. A. van Dyke, 103-125. New York: Academic Press. West, Elmer D. see Stoke, Stuart M. West, Robin 1988. "Jurisprudence and gender," University of Chicago Law Review 55.1 (Winter): 1-72. Westman, M. see Hultman, Tor G. Wexford, Mary see Drake, Kirsten Wheeler, Helen (Rippier) 1972. Womanhood media: current resources about women. Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, 335 pages. 1975. Womanhood media supplement: additional current resources about women. Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, 482 pages. Wheeless, Virginia Eman, Cynthia Berryman-Fink, and Denise Serafini 1982. "The use of gender-specific pronouns in the 1980's," Encoder 9: 35-46. White, Linda n.d. 19?? "Feminism and lexicography: dealing with sexist language in a bilingual dictionary," Special Issue, Journal of Women Studies 10.3. White, Toni L. [Candler School of Theology] n.d. [before 1975]. "A feminine word to the men of God." Whitehead, Harriet see Ortner, Sherry B. Whitney, Debbie L. 1992. Women's or powerless language in conversation: gender, status, and attributional consequences. dissertation: University of Saskatchewan, Canada. DANN 68217, DAI 53-06B (December): 3144. Whittaker, James O., and Robert D. Meade 1967. "Sex of the communicator as a variable in source credibility," Journal of social psychology 72.1: 27-34.

< previous page

page_302 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_303

next page > Page 303

Whorf, Benjamin Lee ca. 1937. "Grammatical categories," Language 21.1 (January-March 1945). Reprinted 1962 in Language, thought, and reality: selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, ed. John Carroll, 87-201. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Widmark, Gun 1973. "Språkförändring och socialgruppsbyte I," Förhandlingar vid sjunde sammankomsten för svenskans beskrivning, ed. C. Hummelstedt. Helsingfors, Finland: Folkmålsstudier 23: 10-23. 1979. "Hart och hon I," Språkform och språknorm, 264-271. En bok till B. Molde på 60-åsdagen, 16 September 1979. Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Språknämnden 67. Lund, Sweden: Berlings. 1980. "Kvinnospråk.I," Språken i vårt språk: språkstudier samlade av I. Jonsson och utgivna av Svenska Akademien. Stockhom, Sweden. Wiemann, John see Coupland, Nikolas Wierzbicka, Anna 1987. "Boys will be boys: 'radical semantics' vs. 'radical pragmatics'," Language 63.1 (March): 95114. Wijnen, Frank and Werner Deutsch 1985. "The article's noun and the noun's article: explorations into the representation and access of linguistic gender in Dutch," Linguistics 23.5 (v. 279): 793-810. Wilcox, J. R. see Berryman, Cynthia L. Williams, Jeffrey P. 1988. "Women and kinship in creole genesis," International Journal of the Sociology of Language 71: 81-89 (Special issue, "Sociolinguistics and Pidgen-Creole studies," ed. John R. Rickford.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Williams, Patricia J. 1991. The alchemy of race and rights: diary of a law professor. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 263 pages. Willis, Kathy n. d. [Before 1978]. The effects of sex of audience and degree of evaluation on past performance of women assessed on fear of success. M.A. Thesis, University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.

< previous page

page_303 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_304

next page > Page 304

Willson, Norma, ed. 1973. A woman's new world dictionary. vol. 2.3-4 (October), Lomita, California: 51% Publications, 14 pages. See also Lennert, Midge Winitz, Harris 1959. "Language skills of male and female kindergarten children," Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 2.4 (December): 377-386. Wise, C. M. 1951." 'Chiefess'a Hawaiian word," American Speech 26.2: 116-121. Withington, Robert 1937. " 'Lady,' 'woman,' and 'person'" American Speech 12.2 (April):117-121. 1937. "Woman-Lady," American Speech 12.3 (October): 235. Wodak, Ruth 1989. "Normaldeviantdisturbed? The sociopsychological theory of textplanning," in From sign to text: a semiotic view of communication, ed. Yishai Tobin, 333-354. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Wodak, Ruth, and Muriel Schulz 1986. The language of love and guilt: mother-daughter relationships from a crosscultural perspective. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins, 253 pages. Wolf, Gaelans Dodds de 1990. "Patterns of usage in urban Canadian English," English World-Wide 11.1: 1-31. Wood, Julia T. 1994 [available in 1993]. Gendered lives: communication, gender, and culture. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing. Wood, Marion M. 1966. "The influence of sex and knowledge of communication effectiveness on spontaneous speech," Word 22.1-3 (April-December): 112-137. Woods, Nicola J. 1991. "The significance of social factors for the adequate description of grammars," review of Japanese women's language, by Janet Shibamoto. Multilingua 10.3: 325-330.

