The Extent of Gender Sensitivity in the Language of the Discussion Papers Produced by King Abdullah II ibn Al-Hussein: A Critical Discourse Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33806/ijaes.v25i1.609Keywords:
critical discourse analysis, discussion papers, gender-sensitive language, linguistic strategyAbstract
This study investigates the extent of gender sensitivity in the language of the Seven Discussion Papers (DPs) produced by Jordan’s King Abdullah II ibn Al Hussein (KAII). The DPs came as a series of papers directed to Jordanians to lay down the KAII’s vision of achieving a comprehensive reform in Jordan. In this study, gender sensitivity is determined by the extent to which men and women are addressed equally in the language of the DPs. The study employs the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) approach. In implementing the qualitative content analysis methodology, the findings show that KAII employed several linguistic strategies that were instrumental in producing a highly gender-sensitive language. These are the strategy of referring to both men and women simultaneously, the strategy of using inclusive terms, the strategy of using gender-neutral terms, and the strategy of using examples including both men and women. a gender perspective, the study found that the language used in the DPs differs from that used in the prevailing political discourse. The findings imply that Arabic, which is generally labelled as a gendered language, can be gender-sensitive if its users have the right attitudes and the right linguistic strategies to change the existing prevailing norms.
References
Alzharani, Eman. (2019). ‘The role of gender in language change’. The Electronic Interdisciplinary
Comprehensive Journal, 17(10): 1-11.
Bataineh, Adnan. ((2020). ‘Analysis of gender bias in two Arabic language textbooks – grade 1’.
International Journal of Linguistic, Literature and Translation, 3 (12):181-186.
Bucholtz, Mary. (2003). ‘Theories of discourse as theories of gender: Discourse analysis in language and
gender studies’. In J. Holmes & M. Meyerhoff (ed.), Handbook of Language and Gender,43-68.
MA, USA: Blackwell. Chamberlain, L. 1992.
Cameron, Deborah. (1985). Feminism and Linguistic Theory. London: Macmillan.
Cameron, Deborah. (2005). ‘Language, gender, and sexuality: Current issues and new directions’. Applied
Linguistics. 26(4): 482-502.
Cameron, Deborah. (2020). ‘Language and gender: Mainstreaming and the persistence of patriarchy’.
International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 263: 25-30.
Chamberlain, Alexander. (1912). ‘Women’s languages’. American Anthropologist, 14:579–581.
Coady, Ann. (2018). ‘The origin of sexism in language’. Gender and Language, 12(3): 271-293.
Coates, Jennifer. (1993). Women, Men, and Language: A Sociolinguistic Account of Gender Differences
in Language. 2nd ed. London: Longman.
Epstein, Cynthia. (1988). Deceptive Distinctions: Sex, Gender, and Social Order. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press and New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Fairclough, Norman. (2001). ‘The discourse of New Labor: critical discourse analysis’, in Margaret
Wetherell, Stephanie Taylor and Simon Yates (eds.), Discourse as Data: A Guide for
Analysis,229–266. London: Sage and Open University Press.
Fowler, Roger. (1996). “On Critical Linguistic”. In Caldas-Coulthard, Rosa and Coulthard, M. (eds.), Text
and Practice, 3-14. London and New York: Routledge.
Furfey, Paul Hanly. (1944). ‘Men’s and women’s language’. American Catholic Sociological Review,
(4):218–223.
Graham, Alma. (1975). ‘The making of a non-sexist dictionary’. in Barrie Thorne and Nancy
Henley (eds.), Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance, 57–63. Rowley, Mass.:
Newbury House.
Halliday, Michael. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Gramer. London: E. Arnold.
Holmes, Janet. ((2013). Women, Men, and Politeness. New York: Routledge.
Jespersen, Otto. (1922). Language: Its Nature, Development, and Origin. London: Allen and Unwin.
Kramarae, Cheris. and Treichler, Paula. (1985). A Feminist Dictionary. London: Pandora.
Labov, William. (1966). The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center
for Applied Linguistics.
Lakoff, Robin. (1973). ‘Language and women’s place’. Language in Society, 2(1): 45-80.
McConnel-Gient, Sally. (2011). Gender, Sexism, and Meaning: Linguistic Practices and Politics. Oxford
University Press.
Pauwels, Anne. (1998). Women Changing Language. London and New York: Addison Wesley
Longman.
Prewitt-Freilino, Jennifer. Caswell, Andrew, & Laakso, Emmi. (2012). ‘The gendering of language: a
comparison of gender equality in countries with gendered, natural gender, and genderless
languages’. Sex Roles, 66:268-281.
Schor, Lisa. (2021). ‘Is Arabic a gender inclusive language’. https://arabic-for-nerds.com/is-arabic-a- gender-inclusive-language. (Retrieved on 20 July, 2022).
Spender, Dale (1980). Man Made Language. London: Routledge.
Sunderland, Jane. (2006). Language and Gender: An Advanced Resource Book. Routledge, New York:
USA.
Tannen, Deborah. (1994). Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tukhtaeva, Kuysin. (2021). ‘Essential features of gender linguistics’. Current Research Journal of Pedagogics, 2 (12): 1-6.
Van Dijk, Teun. (1993). ‘Principles of critical discourse analysis’. Discourse and Society, 4(2):249-283.
Wodak, Ruth. (1999). ‘Critical discourse analysis at the end of the 29th century’. Research on Language
and Social Interaction, 32(1-2):185-193.
Downloads
Date of Publication
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Accepted 2024-07-02
Published 2024-07-11
