1887
Volume 7, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2211-3770
  • E-ISSN: 2211-3789
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

As an introduction to the special issue, this paper presents an overview of previous corpus linguistic work in the field of language and sexuality and discusses the compatibility of corpus linguistic methodology with queer linguistics as a central theoretical approach in language and sexuality studies. The discussion is structured around five prototypical aspects of corpus linguistics that may be deemed problematic from a poststructuralist, queer linguistic perspective: quantification and associated notions of objectivity, reliance on linguistic forms and formal presence, concentration on highly frequent features, reliance on categories, and highlighting of differences. It is argued that none of these aspects rules out an application of corpus linguistic techniques within queer theoretically informed linguistic work per se and that it is rather the way these techniques are employed that can be seen as more or less compatible with queer linguistics. To complement the theoretical discussion, a collocation analysis of sexual descriptive adjectives in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) is conducted in an attempt to address some of the issues raised. The concluding section makes suggestions for future research.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jls.17019.mot
2018-08-27
2019-10-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Archer, Dawn , Culpeper, Jonathan & Rayson, Paul
    2009 Love – ‘a familiar or a devil’? An exploration of key domains in Shakespeare’s comedies and tragedies. InWhat’s in a Word-List? Investigating Word Frequency and Keyword Extraction, Dawn Archer (ed), 137–157. Farnham: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aull, Laura L. & West Brown, David
    2013 Fighting words. A corpus analysis of gender representations in sports reportage. Corpora8(1): 27–52.10.3366/cor.2013.0033
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2013.0033 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bachmann, Ingo
    2011 Civil partnership – ‘gay marriage in all but name’. A corpus-driven analysis of discourses of same-sex relationships in the UK Parliament. Corpora6(1): 77–105.10.3366/cor.2011.0005
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2011.0005 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baker, Paul
    2002Polari – The Lost Language of Gay Men. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203167045
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203167045 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2004a Querying keywords: Questions of difference, frequency, and sense in keywords analysis. Journal of English Linguistics32(4): 346–359.10.1177/0075424204269894
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424204269894 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2004b ‘Unnatural acts’: Discourses of homosexuality within the House of Lords debates on gay male law reform. Journal of Sociolinguistics8(1): 88–106.10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2004.00252.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2004.00252.x [Google Scholar]
  7. 2005Public Discourses of Gay Men. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2006Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2008 ‘Eligible’ bachelors and ‘frustrated’ spinsters. Corpus linguistics, gender and language. InGender and Language Research Methodologies, Kate Harrington , Lia Litosseliti , Helen Sauntson & Jane Sunderland (eds), 73–84. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 2010 Will Ms ever be as frequent as Mr? A corpus-based comparison of gendered terms across four diachronic corpora of British English. Gender and Language4(1): 125–149.10.1558/genl.v4i1.125
    https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.v4i1.125 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2011 Discourse and gender. InContinuum Companion to Discourse Analysis, Ken Hyland & Brian Paltridge (eds), 199–212. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 2012 Corpora and gender studies. InCorpus Applications in Applied Linguistics, Ken Hyland , Chau Meng Huat & Michael Handford (eds), 100–116. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2013 From gay language to normative discourse. A diachronic corpus analysis of Lavender Linguistics conference abstracts 1994–2012. Journal of Language and Sexuality2(2): 179–205.10.1075/jls.2.2.01bak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.2.2.01bak [Google Scholar]
  14. 2014aUsing Corpora to Analyze Gender. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2014b ‘Bad wigs and screaming mimis’: Using corpus-assisted techniques to carry out critical discourse analysis of the representation of trans people in the British press. InContemporary Critical Discourse Studies, Christopher Hart & Piotr Cap (eds), 211–235. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 2015 Two hundred years of the American man. InLanguage and Masculinities: Performances, Intersections, Dislocations, Tommaso M. Milani (ed), 34–52. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2016 Gendered discourses. InTriangulating Methodological Approaches in Corpus Linguistic Research, Paul Baker & Jesse Egbert (eds), 138–151. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Baker, Paul , Gabrielatos, Costas , KhosraviNik, Majid , Krzyżanowski, Michał , McEnery, Tony & Wodak, Ruth
    2008 A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press. Discourse & Society19(3): 273–306.10.1177/0957926508088962
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088962 [Google Scholar]
  19. Baker, Paul & Levon, Erez
    2015 Picking the right cherries? A comparison of corpus-based and qualitative analyses of news articles about masculinity. Discourse & Communication9(2): 221–236.10.1177/1750481314568542
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481314568542 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2016 ‘That’s what I call a man’: Representations of racialised and classed masculinities in the UK print media. Gender and Language10(1): 106–139.10.1558/genl.v10i1.25401
    https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.v10i1.25401 [Google Scholar]
  21. Barbieri, Federica
    2007 Older men and younger women. A corpus-based study of quotative use in American English. English World-Wide28(1): 23–45.10.1075/eww.28.1.03bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.28.1.03bar [Google Scholar]
  22. Barrett, Rusty
    2014 The emergence of the unmarked: Queer theory, language ideology, and formal linguistics. InQueer Excursions: Retheorizing Binaries in Language, Gender, and Sexuality, Lal Zimman , Jenny L. Davis & Joshua Raclaw (eds), 195–224. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937295.003.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937295.003.0010 [Google Scholar]
  23. Biber, Douglas & Reppen, Randi
    (eds) 2015The Cambridge Handbook of English Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139764377
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139764377 [Google Scholar]
  24. Bing, Janet M. & Bergvall, Victoria L.
    1996 The question of questions. Beyond binary thinking. InRethinking Language and Gender Research. Theory and Practice, Victoria L. Bergvall , Janet M. Bing & Alice F. Freed (eds), 1–30. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Bogetic, Ksenija
    2013 Normal straight gays. Lexical collocations and ideologies of masculinity in personal ads of Serbian gay teenagers. Gender and Language7(3): 333–367.10.1558/genl.v7i3.333
    https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.v7i3.333 [Google Scholar]
  26. Butler, Judith
    1990Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Cameron, Deborah
    1998 Dreaming the dictionary: Keywords and corpus linguistics. Key Words: A Journal of Cultural Materialism1: 35–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Cameron, Deborah & Kulick, Don
    2003Language and Sexuality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791178
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791178 [Google Scholar]
  29. Carroll, David & Kowitz, Johanna
    1994 Using concordancing techniques to study gender stereotyping in ELT textbooks. InExploring Gender. Questions and Implications for English Language Education, Jane Sunderland (ed), 73–82. New York: Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Culpeper, Jonathan
    2009 Keyness: Words, parts-of-speech and semantic categories in the character-talk of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics14(1): 29–59.10.1075/ijcl.14.1.03cul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14.1.03cul [Google Scholar]
  31. Davies, Mark
    2009 The 385+ million word Corpus of Contemporary American English (1990–2008+): Design, architecture, and linguistic insights. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics14(2): 159–190.10.1075/ijcl.14.2.02dav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14.2.02dav [Google Scholar]
  32. 2010 The corpus of contemporary American English as the first reliable monitor corpus of English. Literary and Linguistic Computing25(4): 447–464.10.1093/llc/fqq018
    https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqq018 [Google Scholar]
  33. Davis, Jenny L. , Zimman, Lal & Raclaw, Joshua
    2014 Opposites attract: Retheorizing binaries in language, gender, and sexuality. InQueer Excursions: Retheorizing Binaries in Language, Gender, and Sexuality, Lal Zimman , Jenny L. Davis & Joshua Raclaw (eds), 1–12. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937295.003.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937295.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Egbert, Jesse & Baker, Paul
    2016 Research synthesis. InTriangulating Methodological Approaches in Corpus Linguistic Research, Paul Baker & Jesse Egbert (eds), 183–208. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Ehrlich, Susan
    2001Representing Rape: Language and Sexual Consent. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203459034
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203459034 [Google Scholar]
  36. Findlay, Jamie Y.
    2017 Unnatural acts lead to unconsummated marriages: Discourses of homosexuality within the House of Lords debate on same-sex marriage. Journal of Language and Sexuality6(1): 30–60.10.1075/jls.6.1.02fin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.6.1.02fin [Google Scholar]
  37. Gales, Tammy
    2015 The stance of stalking: A corpus-based analysis of grammatical markers of stance in threatening communications. Corpora10(2): 171–200.10.3366/cor.2015.0073
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2015.0073 [Google Scholar]
  38. Grimm, Anne
    2008‘Männersprache’ – ‘Frauensprache’? Eine korpusgestützte empirische Analyse des Sprachgebrauchs britischer und amerikanischer Frauen und Männer hinsichtlich Geschlechtsspezifika. Hamburg: Dr. Kovac.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Hall, Kira
    2013 ‘It’s a hijra!’. Queer linguistics revisited. Discourse & Society24(5): 634–642.10.1177/0957926513490321
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513490321 [Google Scholar]
  40. Harrington, Kate
    2008 Perpetuating difference? Corpus linguistics and the gendering of reported dialogue. InGender and Language Research Methodologies, Kate Harrington , Lia Litosseliti , Helen Sauntson & Jane Sunderland (eds), 85–102. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Jiménez, Catalán , Rosa Maria & Ojeda Alba, Julieta
    2008 The English vocabulary of girls and boys. Evidence from a quantitative study. InGender and Language Research Methodologies, Kate Harrington , Lia Litosseliti , Helen Sauntson & Jane Sunderland (eds), 103–115. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. King, Brian W.
