Asymmetries of Male/Female Representation in Arabic

  • Samira Farwaneh

Abstract

The correlation between language and gender has advanced to the forefront of sociolinguistic research, particularly after the widely acclaimed yet highly controversial work of Lakoff (1975) in which she examines societal gender inequity and its effect on linguistic performance, focusing on language used by women as well as language used to refer to women. She sheds light on several linguistic domains where gender asymmetry figures prominently. Her work generated an upsurge in research on language and gender issues, primary among which is the detection of sexist language usage in English and other languages. Evident throughout is the assertion that sexist language usage, that is, the overt expression of gender bias, manifests itself in a variety of linguistic domains: syntax, semantics, discourse and the lexicon, as demonstrated unequivocally in the study of naming practices, terms of address usage, sex language and use of metaphors (Pauwels, 1998). According to these studies, gender inequity manifests itself in a variety of patterns ranging from the subtle to the profound. These manifestations include the following:
  • 1. The generic use of the masculine pronoun; for example, ‘to each his own’.

  • 2. Ordering the masculine form before the feminine; for example, ‘husband and wife’ rather than ‘wife and husband’.

  • 3. Euphemisms; such as using the term ‘lady’ instead of ‘woman’.

  • 4. Semantic derogation; for example, ‘mistress’ which is no longer the exact equivalent of ‘master’.

  • 5. Lexical and paradigmatic asymmetries; for example, the term ‘spinster’ which refers exclusively to females has no masculine counterpart in the English lexicon; nor does the title of address ‘Miss’ which reflects differentiation on the basis of marital status.

Keywords

Syria Egypt Suffix Metaphor Verse 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abdel-Jawad, H. R. (1986). A linguistic and sociocultural study of personal names in Jordan. Anthropological Linguistics 28(1), 80–94.Google Scholar
  2. Abdel-Jawad, H. R. (1989). Language and women’s place with reference to Arabic. Language Sciences 11(3), 305–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abu-Haider, F. (1989). Are Iraqi women more prestige conscious than men? Sex differentiation in Baghdadi Arabic. Language in Society 18(4), 471–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Badawi, E. S., and Hinds, M. (1986). A dictionary of Egyptian Arabic: Arabic-English. Beirut: Librairie Du Liban; issued under the sponsorship of the American University in Cairo. Beirut, Lebanon.Google Scholar
  5. Bakir, M. (1986). Sex differences in the approximation to standard Arabic: A case study. Anthropological Linguistics 28(1), 3–9.Google Scholar
  6. Eid, M. (1994). ‘What’s in a name?’: Women in Egyptian obituaries. In: Y. Suleiman (Ed.), Arabic sociolinguistics: Issues and perspectives. Richmond: Curzon Press (pp. 81–100).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eid, M. (2002). The world of obituaries: Gender across cultures and over time. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Ferguson, C. A. (1997). Standardization in Arabic. In: R. K. Belnap and N. Haeri, (Eds), Structuralist studies in Arabic linguistics: Charles A. Ferguson’s Papers, 1954–94 (Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  9. Greenberg, J. (1960). The patterning of root morphemes in Semitic. Word 6, 162–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Haeri, N. (1987). Male/Female differences in speech: An alternative interpretation. In: K. M. Deming et al. (Eds), Variation in language: NWAV-XV at Stanford (Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference on New Ways of Analyzing Variation). Stanford, CA: Department of Linguistics, Stanford University (pp. 173–82).Google Scholar
  11. Haeri, N. (1992). How different are men and women: Palatalization in Cairo. In: E. Broselow, M. Eid, and J. McCarthy (Eds), Perspectives on Arabic linguistics IV. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins (pp. 165–80).Google Scholar
  12. Hellinger, M. (2002). Gender in a global language. In: M. Hellinger and H. Bußman (Eds), Gender across languages: The representation of women and men, vol. 1. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins (pp. 105–13).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  14. Maalej, Z. (2003). Metaphor and first names. ms, University of Manouba, Tunes.Google Scholar
  15. Pauwels, A. (1998). Women changing language. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  16. Romaine, S. (2002). A corpus-based view of gender in British and American English. In: M. Hellinger, and H. Bußman (Eds), Gender across languages: The representation of women and men, vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins (pp. 153–75).Google Scholar
  17. Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  18. Talbot, M. (2003). Gender stereotypes: Reproduction and challenge. In: J. Holmes and M. Meyerhoff (Eds), Handbook of language and gender. Oxford: Blackwell (pp. 468–84).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Yassin, M. A. F. (1986). The Arabian way with names: A sociolinguistic approach. Linguistics 25(2), 77–82.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Samira Farwaneh 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Samira Farwaneh

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations