1887
Volume 11, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2211-3770
  • E-ISSN: 2211-3789
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The article provides a comprehensive overview of attitudes towards nonbinary pronouns, with the aim of better understanding why these pronouns are either accepted or rejected. Attitudes towards nonbinary and the neopronouns and are explored with a thematic analysis of data derived from a larger online survey on pronouns ( = 1128). While the results demonstrate various polarized stances for both types of pronouns, the participants’ reactions highlight greater acceptance of and support for nonbinary . In addition, the paper proposes that broader ideologies about gender are behind the participants’ overt reactions to nonbinary pronouns. Most notably, while some participants rejected the pronouns on the basis of a binary gender ideology, others viewed gender as a matter of self-identification, accepting any pronoun an individual chooses for themselves.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jls.21025.hek
2022-08-04
2022-08-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ackerman, Lauren
    2019 Syntactic and cognitive issues investigating gendered coreference. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics4(1): 1–27. 10.5334/gjgl.721
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.721 [Google Scholar]
  2. American Dialect Society
    American Dialect Society 2020 2019 Word of the year is “(my) pronouns,” Word of the decade is singular “they”. https://www.americandialect.org/2019-word-of-the-year-is-my-pronouns-word-of-the-decade-is-singular-they (May31 2021)
  3. American Psychological Association
    American Psychological Association 2019 Singular “they”. APA style. https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/grammar/singular-they (May31 2021)
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Anthony, Laurence
    2018AntConc. Version 3.5.7. Waseda University.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Baron, Dennis
    1981 The epicene pronoun: The word that failed. American Speech56(2): 83–97. 10.2307/455007
    https://doi.org/10.2307/455007 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bjorkman, Bronwyn
    2017 Singular they and the syntactic representation of gender in English. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics2(1): 1–13. 10.5334/gjgl.374
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.374 [Google Scholar]
  7. Blaubergs, Maija
    1980 An analysis of classic arguments against changing sexist language. Women’s Studies International Quarterly3(2): 135–147. 10.1016/S0148‑0685(80)92071‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-0685(80)92071-0 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bradley, Evan
    2020 The influence of linguistic and social attitudes on grammaticality judgments of singular ‘they’. Language Sciences78: 1–11. 10.1016/j.langsci.2020.101272
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2020.101272 [Google Scholar]
  9. Braun, Virginia & Clarke, Victoria
    2006 Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar]
  10. 2016 (Mis)conceptualising themes, thematic analysis, and other problems with Fugard and Potts’ (2015) sample-size tool for thematic analysis. International Journal of Social Research Methodology19(6): 739–743. 10.1080/13645579.2016.1195588
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1195588 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chak, Avinash
    2015 Beyond ‘he’ and ‘she’: The rise of non-binary pronouns. BBC News Online. www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34901704 (January14 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Conrod, Kirby
    2019 Pronouns Raising and Emerging. (Unpublished) PhD dissertation, University of Washington.
  13. Corwin, Anna
    2017 Emerging genders: Semiotic agency and the performance of gender among genderqueer individuals. Gender and Language11(2): 255–277. 10.1558/genl.27552
    https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.27552 [Google Scholar]
  14. Curzan, Anne
    2014Fixing English: Prescriptivism and Language History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139107327
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139107327 [Google Scholar]
  15. Darwin, Helena
    2017 Doing gender beyond the binary: A virtual ethnography. Symbolic Interaction40(3): 317–334. 10.1002/symb.316
    https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.316 [Google Scholar]
  16. Duggan, Maeve & Smith, Aaron
    2013 6% of Online Adults are Reddit Users. www.pewinternet.org/2013/07/03/6-of-online-adults-are-reddit-users/ (January14 2020)
  17. Garrett, Peter
    2010Attitudes to Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511844713
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511844713 [Google Scholar]
  18. Guest, Greg, MacQueen, Kathleen & Namey, Emily
    2014Applied Thematic Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Gustafsson Sendén, Marie, Bäck, Emma & Lindqvist, Anna
    2015 Introducing a gender-neutral pronoun in a natural gender language: The influence of time on attitudes and behavior. Frontiers in Psychology6: 1–12. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00893
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00893 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hekanaho, Laura
    2020 Generic and Nonbinary Pronouns: Usage, Acceptability and Attitudes. (Unpublished) PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki. https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/321581 (May31 2021)
  21. Hernandez, Ellis
    2020 Pronouns, Prescriptivism, and Prejudice: Attitudes Toward the Singular ‘They’, Prescriptive Grammar, and Nonbinary Transgender People. (Unpublished) MA thesis, Purdue University.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Konnelly, Lex & Cowper, Elizabeth
    2020 Gender diversity and morphosyntax: An account of singular they. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics5(1): 1–19. 10.5334/gjgl.1000