< previous page

page_304 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_305

next page > Page 305

Woodward, James 1977. "Sex is definitely a problem: interpreters' knowledge of signs for sexual behavior," Sign Language Studies 14 (Spring): 73-88. Woolf, Virginia [1929] 1957. A room of one's own. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 118 pages. Worby, Diana Zacharia 1979. "In search of a common language: women and educational texts," College English 41.1 (September): 101-105. Wright, Audrey J. 1975. "Language Arts," Review of Male/female language, by Mary Ritchie Key. Library Journal 100.10 (May 15): 987. Wu, Ke, and D. G. Childers 1991. "Gender recognition from speech, Part I: coarse analysis," Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 90.4.1 (October): 1828-1840. See also Childers, D. G. Xie, Zhimin 1991. Jiangyong * nushu* zhi* mí [The myth of Jiangyong female writing]. Henen, China: Henan People's Press, 1914 pages. [Review by Dingxu Shi, Language 69.1 (March 1993): 174-178.] Yaguello, Marina 1978. Les mots et les femmes: essai d'approche sociolinguistique de la condition féminine. Paris: Petite Bibliothèque Payot, 202 pages. Yamasawa, Kayoko, and Takae Takamizu 1969. "Women's language: east and west," in Collected essays by the members of the faculty No. 13 (December), 140-156. Kyoritsu, Japan: Kyoritsu Women's Junior College. Yashiro, Kyoko 1989. "On reciprocity of Japanese address terms," Tsukuba University: Gaikokugo Kyoiku Ronshu, No. 11, 61-75.

< previous page

page_305 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_306

next page > Page 306

Zerffi, William A. C. 1957. ''Male and female voices," American Medical Association Archives of Otolaryngology 65.1 (January): 7-10. Ziel, Catherine Agnes 1991. Mother tonguel father tongue: gender-linked differences in language use and their influence on the perceived authority of the preacher, 211 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton Theological Seminary, DAI 52-04A (October 1991): 1378. Zihlman, Adrienne L. 1989. "Woman the gatherer: the role of women in early hominid evolution," in Gender and anthropology: critical reviews for research and teaching, ed., Sandra Morgen, 21-40. Washington, D.C.: American Anthropological Association. Zimin, Susan Esther 1978. Sex of speaker and addressee in the degree of deference used to request and apologize by first and second language users, 205 pages. Ph.D. dissertation, Boston University School of Education, DAI 39-05A (November 1978): 2798. 1981. "Sex and politeness: factors in first- and second-language use," International Journal of the Sociology of Language 27: 35-58. (Special issue, "The sociolinguistics of deference and politeness," ed. Joel Walters.) The Hague: Mouton. Zimmerman, Don H. and Candy West [= Candace West] 1973. "Conversational order and sexism: a convergence of theoretical and substantive problems," University of California, Santa Barbara. Paper read at the Linguistics Symposium, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, California. 1975. "Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation," in Language and sex, eds. Barrie Thorne, and Nancy Henley, 105-129. [Published version of 1973 paper.] See also West, Candace Zlateva, Palma 1987. "Za sistemata et opozicii pri lignite mestoimenija (On the personal pronoun system of oppositions)," Contrastive Linguistics 5: 47-53. Zonneveld, Wim see Trommelen, Mieke

< previous page

page_306 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_307

next page > Page 307

Zuckerman, Harriet, Jonathan R. Cole, and John T. Bruer, eds. 1991. The outer circle: women in the scientific community. New York: Norton. See also Cole, Jonathan R. Zweigenhaft, Richard L. see Aiken, Lewis R.

< previous page

page_307 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_308

next page > Page 308

Name Index A Abarbanel, Albert, 150, 160 Abercrombie, David, 155 Abrahams, Roger D., 161 Agnew, Spiro, 76 Alasdair, Mary, 115 Allman, William F., 13 Alyeshmerni, Mansoor, 72, 157 Anderson, George K., 165 Anderson, Paul S., 57 Annan, Noel Gilroy, 117, 164, 165 Argyle, Michael, 163, 167 Aristotle, 2 Aston, W. G., 164, 165 Atkins, Bowman K., xxiii Atwood, E. Bagby, 151 Austen, Jane 113, 115, 117, 166 Austin, George A., 74 Austin, William M. 103-104 B Babcock, Barbara, xxiii Bach, Emmon 157 Badinter, Elisabeth 12 Baecklund, Astrid 166 Bailey, Rosalie Fellows 151 Bailey, Susan McGee 60 Baker, Sidney J. 166 Balfour, Henry 162 Bánhidi, Zoltán 51 Bank, Mirra 120-121 Barak 19, 148-149 Baratz, Joan C. 158 Barbara, Dominick A. 163 Barber, Charles 156 Bardwick, Judith M. 154 Bart, Pauline 148 Baudelaire, Charles ix Beauvoir, Simone de viii, xxx, 32, 70, 77, 85-86, 113, 145, 146, 149, 150, 159 Beinhauer, Werner 163 Bennet, Edward M. 156 Bergman, Ingmar 123

Berko [Gleason, q.v.], Jean 55, 153, 167 Bierce, Ambrose 151 Bird, Caroline 166 Bird, Rose Elizabeth xx Birdwhistell, Ray L. 109, 162, 163 Bix, Brian xxiii Black-Rogers, Mary B. 77 Blood, Doffs 155, 168 Blount, Ben G. 156 Blount, Thomas 75 Bly, Robert 51 Boas, Franz xvi, 74, 157 Bodine, Ann xiii, 60 Bolinger, Dwight 156 Bosmajian, Haig A. xxiii, 169 Bradstreet, Anne 112, 163, 164 Brazelton, T. Berry 152 Brend, Ruth M. 155 Breton, Raymond 3 Brightman, R. 77 Brilliant, Richard 163 Brimelow, Peter 51 Brinton, Daniel 147 Brontë, Charlotte 113-115