    2009 Building and analysing corpora of computer-mediated communication. InContemporary Corpus Linguistics, Paul Baker (ed), 301–320. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 2015 Investigating digital sex talk practices: A reflection on corpus-assisted discourse analysis. InDiscourse and Digital Practices: Doing Discourse Analysis in the Digital Age, Rodney H. Jones , Alice Chik & Christoph A. Hafner (eds), 130–143. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kjellmer, Göran
    1986 ‘The lesser man’: Observations on the role of women in modern English writings. InCorpus Linguistics II. New Studies in the Analysis and Exploitation of Computer Corpora, Jan Aarts & Willem Meijs (eds), 163–176. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Kulick, Don
    2005 The importance of what gets left out. Discourse Studies7(4/5): 615–624.10.1177/1461445605054408
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605054408 [Google Scholar]
  46. Leap, William L.
    2015 Queer linguistics as critical discourse analysis. InThe Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Deborah Tannen , Heidi E. Hamilton & Deborah Schiffrin (eds), 661–680. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Leipold, Ute
    2006 Constructing the self and constructing the (significant) other. A corpus-based critical analysis of gender identities in personal ads. InPlaning [sic], Gluing and Painting Corpora. Inside the Applied Corpus Linguist’s Workshop, Bernhard Kettemann & Georg Marko (eds), 151–174. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Love, Robbie & Baker, Paul
    2015 The hate that dare not speak its name?Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict3(1): 57–86.10.1075/jlac.3.1.03lov
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.3.1.03lov [Google Scholar]
  49. Manning, Elizabeth
    1997 Kissing and cuddling. The reciprocity of romantic and sexual activity. InLanguage and Desire. Encoding Sex, Romance and Intimacy, Keith Harvey & Celia Shalom (eds), 43–59. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Marchi, Anna & Taylor, Charlotte
    2009 If on a winter’s night two researchers… A challenge to assumptions of soundness of interpretation. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines3(1): 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Marko, Georg
    2006 ‘… was an incredibly sexy Latin stud.’ Critically analysing descriptors in a (pornography) corpus. InPlaning [sic], Gluing and Painting Corpora. Inside the Applied Corpus Linguist’s Workshop, Bernhard Kettemann & Georg Marko (eds), 175–203. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 2008Penetrating Language. A Critical Discourse Analysis of Pornography. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Mautner, Gerlinde
    2009 Corpora and critical discourse analysis. InContemporary Corpus Linguistics, Paul Baker (ed), 32–46. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 2016 Checks and balances: How corpus linguistics can contribute to CDA. InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies, Ruth Wodak & Michael Meyer (eds), 154–179. Los Angeles: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. McEnery, Tony & Baker, Helen
    2017aCorpus Linguistics and 17th-Century Prostitution: Computational Linguistics and History. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. McEnery, Tony & Baker, Helen
    2017b The public representation of homosexual men in seventeenth-century England – A corpus based view. Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics3(2): 197–217.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. McEnery, Tony & Hardie, Andrew
    2012Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Milani, Tommaso M.
    2013 Are ‘queers’ really ‘queer’? Language, identity and same-sex desire in a South African online community. Discourse & Society24(5): 615–633.10.1177/0957926513486168
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513486168 [Google Scholar]
  59. Mills, Sara
    2008Language and Sexism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511755033
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511755033 [Google Scholar]
  60. Morrish, Liz & Sauntson, Helen
    2007New Perspectives on Language and Sexual Identity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230599406
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230599406 [Google Scholar]
  61. 2011 Gender, desire and identity in a corpus of lesbian erotica. InQueering Paradigms II. Interrogating Agendas, Burkhard Scherer & Matthew Ball (eds), 63–81. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Motschenbacher, Heiko
    2010Language, Gender and Sexual Identity. Poststructuralist Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/impact.29
    https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.29 [Google Scholar]
  63. 2011 Taking Queer Linguistics further. Sociolinguistics and critical heteronormativity research. International Journal of the Sociology of Language212: 149–179.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. 2013 Gentlemen before ladies? A corpus-based study of conjunct order in personal binomials. Journal of English Linguistics41(3): 212–242.10.1177/0075424213489993
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424213489993 [Google Scholar]
  65. 2014 Focusing on normativity in language and sexuality studies. Insights from conversations on objectophilia. Critical Discourse Studies11(1): 49–70.10.1080/17405904.2013.836113
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2013.836113 [Google Scholar]
  66. 2016 A corpus linguistic study of the situatedness of English pop song lyrics. Corpora11(1): 1–28.10.3366/cor.2016.0083
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2016.0083 [Google Scholar]
  67. 2018 Sexuality in critical discourse studies. InThe Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, John Flowerdew & John E. Richardson (eds), 388–402. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. . forthcoming a. Language and sexual normativity. InThe Oxford Handbook of Language and Sexuality, Rusty Barrett & Kira Hall eds Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. . forthcoming b. Gay people and homosexual persons: A co-occurrence analysis of sexual descriptive adjectives in COCA.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Murphy, Bróna
    2010Corpus and Sociolinguistics. Investigating Age and Gender in Female Talk. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.38
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.38 [Google Scholar]
