Gender-inclusive language reform in educational writing in singapore and the philippines: A corpus-based study

Asian Englishes

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 4-20

  Pauwels, Anne ^a   Winter, Joanne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84945571987     PISSN: 13488678     EISSN: 23312548     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13488678.2004.10801128     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Bull, Tove. 1993. “Language and gender research in Norway: An overview.” Paper presented at AILA International Congress of Applied Linguistics. Amsterdam.
2. Cooper, Robert. 1984. “The avoidance of androcentric generics.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 50. 5-20.
3. Curriculum Development Institute of Singapore. 1990s. Primary English Series. Singapore: Curriculum Development Institute of Singapore.
4. Fasold, Ralph. 1987. “Language policy and change: sexist language in the periodical news media.” In Peter Lowenberg (ed.), Language spread and language policy. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 187-206.
5. Fasold, Ralph, Haru Yamada, David Robinson and Steven Barish. 1990. “The language planning effect of newspaper editorial policy: Gender differences in the Washington Post.” Language in Society 19. 521-39.
6. Frank, Francine W. 1989. “Language planning, language reform and language change: a review of guidelines for nonsexist usage.” In Francine Frank and Paula Treichler (eds.), Language, gender and professional writing. New York: Modern Language Association of America. 105-36.
7. Gupta, Anthea F. and S.Y.A. Lee. 1989. “Gender representation in English language textbooks used in Singapore primary schools.” Language and Education 4. 2949.
8. Hamilton, Mykol C. 1988. “Using masculine generics: does generic he increase male bias in the user’s imagery?” Sex Roles 19. 785-99.
9. Hellinger, Marlis. (ed.) 1985. Sprachwandel und feministische Sprachpolitik: Internationale Perspektiven [Language change and feminist language policy: International perspectives]. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
10. Hellinger, Marlis and Hadumod Bussmann. (eds.) 2001. Gender across languages vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
11. Hellinger, Marlis. 1990. Kontrastive Feministische Linguistik [Contrastive feminist linguistics]. Ismaning: Hueber.
12. Hennessy, Margaret. 1993. “Propagating half the species: gender in learners’ dictionaries.” In Pam Peters (ed.), Style on the move: proceedings of the Style Council 1992. North Ryde: Macquarie University, Dictionary Research Centre. 120-32.
13. Holmes, Janet. 2001. “A corpus-based view of gender in New Zealand.” In Marlis Hellinger and Hadumod Bussmann (eds.), Gender across languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 115-36.
14. Jacobs, George M., Q.Y. Zhou, P.C. Jocson, C.W. Ong and M.E.D. Austria. 1996. “Asian second-language educationists’ views on gender-inclusive English.” TEFLIN Journal 8. 86-103.
15. Jacobs, George M. 1997. “Ripple effects: the case of gender-inclusive language. Asian Englishes 1:2. 17-33.
16. Kurzon, Denis. 1989. “Sexist and nonsexist language in legal texts: the state of the art.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 80. 99-113.
17. Mackay, Donald and David Fulkerson. 1979. “On the comprehension and production of pronouns.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 18. 661-73.
18. McGraw Hill Book Company. 1972. Guidelines for Equal Treatment of the Sexes. New York: McGraw Hill.
19. Martyna, Wendy. 1978. “What does ‘he’ mean?: use of the generic masculine.” Journal of Communication 28. 130-39.
20. Moulton, Janice, George M. Robinson and Cherin Elias. 1978. “Sex bias in language use: neutral pronouns that aren’t.” American Psychologist 33. 1032-36.
21. Nilsen, Alleen P., Haig Bosmajian, Lee Gershuny, Julia P. Stanley. (eds.) 1977. Sexism and language. Urbana, ILL: National Council of Teachers of English.
22. Ong, C.W. 1999. Gender representations and gender-exclusive English in Current Singapore Primary School English Language Textbooks. National University of Singapore: MA.
23. Pauwels, Anne. 1998. Women changing language. London: Longman.
24. Pauwels, Anne. 2000. “Feminist language change in progress.” Paper presented at International Gender and Language Association Congress. Stanford University.
25. Pauwels, Anne. 2001. “Non-sexist language reform and generic pronouns in Australian English.” English World Wide: a Journal of Varieties of English 22. 105-19.
26. Pauwels, Anne. 2002. “The sociolinguistics of generic pronouns: women’s and men’s use of gender inclusive, gender neutral and masculine generic pronouns.” Paper presented at International Sociological Association Congress. Brisbane, Australia.
27. Pennycook, Alistair. 1994. The cultural politics of English as an international language. London: Longman.
28. Peters, Pam, Harry Purvis, Cathy Martin and Robert Jenkins. 1990. “Word frequencies from the Macquarie corpus: The newspaper files.” Working Papers of the Speech. Hearing and Language Research Centre.
29. Phillipson, Robert. 2001. “Global English and local language policies: What Denmark needs.” Language Problems and Language Planning 25. 1-24.
30. Romaine, Suzanne. 2001. “A corpus-based view of gender in British and American English.” In Marlis Hellinger and Hadumod Bussman (eds.), Gender across languages, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 153-76.
31. Schneider, Joseph W. and Sally Hacker. 1973. “Sex role imagery and the use of generic ‘man’ in introductory texts.” American Sociologist 8. 12-18.
32. Soto, Debbie H., Evelyn F. Forslund and Claudia Cole. 1975. “Alternative to using masculine pronouns when referring to the species.” Paper presented at Western Speech Association. San Francisco, USA.
33. Sunderland, Jane. 1986. “The grammar book and the invisible woman, Lancaster University: Unpublished MA Thesis.
34. Wilson, Elizabeth and Sik H. Ng. 1988. “Sex bias in visuals evoked by generics: a New Zealand study.” Sex Roles 18. 159-68.
35. Winter, Joanne and Anne Pauwels. 2003. “Mapping trajectories of change -women’s and men’s practices and experiences of feminist linguistic reform.” Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 26. 19-37.