XI Международная студенческая научная конференция Студенческий научный форум - 2019


Текст работы размещён без изображений и формул.
Полная версия работы доступна во вкладке "Файлы работы" в формате PDF

I.Concept "gender". History of emergence, specifics, cross-disciplinary character.

Over time the sex of the person from biological characteristic was transformed to characteristic social and psychological. Thus, there was a concept "gender" meaning set of social and cultural norms which society orders to carry out to people depending on their biological floor. The concept "gender" was beyond grammar for a long time. This phenomenon widely is considered as a sociocultural, psycholinguistic phenomenon.

For the first time the floor factor in connection with language arose in antiquity at judgment of category of a grammatical gender. The most ancient and long time the only hypothesis of the reasons of emergence and functioning in language of category of a sort became symbolic and semantic, being based on correlation of natural biological category sexus from grammatical genus. Supporters of this hypothesis considered that the grammatical gender arose under the influence of a natural reality – presence of people of a different floor (Herder, Humboldt, Grimm, etc.) at the same time researchers made use of the not language experience for an explanation of extralinguistic motivation of category of a sort. It led to emergence of estimation in interpretation of category of a sort: the masculine gender appeared to the names, paramount because of attributing, relating to it, semantics of force, activity, energy. Names of a feminine gender, on the contrary, were characterized by passivity, subordination. Thus, conditions of social reality were extrapolated to laws of development of language that is confirmed by basic gender researches E. Borneman, where the analysis is kept in terms of cross-disciplinary approach. The blow to a symbolic and semantic hypothesis was struck by opening of languages in which the category of a sort is absent. When studying a gender factor in language – many linguists –of the Russian school which declared in the late eighties (Haleeva I.I., Kirilina A.V., Malishevskoy D.Ch., etc.) is called the linguoculturological approach assuming studying of courage and femininity as basic cultural concepts.

The public importance of category "gender" justifies its application to all language phenomena concerning floor problems. "A floor and its manifestations not just "are registered" language, but get an axiology, are estimated in terms of a naive picture of the world.[3,with 110-114]

1.1Linguistic aspects of gender stereotypes and their functioning in modern society. Gender asymmetry.Researches of the 1970th differ in a depopulation of the conclusions which are contained in them that demonstrates "recognition" of a problem linguistic science. The theory of opposition of "women's cooperation" to "men's rivalry" in linguistic (speech) behavior became one of aspects of gender linguistics. Dale Spender ("The language created by the man", Spender, 1986) claims that in essence language is initially predisposed to establishment of superiority of men in society. This statement provoked a rough discussion on a problem: whether really the similar phenomena are caused by the fact that language creates reality, or words which people have at the order are irrelevant to thought processes.

In the course of knowledge from the world around objects, properties, processes not only real, but also inner worlds are isolated and called. It is possible to carry images, symbols, standards and stereotypes of culture to the last and also recognized as society of value ethical standards. The gender stereotypes arising over biologically - sexual reality, reflect the set of biological signs, social roles, features of mentality and behavior inherent in representatives of this floor within this culture. Terms a masculinity and a femininity in relation to gender stereotypes, represent, themselves conceptual metaphors (P. Lakoff), transferring internally contradictory and at the same time dynamic ratio of men's and women's substrates.[4,with 45-49] Manifestations of a masculinity and femininity can be observed in the most different spheres, for example, in behavior types, in different types of social activity and also in the language describing these phenomena.

Let's return to results of the dictionary analysis. The analysis of the British dictionaries of the middle of the XX century illustrates the provision of feministic linguistics that lexicographic sources reflect and reproduce the sexist use of language. The research was conducted on material of the illustrative contexts (IC) of the "Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English" A.S.Hornby dictionary,[5,with 112-118] authoritative in the 1940-50th years, prod. 1942, 1948, 1958 (ALDCE), also aimed to track as in this source are shown:

obscurity of women in language;

secondariness of the female status in relation to men's;

stereotypical representation of both sexes, leading to

- in other words, how in dictionary entries the gender asymmetry is shown.

Swear words and Expletives Maybe because women are gentle and docile, they usually avoid using swear words and dirty words. They believe that these kinds of words will not only make others uncomfortable and give an impression of “no civilization”, but also destroy the relationship between her and others. Women always pay more attention to the grace of themselves and their use of language. We rarely hear that women utter such words like “damn, fuck you, hell,” instead they use “oh, dear, my god” to express their feelings. Diminutives Women like to use words that have the meaning of “small”, such as bookie, hanky, panties. They also like to use words that show affections, such as dear, sweetie. Furthermore, women like to use words that show politeness, such as please, thanks, and they use more euphemism, but “slang” is considered to be men’s preference. From the study we can see that men and women have their own vocabulary choices in achieving emphatic effects.