< previous page

page_308 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_309

next page > Page 309

Brontë, Emily 113-115, 164, 169 Brooks, Ellen W. 95 Broverman, Inge K. 146 Blower, Reuben A. 159 Brown, Roger 74, 151 Brunet, Jerome S. 74, 157 Brush, Stephen G. 60 Buck, Pearl S. 120, 166 Budge, E. A. Wallis xxiii Bullowa, Margaret 152 Burr, Chandler 12 Burr, Elizabeth 153 Butler, Samuel 115, 165 Butz, Eleanore 12 Bysiewicz, Shirley xxiii C Callaghan, Catherine A. 12 Cammack, Floyd M. 162 Carroll, John B. 156, 158 Carroll, Lewis 91 Caso, Alfonso 147 Catford, J.C. 146 Cawdry, Robert 75 Charrow, V. R. xxiii Chatterji, Suniti Kumar 155 Chaucer, Geoffrey 23, 123 Chesterfield, Earl of 3, 96 Chesterton, Gilbert Keith 113, 164 Churchill, Winston 6, 123 Ciardi, John 146 Cicero 131 Classen, Constance xxvii-xxviii, xxxv Cohen, Larry R. 156 Cole, Jonathan R. 60 Coleridge, Samuel Taylor x, 142, 169 Collins, Ronald K. L. xix, xxii, xxiii Collinson, W. E. 146 Columbus, Christopher xi Condon, William S. 152 Converse, Charles Crozat 138 Cook, Mark 167 Corbett, Greville G. 77, 95 Coughenour, John C. xx, xxiii, 109

Cowan, George M. 162 Cox, Gall Diane xxiii Crockett, Harry J., Jr. 155 Crook, J. H. 162 Crumrine, Lynne S. 152 cummings, e. e. 92, 160 Curie, Marie xxxi, 137 D Daumier, Honoré 78 Davidson, Kenneth M. xxiii Davies, Hugh Sykes 154 Davies, Peter 158 Davison, Alice 60 Dawson, Mildred 56, 154 de Beauvoir see Beauvoir Deborah (Judge of Israel) 19, 148-149 Deeley [Spehn], Deanna 156, 185 Devereux, George 162 Dickinson, Emily 67, 113 Dinneen, Francis P. 157 Donne, John xxxiii Driedger, E. A. xxiii Dumit, Edward S. 155 Dunaway, Wayland F. 150 Dunn, Susan 153 Durant, Ariel 116 Darant, Will 116

< previous page

page_309 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_310

next page > Page 310

E Earnshaw, Doris 121 Eckert, Penelope 60 Eddy, Mary Baker 85 Ehrenberg, Margaret 12 Ehrenfels, U. R. 169 Einstein, Albert xv Eisenberg, Anne 59 Ekka, Francis 155 Eliot, George 113 Ellis, Albert 150, 160 "Ellis Bell" 113 Ember, Carol R. 51 Endicott, Jeffrey xxiii Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs xxiii Erades, P. A. 156, 160 Exline, Ralph 163 F Farenthold, Sissy (Frances) 69 Farquhar, Norma 153 Farrell, Warren 51 Fasold, Ralph W. 155 Faust, Norma 155 Ferber, Andrew 162 Ferguson, Charles A. 150, 159 Firestone, Shulamith 163 Fischer, John L. 155, 160 Fisher, Sue xxiii Flannery, Regina 104, 155 Flugel, J.C. xxx, 110 Fodor, Jerry A. 72, 157 Ford, Marguerite 151 Foss, B. M. 153 Fowler, H. W. 67, 93 Frazer, Sir James George 6, 124, 167 Freeman, Jo 156 Freeman, Kathleen 145 Freud, Sigmund 7, 72 Funk, Wilfred 150 G Galbraith, John Kenneth xxiv Gardner, Gerald H. F. 169 Geeting, Corinne 167

Gerzon, Mark 51,127 Gilligan, Carol xxi Ginsburg, Ruth Bader xxiii, xxiv Ginzberg, Eli 157 Glasse, R. M. 147 Gleason, Jean Berko 55, 153, 167 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang yon 19 Goldberg, Philip 151,165 Goldberg, Susan 108 Goodall, Jane 107, 148, 163 Goodnow, Jacqueline J. 74 Gould, Stephen Jay xxix Gravdal, Kathryn xxiii, 129 Graves, Robert 7, 19, 141, 146, 147, 148, 169 Gray, John 51 Greenberg, Joseph H. 77, 168 Greene, Elsa 156, 164 Greenough, James Bradstreet 4 Graber, Jeffrey 73, 157 Gruber, Ruth 169 H Haas, Mary R. 155 Hacker, Helen 161 Hadida, Sophie C. 158 Haederle, Michael 51 Hager, Philip xx, xxii, xxiii Haldane, J.B.S. 11

< previous page

page_310 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_311

next page > Page 311

Hall, Edward T. 57, 148, 154 Hall, James B. 170 Hall, Robert A., Jr. 160 Hamilton, Jack 166 Hammurabi (= Khammurabi) xxii Handelman, Gwen Thayer xxiii, xxvi Hannerz, Ulf 161 Haring, D. G. 161 Harms, Robert T. 157 Hastings, James 124 Hayes, Alfred S. 162 Heilbrun, Carolyn G. 70, 77, 156, 169 Heiney, Donald xxvii Henley, Nancy M. 107 Henneke, Ben Graf 155 Herzog, Marvin I. 169 Hindmarch, Ian 163 Hoenigswald, Henry M. 133, 168 Hoffman, Paul 12 Hoff-Wilson, Joan xxiii Holtby, Winifred 117, 165 Holton, Gerald 148 Hopkins, Anne 112 Howe, Florence 59, 165, 175 Hsu, Francis L. K. 166 Hubbard, Ruth 13 Hughes, Marija Matich xxiii, 45-46 Hutchinson, Robert 163, 164 Hymes, Dell 157, 158, 161, 162 I Irwin, O. C. 153 J Jacobs, Roderick A. 72, 157 Jakobson, Roman xxix, 88-89, 147, 159 Jennings, Edward M. 148 Jespersen, Otto 4, 67, 71-72, 75, 82, 89, 98, 131-132, 145, 146, 151, 156, 158, 159, 160, 167 Johnson, Samuel 86 Johnston, Harry H. 158, 168 Jones, Rodney 127 Jonson, Ben 123 K Kagan, Jerome 154 Kaiser, L. 153

Karst, Kenneth L. xxiii Katz, Jerrold J. 72, 157 Kay, Henna Hill xxiii Keene, Donald 164 Kelkar, Ashok R. 158 Kendon, Adam 162 Kenmare, Dallas 169 Kerr, James R. xxiii, xxiv Kester, Judy 167 Key, Harold 147, 149 Key, Mary Ritchie 60, 147, 149, 151, 154, 158, 159, 161, 166 Kimmel, Michael S. 51 Kimura, Doreen 148 King, Mary-Claire 13 Kinsey, Alfred C. 118 Kittredge, George Lyman 4 Kohlberg, Lawrence 165 Komarovsky, Mirra 154 Kraus, Flora von 7 Kuehl, Sheila James 129 Kupers, Terry Allen 51 Kurzon, Dennis xxiii

< previous page

page_311 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_312

next page > Page 312

L La Barre, Weston 11, 18, 148, 161 Labov, William 169 LaFollette, Marcel C. xxxv La Fontaine, Jean de 90 Lakoff, Robin 156 Lalljee, Mansur 167 Langendoen, Terence 72, 157 Langenfelt, Gösta 159 Lanham, L. W. 160 Lasch, Richard 146 Lawick-Goodall, Jane van 107, 148, 163 Lawrence, D. H. xv, 28, 119, 123, 141, 150, 166 Lehmann, W. P. 169 León-Portilla, Miguel 147, 149 Levenston, E. A. 156 Levine, Lewis 155 Lewis, Michael 108, 153 Lieberman, Philip 54, 153 Lind, John 169 Livingston, Helen H. 147, 169 Loden, Marilyn 100 Lope Blanch, J. M. 160 Luce, Clare Boothe 118, 141, 169 M Maccoby, Eleanor E. 56, 154, 165 MacKinnon, C. R. 159, 165 MacKinnon, Catharine A. xxiii, 130 Macmurray, John 169 McCawley, James D. 72, 157 McGuire, Michael T. xxiii Maddox, John 13 Magellan, Ferdinand xi Mailer, Norman 88 Malkiel, Yakov 169 Maimberg, Bertil 146 Malone, Sister Helen Daniel 153 Mann, Richard D. xxiii Marder, Herbert 164 Margaret of Newcastle 112 Marks, Barry A. 160 Martin, Ralph G. 167 Martin, Samuel E. 75, 158, 161

Martinet, André 168 Mary, daughter of Red Alasdair 115 Masters, Roger D. xxiii Mead, Margaret vii, 14, 42, 151 Meggitt, M. J. 147 Menkel-Meadow, Carrie xxi, xxiii, 121 Menyuk, Paula 153 Meredith, Mamie 155 Michael, R. P. 162 Michalsen, Tonje 160 Miller, George A. 153 Miller, J. A. 12 Miller, Roy Andrew 161, 164 Miller, Stephen H. 151 Millett, Kate 159 Milton, John 89 Money, John 146, 148 Montagu, Ashley 107, 163 Morgan, Robin 145, 146, 152 Mulcaster, Richard 3 Murasaki, Lady 114-115

< previous page

page_312 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_313

next page > Page 313

Murphy, Robert 152 Myrdal, Gunnar 99, 161 N Naftolin, Frederick 12 Nemeth, Charlan xxiii Neumann, Erich 149 Newcastle, Margaret of 112 Newell, William Wells 162 Newman, Georgiana Collis 56, 154 Nicholson, Margaret 67 Nilsen, Aileen Pace 60, 160 Nilsen, Don 160 Northrop, F. S. C. 147, 169 O O'Barr, William M. xxiii O'Connor, Sandra Day xxiv O'Donovan, Katherine xxiii Ohmann, Carol 164, 169 Olsen, Carroll L. 162 Olsen, Tillie 127, 167 O'Neill, John xxiv, xxviii Ostwald, Peter F. 108, 163 P Parker, Donald Dean 151 Partridge, Eric 150 Parturier, Françoise xix, 78 Paul, Saint 124 Plato 2 Pop, Sever 167 Porter, Lyman W. 151 Porter, Roy 13 Postal, Paul M. 72, 157 Potter, Simeon 150 Pound, Louise 158 Priebsch, R. 146 Pristin, Terry xxii, xxiii Pusey, Nathan 75 Pythagoras 1, 48, 145 R Reibel, David A. 157 Rennie, John 13 Resnik, Judith xx-xxiii Reynolds, Susan Salter 130

