Sexist Language and English as a Foreign Language:
A Problem of Knowledge and Choice
Jacqueline D. Beebe
Nihon University |
This paper looks briefly at problems that can result when EFL students
learn sexist language. It discusses the reasons for and politics of devoting
classroom time to raising students' awareness of this issue. Advice for
teachers includes a sample Worksheet on Avoiding Sexist Language (permission
granted to photocopy) and some suggestions on how the Worksheet may be used.
The paper ends with a list of books and articles related to sexist language
and ESL/EFL that teachers may use to educate themselves.
Why Teachers Need Be Concerned
Imagine the possible consequences to a student who has studied a presumably
up-to-date English textbook entitled Business Basics. It teaches
students how to address business letters to an unknown reader: in Britain
one starts off the letter, "Dear Sirs," and in America they write,
"Gentlemen" (Grant & McLarty, 1995, p. 167). The student picks
the appropriate opening by country and writes a letter asking for a job.
The personnel manager who reads the letter happens to be a woman who gets
irritated with this "sexist fool" before she even reads the body
of the cover letter. Of course he does not get the job.
One could argue that it is not the duty of EFL teachers to cure their
students of sexism, but should we teach Japanese students who in their first
language would use san or sama, courtesy titles which do not
distinguish by sex or marital status, to take up a new sexist practice in
English which could damage the image of themselves or their company? Students
need the knowledge to avoid inadvertent sexist practices such as adding
a Mr. to all the names on a computerized mailing list or addressing all
adult women as Mrs. Family Name.
Students need to be empowered to: (a) control the judgments that will
be made of them according to how they employ gendered language; (b) judge
the messages coming their way; (c) understand why they will encounter different
historical and current versions of gendered English; and (d) consider how
their own language choices ultimately contribute to the evolution of the
English language and to relations between the sexes.
The Politics of the Teacher's Stance
Benson (1997) wrote about the political implications of learner autonomy:
Language teaching methodology tends to promote the view that learners
want to learn how to use the language but not learn about the language
or its social contexts of use...language learning is reduced to a technical
activity divorced not only from politics but also from social relationships
of any kind. (p. 27)
Maintaining silence in the foreign language classroom about language
issues of contention among native speakers, or acting as if native speakers
all pretty much use the language in the same way, is a political decision.
Peirce (1990) addressed the TESOL community thusly:
If we as English teachers wish to help our students to gain control
over the language that we teach, we need to alert students to the current
terrains of struggle that characterize the language and into which the
students enter as they learn the language. (p. 106)
Teaching about sexist language also raises the political issue of "appropriacy."
Wolfson (1989) discusses beginning second-language speakers of English who
worked as waiters and seem to have learned the phrase "Are you ready
to order, dear?" as an unanalyzed chunk, unaware of the sociolinguistic
aspects of dear. Wolfson says that teachers need to warn students
that a dear addressed to a woman may irritate her, because such terms
are used to address men and women in unreciprocal ways and are thus sexist.
Wolfson explains that men will be addressed by someone such as a salesclerk
by the more respectful sir while women are addressed as dear.
In addition to Wolfson's concern that learners not give offense, I would
add that learners also need to recognize when someone is speaking to them
offensively and know how to defend themselves appropriately. Teachers may
need to teach students pragmatic skills such as "instrumental rudeness...breaking
the politeness rules just enough for people to stop and attend to what you
need" (Beebe, 1994, p. 5). Teachers can "help learners claim the
right to speak" (Peirce, 1995, p. 26), but they will not be helped
much by EFL textbooks, that according to Wajnryb (1996, p. 291) model a
world that is "safe, clean, harmonious, benevolent, undisturbed, and
PG-rated."
Wolfson warns against learners addressing unknown women with dear,
and perhaps she would also warn men not to call any male dear, because
she presumes a "need for language learners to learn to use appropriately
sex-linked forms of speech" (1989, p. 185). She says that schools may
be justified in preferentially hiring teachers of a particular gender in
order to "give language learners exposure to both male and female models
so that they can acquire gender-appropriate speech behavior by observation
and emulation" (p. 185). Wolfson assumes that TESOL students will not
want to transgress expected gender roles. Teachers of Japanese may make
the same assumption about their students. Tsuruta (1996) found that female
Japanese college students preparing for careers as Japanese as a Second
Language teachers had to be prodded into even considering the question of
whether female speakers really need to be trained to use feminine expressions.