We often hear a woman say “well, you know…, I think…, I suppose….kind of, maybe I am wrong but…, etc. When they want to get help from others, men and

women express in different ways as the following: Women: I was wondering if you can help me. Men: please give me a hand. From the above example we can see men tend to ask something directly, while women tend to be more polite. b. Interrogative sentences Women use more interrogative sentences than men do. Women look interrogative sentences as a strategy of continuing a good conversation. Lakoff (1975) pointed out that compared with men, women are more likely to use an interrogative sentence to express their idea, and they like to use tag questions, because tag questions can make the tone less tense.[11,with 78-80] Fishman (1980) collected many couples‟ conversation tapes, and he found that women used three times of tag questions as men did. In these conversations, they were 370 interrogative sentences, among which women used 263, almost two and a half of times of men did. This point is similar to the difference in intonation between men and women. Just as Lakoff (1975) said that women might answer a question with rising tone, while men like to use falling tone to make a firm statement. According to Lakoff (1975), women tent to do this because they are less sure about themselves and their opinions than men. [12,with71-77]

Male language

Female language

When will dinner be ready?

Around six o‟clock

it’s a good meal”

It’s a gorgeous meal”

use very, utterly, really

awfully, pretty, terribly, vastly, quite,so. “It was so interesting”

damn, fuck you, hell,”

Oh! Dear, my god”

Shit! The train is late again!

Dear me! Do you always get up so late? It‟s one o‟clock!


bookie, hanky, panties


please, thanks

You need to be quick

We need to be in a hurry


well, you know…, I think…, I suppose….kind of, maybe I am wrong but

please give me a hand

I was wondering if you can help me.

Give me an apple!

Would you give me an apple?

It’s time to go

Let’s go!

We are gonna to the park today

We are going to go to the park today


Along with various social, cultural and political factors, language is most certainly one of the biggest conveyors of prejudices. Consciously or subconsciously, we tend to depict all our beliefs, values and expectations via our choice of vocabulary, speaking style, etc. Moreover, the attitude of speakers towards diverse social issues, such as gender equality, can be visible through our language usage.

As the results of the questionnaire show, there are many dichotomies between genders and their language usage, starting from diverse expectations and vocabulary, through the usage of power, solidarity and indirectness, to the habits of interruption and exclamation. However, in order to ameliorate the communication between genders, it is not enough to define those dichotomies, but to accept them and learn how to recognize them and comply with them. Apart from understanding the differences, it is also crucial to recognize the similarities in communication, as they can be of great help in bridging the gaps between genders.

According to the research, what is regarded as crucial in successful communication today is not gender, but communicative competence. The essential skill is the ability to share personal feelings and information, the ability to hold

adequate interpersonal relations and the ability to discuss life issues, and it has

been proven that both men and women own some of these skills, but it is a rare occurence that one man or one woman owns all of these traits. That is why

successful orators today are speakers who can combine traditional masculine characteristics of authority, entrepreneurship and leadership and female characteristics of emotional expressivity and understanding.


Aitchison, J. (1987). The language lifegame: Prediction, explanation and linguistic change. In W. Koopman, F. van der Leek, O. Fischer, & R. Eaton (Eds.), Explanation and language change (pp. 11-32).

Allerton, D.J. (1990). Language as form and structure: Grammar and its categories. In N.E. Collinge (Ed.), An encyclopedia of language (pp. 68-111). London: Routledge.

Corbett, G.G. (1994). Gender and gender systems. In R.E. Asher, & J.M.Y. Simpson (Eds.), The encyclopedia of language and linguistics. Vol. 3 (pp. 1347-1353). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Glaser, W.R., & Düngelhoff, F.-J. (1984). The time course of picture-word interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(5), 640-654.

Kooij, J.G. (1987). Dutch. In B. Comrie (Ed.), The world's major languages (pp. 139-156).

Monsell, S. (1985). Repetition and the lexicon. In A.W. Ellis (Ed.), Progress in the psychology of language, Vol. 2 (pp. 147-195). London: Erlbaum.

Просмотров работы: 369