Richman, Barry 158 Ridley, Matt 13 Riessman, Frank 161 Ritchie, Marguerite E. xxiii Romeo, Luigi 37 Romm, Ethel Grodzins xxii, xxiii Rosenbaum, Peter S. 72, 157 Rosener, Judy B. 100 Rothstein, Robert A. 159, 160, 168 Rousseau, Jean Jacques 41 Royen, Gerlach 7, 72 Rubin, Joan 168 Rudolph, Vance 152 Ruskin, John 32 S Sachs, Albie xxiii Salvador, Gregorio 167 Samarin, William J. 162, 168 Sand, George 113 Sander, Louis W. 152 Sandler, Bernice 166 Sapir, Edward xvi, 4, 74, 98, 124, 155, 157, 160, 167 Saporta, Sol 153 Sayers, Dorothy L. 150 Schane, Sanford A. 157 Schorer, Mark 169 Schuell, Hildred 153

< previous page

page_313 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_314

next page > Page 314

Scott, Sir Walter 17 Scully, Diana 148 Seiler, Hansjakob xxix Sexton, Patricia 57, 154 Shakespeare, William 23, 82, 89, 108, 115, 143 Shaw, George Bernard 4, 7, 12, 126, 143, 167, 170 Shea, Gail 148 Sherfey, Mary Jane 146 Shuy, Roger W. 158, 161, 182 Slobin, Dan I. 151 Small, Meredith F. 12 Smith, Frank 153 Smith, Stevenson 154 Sontag, Lester Warren 152 Sophocles 122 Soustelle, Jacques 147, 149 Spehn, Deanna Deeley 156, 185 Spehn, Michaela Katherine 185 Stanchfield, Jo M. 57, 154 Stanford, Ann 163-164 Stanley, Julia Penelope 146 Stannard, Una xxiii, 46 Stark, Louisa 160 Steadman, J. M., Jr. 160 tech; Svatopluk 159, 160 Stene, Aasta 159 Stephen, Julia 117, 165 Stephen, Leslie 113, 164, 165 Stewart, William A. 158 Stix, Harriet xxiii Stopes, Charlotte Carmichael xxiii Straus, A. T. 77 Strodtbeck, Fred L. xxiii Sutton, William A. 158, 169 Svartengren, T. Hilding 158, 159, 160 Swadesh, Morris 74, 157 Swift, Jonathan 3, 27, 150 Symons, Donald 13 T Tannen, Deborah 51 Tanner, Nancy Makepeace 12 Taubr, Paul 72, 157 Tavris, Carol xxix

Taylor Douglas 134, 168 Templin, Mildred C. 153 Tobin, Richard L. 154 Todd, Alexandra Dundas xxiii Townsend, Elvira M. 151 Trager, George L. 103, 161 Trudgill, Peter 160 Truman, Harry 26 Tunick, George 100 Twain, Mark 81, 106 U Uhlenbeck, C. C. 146 Ulanov, Barry 170 Uldall, Elizabeth 155 V Vachek, Josef 160 Vaillant, George C. 147, 149 Vaillant, Susannah B. 147 Van Buren, Hildebert 162 Veach, Sharon R. xxii, xxiii Vygotsky, L. S. 89, 159 W Wachtler, Joel xxiii Wallace, Robert F. 152 Watson, Barbara Bellow 146, 147, 167, 170

< previous page

page_314 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_315

next page > Page 315

Webster, Staten W. 161 Wegener, Philipp 149 Weiner, Annette B. xxiv Weininger, Otto 4, 146 Weinreich, Uriel 169 Weir, Ruth H. 153 Weiss, Rick 12 Wermuth, Paul C. 154 West, Candy (=Candace) 167 West, Robin xxiii Whitehall, Harold 159 Whorf, Benjamin Lee xvi, 71, 74, 81, 156, 157, 158 Wife of Bath 123 Wilde, Oscar 3 Wilhelm, Richard 149 Williams, Crafts D. 150 Williams, Patricia xxiii Willson, Norma 127 Winchilsea, Lady 113 Windfuhr, Gernot L. 9 Winthrop, Governor 112 Wise, C. M. 156 Wish, Harvey 168 Wolff, Peter H. 53, 153 Wolfram, Walter A. 161 Wollstonecraft, Mary 143 Woolf, Virginia viii, 69, 112-114, 117, 118, 143, 164, 165, 166, 169 Wordsworth, William 117 Y Young, Grace C. 152 Z Zihlman, Adrienne L. 12 Zimmerman, Don H. 167 Zuckerman, Harriet 60 Page 316 General Index A AAUP Bulletin (American Association of University Professors) 75, 83 AAUW (American Association of University Women) 60 abnormal speech 4 acquisition of language 52, 83, 87 adjective 68