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1000 [Google Scholar]
  23. Lund Eide, Mari
    2018 Shaping the Discourse of Gender-Neutral Pronouns in English: A Study of Attitudes and use in Australia. (Unpublished) MA thesis, University of Bergen.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Marquis, Marriott
    2015 Word of the year is singular “they”. www.americandialect.org/2015-word-of-the-year-is-singular-they (January14 2020)
  25. Martyna, Wendy
    1978 What does ‘he’ mean? Use of the generic masculine. Journal of Communication28(1): 131–138. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.1978.tb01576.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1978.tb01576.x [Google Scholar]
  26. Matsuno, Emmie & Budge, Stephanie
    2017 Non-binary/genderqueer identities: A critical review of the literature. Current Sexual Health Reports9: 116–120. 10.1007/s11930‑017‑0111‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-017-0111-8 [Google Scholar]
  27. Mauri, Michele, Tommaso, Elli, Caviglia, Giorgio, Uboldi, Giorgio & Azzi, Matteo
    2017RAWGraphs: A Visualisation Platform to Create Open Outputs. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Merriam-Webster
    Merriam-Webster 2019 A note on the nonbinary ‘they’. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/nonbinary-they-is-in-the-dictionary (January14 2020)
  29. Milroy, James
    2001 Language ideologies and the consequences of standardization. Journal of Sociolinguistics5(4): 530–555. 10.1111/1467‑9481.00163
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00163 [Google Scholar]
  30. Milroy, Lesley
    2004 Language ideologies and linguistic change. InSociolinguistic Variation: Critical Reflections, Carmen Fought (ed), 308–342. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Parker, Linden
    2017 An Exploration of Use of and Attitudes Towards Gender-Neutral Pronouns among the Non-Binary, Transgender and LGBT+ Communities in the United Kingdom. (Unpublished) MA thesis, University of Essex.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Parks, Janet & Roberton, Mary Ann
    1998 Contemporary arguments against nonsexist language: Blaubergs (1980) Revisited. Sex Roles39(5): 445–461. 10.1023/A:1018827227128
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018827227128 [Google Scholar]
  33. Pauwels, Anne
    2010 Socially motivated language reform in a global lingua franca: The case of gender reform in English. InLanguage in its Socio-Cultural Context, Markus Bieswanger, Heiko Motschenbacher & Susanne Mühleisen (eds), 21–33. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Preston, Dennis
    2011 The power of language regard – Discrimination, classification, comprehension, and production. Dialectologia7(2): 9–33.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Rosa, Jonathan & Burdick, Christa
    2016 Language ideologies. InThe Oxford Handbook of Language and Society, Ofelia Garcia, Nelson Flores & Massimiliano Spotti (eds), 103–123. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Sallabank, Julia
    2013Attitudes to Endangered Languages: Identities and Policies. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139344166
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139344166 [Google Scholar]
  37. Scelfo, Julie
    2015 A university recognizes a third gender: Neutral. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/education/edlife/a-university-recognizes-a-third-gender-neutral.html (January14 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Seargeant, Philip
    2007 Language ideology, language theory, and the regulation of linguistic behaviour. Language Sciences31: 345–359. 10.1016/j.langsci.2007.12.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2007.12.002 [Google Scholar]
  39. Silverstein, Michael
    1979 Language structure and linguistic ideology. InThe Elements: A Parasession on Linguistic Units and Levels, Paul Clyne, William F. Hanks & Carol L. Hofbauer (eds), 193–247. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Song, Hyunjin & Schwarz, Norbert
    2009 If it’s difficult to pronounce, it must be risky: Fluency, familiarity, and risk perception. Psychological Science20(2): 135–138. 10.1111/j.1467‑9280.2009.02267.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02267.x [Google Scholar]
  41. van Dijk, Teun A.
    2006 Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies11(2): 115–140. 10.1080/13569310600687908
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13569310600687908 [Google Scholar]
  42. Vergoossen, Hellen, Renström, Emma, Lindqvist, Anna & Gustafsson Sendén, Marie
    2020 Four dimensions of criticism against gender-fair language. Sex Roles83(4–5): 328–337. 10.1007/s11199‑019‑01108‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01108-x [Google Scholar]
  43. Wales, Katie
    1996Personal Pronouns in Present-Day English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Walsh, Olivia
    2016Linguistic Purism: Language Attitudes in France and Quebec. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/impact.41
    https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.41 [Google Scholar]
  45. Zimman, Lal
    2017 Transgender language reform: Some challenges and strategies for promoting trans-affirming, gender-inclusive language. Journal of Language and Discrimination1(1): 84–105. 10.1558/jld.33139
    https://doi.org/10.1558/jld.33139 [Google Scholar]
  46. 2019 Trans self-identification and the language of neoliberal selfhood: Agency, power, and the limits of monologic discourse. International Journal of the Sociology of Language256: 147–175. 10.1515/ijsl‑2018‑2016
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2018-2016 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jls.21025.hek
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jls.21025.hek
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): attitudes; ideologies; nonbinary; pronouns; thematic analysis
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