  71. O’Keeffe, Anne & Breen, Michael J.
    2007 At the hands of the brothers. A corpus-based lexico-grammatical analysis of stance in newspaper reporting of child sexual abuse cases. InThe Language of Sexual Crime, Janet Cotterill (ed), 217–236. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230592780_12
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230592780_12 [Google Scholar]
  72. O’Keeffe, Anne & McCarthy, Michael
    (eds) 2012The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Partington, Alan
    2014 Mind the gaps: The role of corpus linguistics in researching absences. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics19(1): 118–146.10.1075/ijcl.19.1.05par
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19.1.05par [Google Scholar]
  74. Pearce, Michael
    2008 Investigating the collocational behaviour of MAN and WOMAN in the BNC using Sketch Engine. Corpora3(1): 1–29.10.3366/E174950320800004X
    https://doi.org/10.3366/E174950320800004X [Google Scholar]
  75. Rayson, Paul
    2008 From key words to key semantic domains. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics13(4): 519–549.10.1075/ijcl.13.4.06ray
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.13.4.06ray [Google Scholar]
  76. Rayson, Paul , Leech, Geoffrey & Hodges, Mary
    1997 Social differentiation in the use of English vocabulary. Some analyses of the conversational component of the British National Corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics2(1): 133–152.10.1075/ijcl.2.1.07ray
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.2.1.07ray [Google Scholar]
  77. Sauntson, Helen & Sundaram, Vanita
    2016 Discursive silences: Critically analysing the presence/absence of sexual diversity in the sex and relationships education guidance for England and Wales. InGlobal Perspectives and Key Debates in Sex and Relationships Education: Addressing Issues of Gender, Sexuality, Plurality and Power, Vanita Sundaram & Helen Sauntson (eds), 100–114. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Schmid, Hans-Jörg
    2003 Do women and men really live in different cultures? Evidence from the BNC. InCorpus Linguistics by the Lune. A Festschrift for Geoffrey Leech, Andrew Wilson , Paul Rayson & Tony McEnery (eds), 185–221. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 2015 Does gender-related variation still have an effect, even when topic and (almost) everything else is controlled?InChange of Paradigms – New Paradoxes: Recontextualizing Language and Linguistics, Jocelyne Daems , Eline Zenner , Kris Heylen , Dirk Speelman & Hubert Cuyckens (eds), 327–346. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Schröter, Melani & Taylor, Charlotte
    2018 Introduction. InExploring Silence and Absence in Discourse: Empirical Approaches, Melani Schröter & Charlotte Taylor (eds), 1–21. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978‑3‑319‑64580‑3_1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64580-3_1 [Google Scholar]
  81. Scott, Mike
    2009 In search of a bad reference corpus. InWhat’s in a Word-List? Investigating Word Frequency and Keyword Extraction, Dawn Archer (ed), 79–92. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Sigley, Robert & Holmes, Janet
    2002 Looking at girls in corpora of English. Journal of English Linguistics30(2): 138–157.10.1177/007242030002004
    https://doi.org/10.1177/007242030002004 [Google Scholar]
  83. Taylor, Charlotte
    2013 Searching for similarity using corpus-assisted discourse studies. Corpora8(1): 81–113.10.3366/cor.2013.0035
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2013.0035 [Google Scholar]
  84. Thorne, Lisa
    2013 ‘But I’m attracted to women’: Sexuality and sexual identity performance in interactional discourse among bisexual students. Journal of Language and Sexuality2(1): 70–100.10.1075/jls.2.1.03tho
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.2.1.03tho [Google Scholar]
  85. Vigo, Francesca
    2015 And what about same sex marriages? A corpus-based analysis of lexical choices and social attitudes. InLanguaging Diversity: Identities, Genres, Discourses, Giuseppe Balirano & Maria Cristina Nisco (eds), 197–210. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Wilson, Andrew
    2012 Using corpora in depth psychology. A trigram-based analysis of a corpus of fetish fantasies. Corpora7(1): 69–90.10.3366/cor.2012.0018
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2012.0018 [Google Scholar]
  87. Zimman, Lal , Davis, Jenny L. & Raclaw, Joshua
    (eds) 2014Queer Excursions: Retheorizing Binaries in Language, Gender, and Sexuality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937295.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937295.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jls.17019.mot
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jls.17019.mot
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error