advertising 97, 137 Africa 87 against males 47 Algonkin 70, 77 ambiguity 81-82 American Dialect Society (ADS) vii, 46, 154 American Men and Women of Science 136 American Speech 44, 97 androgen 5 androgyny/androgynous viii, 85, 136, 142 animal/animal behavior 14 animate 8, 12, 80, 139 anomalous construction 87, 139 anonymous 115 anthropological 4 antiphonal composition 27 apology 29, 30 Arabic 88 Arawak(an) 3, 8-9, 134, 147 Armenian 9 artist 123 asymmetry, symmetry xxix, 110-111 authors 112 "The Average American" 94 "The Average Shopper" 94 Aztec 9-10, 25, 80, 82, 87, 142, 147 B baby doll (clothes) 100, 111 Babylon xxii-xxiii baby talk 28, 88, 104, 107, 108, 150 bachelor 32, 44 bag lady 36 Bantu 83, 158 Bengali 63, 75, 155 bilingualism/bidialectalism 131 biological basis 12 Black Carib 134 Black (English) 87, 99, 105 body language 101, 161 see also posture bonding, male xv, xxxi boy 47, 103, 109, 119 brain 6, 15, 106, 108 business 100 C California Judicial Council xx

Canterbury Tales, The 123 career housewife 32 Carib 3, 134 categories xvi-xviii, 8, 70, 122, 125 Central African Republic 135 Chain 61, 62, 132, 155 change 131,136 see also language change

< previous page

page_315 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_37

next page > Page 37

was it 'human being'?) is related to 'earth' and thus, 'earthling' is a primitive concept. In the following bibliography, see Luigi Romeo (1979), who produced a lexicon of the word homo.

< previous page

page_37 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_317

next page > Page 317

characteristics xvii, 70 chiefess 67 child/children 63, 64, 128, 129-130 children's books 119, 166 see also textbooks Chinese 19, 53, 82, 87, 114-115, 120, 135, 142 chromosome 12, 13 circumcision 129 classification xvi-xvii, 49, 70, 77, 80 clothes xxx, 77, 106 Cocama 66 code-switching 119 see also shifting/switching cognitive verb 86 comedian 75, 88 see also humor command form 69 see also imperative conceptual categories 61, 70-71 context of situation 24, 53, 80, 149, 181 Contract Law 75, 77 control 107, 124, 129, 138 conversation 25, 27, 119, 123, 136, 141 couplet 32, 138 credits due xxxiii, 121, 184-185 cross-cultural 70, 101 cry 17, 47, 104, 153 Czech 88, 91 D Danish/Denmark 42 descriptors/descriptions 31,34, 124 Devil's Dictionary, The 44, 151 dialect 23, 46, 91, 98, 120, 140 see also social dialect dialogue 23, 27, 95, 119, 135, 136, 141 dichotic studies 16 discrimination 47, 124, 137 double bind 91 double standard 21-22, 47, 49, 51, 102, 111, 117, 129 Dravidian 65 dual/dualism xxviii, 10, 80 see also number dualistic opposites xxviii, 18, 145 Dutch 41 dyadic relationship 27 E earthling 37, 80 economy/economic xxiii, 7, 94, 99, 141 education 52, 60, 141

Egypt 137-138 embryological development 73 emotions xxv, 92 emotive/expressive language 64, 91-92, 101 English 9, 63, 66, 79, 80, 82, 86, 88, 90, 92, 139 epic 115 -ess 66-67, 113 etiquette 84, 171 etymology 31 euphemism 49, 86 evolution 16 exclamation mark xxvi-xxvii

< previous page

page_317 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_318

next page > Page 318

exclusive 80 explanations xxvii, 6, 29, 115, 125 expressive see emotive extra-linguistic 101, 140 eye 5, 106, 109 F facial expression 53, 101, 106 falsetto 105 familiarity 79 fear of female 51 female 72, 93 feminine/femininity 14, 20, 26, 57, 68, 70, 72, 96, 99, 101, 105, 113, 143 Finnish 82 form of language 61 France/French 3, 42, 77-78, 88, 89, 90, 92, 132 French Revolution 78 friend/friendship xv function, of language 61, 70 functional behavior xvii G Gaelic 115 gathering and hunting xvii, 7 Gbeya 104 gender/grammatical gender xxvii, 8, 9, 72, 77, 80, 88, 132, 139, 142, 184 ''generic rule" xxxi, 83, 93, 95 genius xviii, 4, 11 Genji Monogatari 114 German/Germany 4, 23, 31, 65, 70, 80, 89, 98 gesture 101, 124 "girl" 31, 33, 36, 111, 124 god 10 grammar/grammatical 61, 65 grammatical categories xvi-xviii, 8, 70, 139 grammatical gender 132 see also gender greetings 38, 162 Gros Ventre 62, 104, 155 Guaraní 134 guidelines 137, 171 H Hawaii 67 Hebrew 120 head-tilt 105 hen-pecking 124

hesitation 64, 65, 144 historical 115 history xi-xii, xxiii, 72, 80, 138, 144 homo 37, 95 homosexual 12, 87 honorific 80, 98 see also status house-husband 32 housewife 32 human xxv, 8, 11, 82, 86, 89 humor 1, 11, 89, 136 see also comedian hunting and gathering xvii, 7 Hungarian 44, 82, 87 hyperbole 3, 29 I I Ching 19, 149 Ignaciano 2 illiteracy 58-60 cf. nonliterate

< previous page

page_318 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_319

next page > Page 319

illness 21 imitative behavior 52 imperative 69 inanimate 8, 12, 80, 86, 89, 90, 91, 139 Inca xxvii inclusive 80 India 63, 65, 88, 169 Indo-European 9, 79, 90, 142 infant 52, 54, 108, 169 infibulation 129 -ing 63, 97 initials 95 insane 112, 115 intensifier 67, 92 interjection 27 interpretation 102, 104 interruption 125 intonation 53, 63, 92, 141 intrusive /r/46 inventions 142 Iran 104 Island Carib 134 it" 80, 86 Italian 87, 98 J Jane Eyre 143 Japan 57, 75, 104, 114, 161 Japanese 98, 135, 164 jokes 129 K Karina 134 Kenya 69 kinesics 101,162 King James Bible 23 Kinsey report 118 kinship 7 Koasati 62, 155 Korea 75, 161 Kurux * 65 L labels 31, 32, 124 Lady Chatterley's Lover 28, 150 "lady/ladies" 31-32, 36, 96, 132 language change 131, 135, 136

language of apology 29, 30 language of clothes xxx, 77, 109-110 language of economics xxiii language of law xviii-xxiii, 185 language of violence 129 language planning 136 lateralization 16 Latin 33 laughing 124 law xviii-xxiii, 128, 129, 185 law (contract) 75, 77 legal see law, language of law lexical domains 26-27 Lingua Franca 133 Linguistic Society of America (LSA) 59, 67 linguistic structures 61, 138 literacy 58-59, 132-133 literature 128, 129 Luo 69 M Madonna/Whore 49 male 72, 93 man/men 31-32, 36, 93

< previous page

page_319 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_320

next page > Page 320

managerial style 100 Marathi 88 marked/unmarked 66 masculine/masculinity 14, 20, 26, 68, 70, 72, 96-97, 99, 101, 105, 113, 143 mask xxxi, 127 master 32 math 58 matrilineal 140 Mayo 48 Mazateco 103, 162 meaning 71 see also semantics Medea 123 medical 15, 60 medicine 85 mental health 5, 20-21, 112-113, 124, 146, 149 see also insane Mexico 25, 38, 48, 103 military 21, 128 see also war mistress 32 MLA Female Studies 176 modal construction 68 Modem Language Association (MLA) vii, 59, 116, 176, 183 Mohave 105 money xxiv, 7, 48, 94 see also economic morphology/morphological 55, 65 mother 105 mourning 124 mouth 106 Ms. 42, 136 Mundurucú 48 music, musicians 108, 129 The Music Man 29 Muskogean 62 My Fair Lady/Pygmalion 30, 116 N nagging 126 names 38, 41, 45, 79 Napoleonic Code xix National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) 59 nature/nurture xxv, 12, 184 neuter 92 nominal 79, 93 nonliterate 132 cf. illiteracy nonstandard 96

nonverbal behavior/communication 29, 101, 124, 149, 184 Nootka 4 notional categories 71 see also grammatical categories novel 114, 120 nudity xxix-xxx, 77, 110-111 number (singular/dual/plural) 10, 70, 80 nurture/nature xxv, 12, 184 nurtures 50 O object 61, 70 objectification 76 obscenities/four-letter words 26-27, 33, 49, 96 occupational language 5, 23, 29, 43 Odyssey, The 115

< previous page

page_320 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_321

next page > Page 321

Old English 117 Old Testament 148 opposites 18, 145 oral literature 115 order 35, 138 origins 9, 15 "Other" xxvii, 32, 77, 86 P palindrome 146 Paraguay 134, 168 paralanguage/paralinguistics xxv-xxvii, 101, 161 patronizing 29 perception xvi, xxi Persian 9 Persona 123 personification 91-92, 139 perspective xi, xxi-xxii, xxiv, xxxii, 77, 95, 127, 129, 181 phonetic 54 phonetic development 54 phonology/phonological 61 physical characteristics 70 physical/physiological differences 6, 15-16, 108 pitch 36, 53, 54, 64, 101, 103, 104, 111 playing the dozens 99 plural 10, 70, 80 see also number poet/poetry 112 poetess 67, 113 poetic drama 115 "politically correct" xxiv pornographic 120, 130 possession/possessive 80 posture 101, 105, 106 power xiv, xxx, 5, 77, 100, 128, 129, 141 powerless xxv, xxx, 127, 129, 130 Prakrit 75, 98 principle of opposites 18 prison language 6 pronoun/pronominal forms 79, 81, 92, 132, 138 pronoun (feminine) 91 psychological 7 psychological differences 17 punctuation xxvi Pygmalion/My Fair Lady 3, 116