In fact, we teach a variety of students who have their own ideas about
"appropriate" speech. Some may have homosexual, bisexual, or transgender
identities. Some women may want to speak more like men to challenge the
patriarchal system, and other women, in order to advance in the workplace
(see Cameron, 1994, whose critique of assertiveness training for women is
also of relevance for teachers of cross-cultural communication styles).
Some students may simply be tired of monitoring their speech in Japanese
to maintain a feminine or masculine persona and therefore welcome the chance
to worry less about that sort of "appropriacy" when they speak
English. McMahill (1997, p. 613) says that "native Japanese-speaking
women in particular may perceive English as allowing or requiring them to
express themselves more directly and specifically than Japanese does...
and thus as undermining prescribed feminine linguistic roles." Siegal
(1996, p. 363) discusses adult Western women learning Japanese in Japan,
who showed "some resistance toward using language forms (which they
saw being used by women) that mirrored what the learners thought was 'too
humble' a stance or 'too silly.'" As Peirce (1995) argues, second language
learners are active agents who use language not only to reflect, but to
create their social position.
What Teachers Can Do
Teachers need to inform themselves (see Appendix B for Suggested Readings)
and then consider what language they are modeling and how much lesson time
to devote to sociolinguistic variation and critical awareness. Should teachers
teach their EFL students to say "somebody forgot his notebook,"
"somebody forgot his or her notebook," or "somebody forgot
their notebook"? If we hope that our students will someday use English
to communicate internationally with real people and not just for test-taking,
we need to teach all these varieties, just as we teach forms appropriate
for differing levels of formality and intimacy. As long as other teachers
and test-writers may demand sexist forms for reasons of supposed linguistic
purity or conservative politics, our students need to know them. However,
they also need to be taught alternatives and to understand why they are
being used and how their use may be interpreted. It is not fair to just
suddenly say that "his notebook" is wrong, because it may cause
students to doubt their own memories or the competence of other English
teachers. Students may be interested or relieved to learn that even native
speakers have trouble with gendered language. Native speakers may by habit
still sometimes say, for example, policeman when their conscious
preference is police officer. We should tell students that native
speakers worry about pronoun choice or whether to refer to someone as a
girl, lady, or woman.
Teachers can alert students on a piecemeal basis, as sexist discourse
arises in classroom materials and classroom talk. For example, I can tell
my students that it is better to ask me if I have children than to first
ask how many children I have. Students can analyze their textbook dialogs,
counting how many dominant speech acts (orders, advice, evaluations, etc.)
and how many submissive speech acts (apologies, requesting permission, etc.)
are performed by women versus men. Or teachers can introduce the topic of
sexist language as an entire lesson or unit.
A Sample Lesson on Avoiding Sexist Language
I have found that doing parts A and B of the Worksheet in Appendix A
can take at least an hour with university students who are not particularly
strong in English. (I based much of Part B of this paper's Worksheet on
the examples of sexist language listed on the back cover of the 1980 edition
of Miller and Swift's Handbook of Nonsexist Writing.) After some
explanation, I have the students rewrite the exercise sentences to eliminate
sexism. My students are generally quick to spot the most obvious sexism
in the questions, but many cannot correct the texts until we do a few questions
together. None of my Japanese university students, for example, could recall
ever having been taught the useful word spouse. Or students may correct
one word on a question but miss other layers of sexist nuance.
In Part B, number 11, for example-"The movie is about an aggressive
lady lawyer and an ambitious young lawyer defending a rich company president"-a
student may substitute woman for lady. However, why is the sex of one character
mentioned and not the sex of the other two? And why is the female lawyer
described as "aggressive," a rather negative-sounding word, while
the male lawyer is described as "ambitious,"which may be a more
positive-sounding word for the same behavior?
In B,12-"A man with a working wife has trouble if his company transfers
him to another city"-the teacher can simply check that students change
this to "an employee with a working spouse," or the teacher can
discuss how the work of women within the home is not counted as "work."
B, 4-"Man needs the same basic things that animals need-life, food,
and access to females"--demonstrates the imprecision, sexism, and absurdity
that use of the pseudo-generic man leads to when speakers forget
that not all humans are male. This sentence also reveals the sexist assumption
that males choose and take females and not vice versa, and also the heterosexist
assumption that all individuals are interested in the opposite sex.
These Worksheet questions can also be used to demonstrate the fact that
no rule will fit every situation. B,10-"Mr. Takahashi and his neighbor's
wife took the same bus" would be in no need of correction if this sentence
were the opening of a love story told from the point of view of Mr. Takahashi.