Q quality of voice xxv, 6, 101 Queen Bee xxx R rape/rapture 128, 129 Rape of the Sabines, The 128 "rattle the tongue" 104 reading 56 Reasonable Man/Woman /Person, The xviii-xx reference/referent 79, 92, 132, 138 religion/religious 85, 96, 124 Rhodes scholarship xii rhythm 29, 53, 138 Rite of Passage 130 Russia/Russian 53, 88, 89, 91, 93, 118, 132 S salutations 139 Sango 135

< previous page

page_321 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_322

next page > Page 322

Sanskrit 75, 98 science/scientists 123 Scotland/Scottish 41, 67, 88 secretary xiv, 45 selectional restriction 71, 74, 87, 139 see also grammatical categories semantic 61, 70 semiotic 109-110 sennachie (shanachie) 115 sex xxix, xxx, 72, 109, 128-129 sex origin 5 sexual harassment 109 s/he 137 shifting/switching 84 see also code-switching sign language 104, 124 silence/silent 85, 107, 127, 144 Silent Woman, The xxix, 122, 123 singular 70 see also number slave 41, 126 smile 106 social dialect 23 sociolinguistics 23, 184 sociological 3 Sorry! 29-30 soul xviii, 4, 11, 146 South Africa 97, 160 Spanish 23, 41, 42, 70, 79, 80, 89, 91, 98, 104, 106, 133, 134 specified 93 spectrograph 54, 140 speech acts 101 speech style see style sports 21 standard 96 status 23, 44, 79, 90, 96, 107, 124, 125 stutter 15, 56 style 23, 28, 55, 120 subject 61, 70, 86 submissive gesture 29, 107 Sudan 39 Sumerian xxii superlative 92 supernatural 7, 124 see also religious suprasegmental 63 see also intonation Supreme Court xxiv

swear/swearing 27, 49, 92, 96 see also obscenities Swedish 89, 103 switching 94 see also shifting symbol/symbolic xxviii, 44, 98, 110, 130 symmetry, asymmetry xxix, 111 syntax/syntactic 65, 67 T taboo 48, 108, 129 tactile 21, 107 see also touch tag question 69 Tale of Genji, The 114 Taos 103 Tenth Commandment 75 temporal 23, 101 textbooks 18, 58, 91, 118, 137 Thai 80

< previous page

page_322 If you like this book, buy it!

next page >

< previous page

page_323 Page 323

theoretical explanation 6, 58, 80, 90, 122 Title IX 21 titles 38, 79, 96 touch 53, 54, 163 transformational theory 74 translation xxix, 89, 128 Tupi 66 tyranny 5, 122, 126, 132, 167 Tzeltal 103 U underlining 58 universal 2, 77, 98, 139 University of California 171 unmarked, marked 66 unspecified 93 unwritten language 132 usage 25, 96, 138 U. S. Ninth Circuit Court xx-xxii, 109 V value(s) xxiii, 51, 60, 130 verbal dueling 99 victim xxi-xxii, 126 Vietnam 61 violence 127, 128, 129 vocabulary/lexical domains 26 vocal folds (vocal cords) 6 vocalizations 124 voice disguisers 104, 162 voice quality 103 see also quality of voice W war 128 see also military warrior woman 21 wedding ring 44 whistle 103-104 wife 32 "woman" 31-32, 95 women 74 Women's Liberation (Day) 76, 125 Women, The 118 written language 132 X Xosa 133 Xth Commandment 75

Y Yana 62, 98, 155 yin and yang 19 Yiddish 48, 120 Z Zulu 133 Page 324 About the Author MARY RITCHIE KEY (Ph.D., University of Texas) is Emeritus Professor at the University of California, Irvine. She has been actively involved in linguistic research for over four decades in more than a dozen different languages, in Mexico, South America, and Easter Island. She has done graduate work at the Universities of Oklahoma, Chicago, and Michigan, and postgraduate work at the University of California, Los Angeles. She has traveled extensively and has lectured on linguistic subjects on four continentsthe United States, Europe, South America, and Asia. She has authored and edited eighteen books and monographs, in addition to over a hundred articles and reviews published in the United States, Europe, Mexico, South America, Japan, and Korea. Topics include: comparative linguistics, nonverbal communication, sociolinguistics, phonology, English spelling, history of linguistics, language classification, American Indian languages, and intercontinental connections. She is on the editorial boards of several journals. She was the founding chairman of the Program in Linguistics when it was established at the University of California, Irvine, and has been an elected delegate to the Senate Representative Assembly. Honors and awards include a University of California Regent's Grant, Friends of the Library Book Award, Fulbright-Hays Research and Lectureship, Faculty Research Fellowship, and the 1990 Rolex Awards Honourable Mention, Spirit of Enterprise. She is listed in Who's Who in America. Among her books are Vocabulario Mejicano de la Sierra [Aztec] (Mexico, D.F., 1953); Cavineña y Castellano (Cochabamba, Bolivia, 1963); Comparative Tacanan Phonology (The Hague: Mouton, 1968); Male/Female Language (Metuchen:Scarecrow, 1975); Paralanguage and Kinesics (Metuchen:Scarecrow, 1975); Nonverbal Communication (Metuchen:Scarecrow, 1977); The Grouping of South American Indian Languages (Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr, 1979); Language Change in South American Indian Languages (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991).

< previous page

page_323 If you like this book, buy it!