Otherwise, his neighbor's wife should probably be changed to his
neighbor, because the original sentence suggests that this woman has
no independent existence apart from her husband.
Note that Parts A and B of the Worksheet provide meaningful and motivating
ways to get students to naturally engage in a useful grammar review. As
my students rewrote sentences to avoid he or his, they were
actually finding it interesting to transform sentences by changing singular
to plural or by employing a relative clause (Anyone who registers on
time will be able to go). Part E; Delicate Words can help students avoid
common basic errors such as "Mr. John" while also examining more
subtle points of current usage by speakers of various ages around the world.
Conclusion
I have found that either one full lesson or several quick comments scattered
over a whole school year can do much to raise students' awareness of sexist
English. Whether it can change already ingrained sexist habits (such as
saying "Thank you, sir" to women ) is another question, so I hope
that other teachers and materials writers will join in by not teaching sexist
language to begin with.
Gendered language is a tricky subject. Students need to know that the
English language is changing quickly and no teacher can tell them which
forms they will be encountering ten or twenty years from now. There seem
to be no solutions that currently satisfy everyone, but knowledge, encouragement,
and practice can help students decide on and implement the choices that
make sense for them. And it does not take much time to warn students against
some of the most common and potentially offensive pitfalls and thus contribute
substantially to their future success in communicating.
References
Beebe, L. M. (1994, October). Rudeness: The neglected
side of communicative competence. Paper and handout presented at the
annual meeting of the Japan Association for Language Teaching, Matsuyama,
Japan.
Benson, P. (1997). The philosophy and politics of learner
autonomy. In P. Benson & P. Voller (Eds.). Autonomy and independence
in language learning (pp. 18-34). London: Longman.
Cameron, D. (1994). Verbal hygiene for women: Linguistics
misapplied? Applied Linguistics, 15 (4), 382-398.
Grant, D., & McLarty, R. (1995). Business basics.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McMahill, C. (1997). Communities of resistance: A case
study of two feminist English classes in Japan. TESOL Quarterly, 31,
612-622.
Miller, C., & Swift, K. (1980). The Handbook of
Nonsexist Writing (1st ed.). New York: Lippincott & Crowell.
Peirce, B. N. (1990). Comments on Bronwyn Norton Peirce's
"Toward a pedagogy of possibility in the teaching of English internationally:
People's English in South Africa": The author responds... TESOL
Quarterly, 24, 105-112.
Peirce, B. N. (1995). Social identity, investment, and
language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 9-31.
Siegal, M. (1996). The role of learner subjectivity in
second language sociolinguistic competency: Western women learning Japanese.
Applied Linguistics, 17 (3), 356-382.
Tsuruta, Y. (1996).Blind to our own language use? Raising
sociolinguistic awareness of future jsl teachers. In C. P. Casanave &
A. D. Yamashiro (Eds.), Gender issues in language education (pp.
114-124). Fujisawa City: Keio University Shonan Fujisawa Campus (SFC).
Wajnryb, R. (1996). Death, taxes and jeopardy: Systematic
omissions in EFL texts, or life was never meant to be an adjacency pair.
In ELICOS Association: 9th Educational Conference (pp. 291-306). Sydney.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and
TESOL. Cambridge: Newbury House.
Appendix A
AVOIDING SEXIST LANGUAGE: A WORKSHEET
A. Can you think of a better word for the words below; one that can be
used for either a woman or a man?
businessman a rich man fireman policeman fisherman
cameraman sportsman repairman waitress actress
housewife husband or wife freshman stewardess
B. Underline the sexist part of each sentence and explain the problem.
Then rewrite the sentence so that it doesn't discriminate against women.
- Somebody forgot his notebook.
- A three-year-old may be able to feed and dress himself.
- Look at that dolphin! He's jumping.
- Man needs the same basic things that animals need--life, food, and
access to females.
- ...an explanation even a housewife can understand.
- Doctors and their wives often go to expensive restaurants.
- The movie makes even adults feel like small boys again.
- Jim is chairman of the Music Group and Mary is chairperson of the Art
Group.
- Susan wants to take English Conversation lessons man-to-man.
- Mr. Takahashi and his neighbor's wife took the same bus.
- The movie is about an aggressive lady lawyer and an ambitious young
lawyer defending a rich company president.
- A man with a working wife has trouble if his company transfers him
to another city.
- The park has a pretty man-made lake.
- Children of that age still need a lot of mothering.
- The company needs more manpower because now they need to man the computers
twenty-four hours a day.
- Anyone will be able to go if he registers on time.
- I dream of a world of peace and brotherhood.
- My brother is a male nurse.
C. If you have to write a business letter and you don't know the name
of the person you are writing to, what greetings can you use? Is "Dear
Sir," "Dear Sirs," or "Gentlemen" OK? If you know
someone's name but you don't know if they are a woman or a man, how can
you start a letter?
D. In English and other languages you know, which order has usually been
used?
husband and wife / wife and husband
father and mother / mother and father
he or she / she or he
Mr. and Mrs. Smith / Mrs. and Mr. Smith
gentlemen and ladies / ladies and gentlemen
E. Delicate words: Think about your own first language. At what age do
people call someone a boy, a girl, a man, a woman? Is it the same for both
sexes?
Different English speakers often have different ideas about what people
should be called. Which word we use depends on where we live, the sex of
the person speaking and the sex of the person being spoken about, how well
we know the person, how old, rich, and powerful both people are, if we are
in a work or a social situation, etc.
Look at the list of words and the sentences below. Try putting different
words in the blanks. Who do you imagine might say that sentence? Who would
they be talking to? Who would they be talking about? Which words sound strange
in which blanks?
Mr. Ms. Miss Mrs. everyone miss madam ma'am mister sir boy guy girl
man woman young man young woman lady gentleman ladies and gentlemen everyone
women and men you buddy mate honey Mary John Jones
There's a ________ at the door.
It's nice to meet you, ________ Brown.
Would you like some more coffee, ___________?
Excuse me, _______, you dropped something!
Hey, _______, get the hell out of here!
Thank you for waiting, __________.
What are you ________s doing tonight?
Hi, __________.
Hello, ____________.
(Introducing someone) This is ___________.
Appendix B
Suggested Readings
Language, Gender and Second Language Teaching
Casanave, C. P., & Yamashiro, A. D. (Eds.). (1996).
Gender issues in language education. Keio University Shonan Fujisawa
Campus (SFC).
McKay, S. L., & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.). (1996). Sociolinguistics
and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter
7, Language and gender by R. Freeman & B. McElhinny. (pp. 218-280).
Sunderland, J. (Ed.). (1994). Exploring gender: Questions
and implications for English language education. New York: Prentice
Hall.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and
TESOL. Cambridge: Newbury House. Chapter 8: Language and Sex. (pp. 162-187).
Theoretical and Historical Background, Usage Information,
and Guidelines
Cameron, D. (Ed.). (1990). The feminist critique of
language: A handbook. London: Routledge.
Frank, F. W., & Treichler, P. A. et al.. (1989). Language,
gender, and professional writing: Theoretical approaches and guidelines
for nonsexist usage. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
Maggio, R. (1992). The bias-free word finder: A dictionary
of nondiscriminatory language. Boston: Beacon Press. (Contains 5,000
entries with 15,000 alternatives and also twenty-four pages of guidelines.)
Miller, C., & Swift, K. (1980). The handbook of
nonsexist writing. New York: Lippincott & Crowell. Also published
as The handbook of non-sexist writing for writers, editors and speakers.
(1989). London: The Women's Press.
Prentice, D. A. (1994). Do language reforms change our
way of thinking? Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 13, 3-19.
(A naturalistic experiment on the effect of correcting sexist language in
college students' papers.)
Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed.) (1994). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
See pp. 46-60, Guidelines to Reduce Bias in Language.
Current Usage
Bebout, L. (1995). Assymetries in male/female word pairs:
A decade of change. American Speech, 70, 163-185.
Ehrlich, S., & King, R. (1994). Feminist meanings and
the (de)politicization of the lexicon. Language in Society, 23, 59-76.
Gramley, S., & Patzold, K.-M. (1992). Using English:
modes of address. A survey of modern English (pp. 287-301). London:
Routledge.
Gramley, S., & Patzold, K.-M. (1992). Language and
gender. A survey of modern English (pp. 260-286). London: Routledge.
Holmes, J. (1993). Sex-marking suffixes in written New
Zealand English. American Speech, 68, 357-370.
Meyers, M. W. (1990). Current generic pronoun usage: An
empirical study. American Speech, 65, 228-237
Rubin, D. L., Greene, K., & Schneider, D. (1994). Adopting
gender-inclusive language reforms: Diachronic and synchronic variation.
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 3 (2), 91-114.
Article
copyright © 1998 by the author.
Document URL: http://www.jalt-publications.org/old_tlt/files/98/may/beebe.html
Last modified: July 9, 1998
Site maintained by TLT
Online Editor
|