The Investigation of Gender Stereotypes and Language Reform in Role
Nouns through the Use of Reflexive Pronouns
NATTASART KOTCHAPRAPA
Abstract
The gender stereotypes and grammatical function of reflexive pronouns on the representation of
gender in Australian English were examined in the paper. The existence of language reform was
also investigated. Six definitionally and fourteen stereotypically gendered role nouns (three items
for each gender and seven items strongly stereotyped to refer to each gender) were chosen from
Misersky et al. (2014)’s norms on the gender perception of role nouns in English. Participants
selected one of the reflexive pronouns (himself, herself, themselves) to the antecedent role nouns.
The overall result was slightly different from those of Misersky et al. (2014) due to language
reform. Language reform was present and showed that male participants used generic plural
anaphor (themselves) more than females participants did. Some role nouns were still strongly
stereotyped on representations of gender when gender information was not available. Stereotyped
information was also found to activate immediately and automatically. Participant gender was
considered as a factor that may have influenced results since the participants were genderoriented in selecting the pronouns to gender-unmarked role nouns.
1. Introduction
Language and gender stereotypes have been thought-provoking topics among scholars for
decades, particularly the mental representation of gender and syntactic anomalies (e.g. Jessell and
Beymer 1992; Banaji and Hardin 1996; Carreiras, Garnham, Oakhill, and Cain 1996; Osterhout,
Bersick, and McLaughlin 1997; Arnold, Eisenband, Brown-Schimidt, and Trueswell 2000; Goddard
and Patterson 2000; Kennison and Trofe 2003; Talbot 2003; Duffy and Keir 2004; Irmen 2007; Gygax,
Gabriel, Sarrasin, Oakhill, and Garnham 2008; Misersky, Gygax, Canal, Gabriel, Garnham, Braun,
Chiarini, Englund, Hanulikova, Öttl, Valdrova, Stockhausen, and Sczesny 2014). The concept is of
interest as language and culture are related to how people perceive and understand the world
(Goddard and Patterson 2000: 47). For example, the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (Carroll 1956; MucchiFaina 2005; Gygax et al. 2008) contends that language influences our minds and thus people in
different societies and cultures perceive and think about the real world differently. This hypothesis
concludes that the structure of the language is influenced by social experiences.
Men and women may view the word differently due to the different characteristics or stereotypes
between genders.
Role nouns with no gender information where a male-or-female gender
specification happens to be unknown, ambiguous and/or unavailable can be classified as
representative of males or females based on an individual’s background and culture. We live in a fastpaced society that is highly interconnected due to globalisation. The way different peoples, genders,
societies and cultures perceive the world is also changing at great speed. This change also includes
the mental representation of gender towards role nouns.
2. Literature review
Pronoun comprehension (Arnold et al. 2000) is a result of the availability of possible referents
and it should be led by gender information included with the pronoun. Kennison and Trofe (2003:
356) discussed that readers must decide which previously encountered unit emphasised in the
sentence is co-referent with an encountered pronoun.
Badecker and Straub (2002) have contended that reflexive pronouns or anaphors are ruled by
corresponding norms of Binding Theory as argued by Chomsky (1981) that ‘an anaphor must be
bound by an antecedent in its domain’. This means that reflexives must agree with the role nouns
and/or names in terms of person, number, and gender embedding within the same clause as shown
in the examples (1) and (2) below:
(1) The princess looked at herself in the mirror.
(2) The husband cooked dinner himself.
According to Goddard and Patterson (2000) stereotyping occurs in the process of categorising
people into certain groups because the members of the groups are more representative in such groups
than others. They contend that stereotypes are influenced by perceptions based on social and political
patterns of culture and the view of oral and written languages used in the everyday lives rather than
reality. Talbot (2003) also contends that people are categorised due to complex schemes of
classification in culture, which differentiates the normal and acceptable from the abnormal and
unacceptable.
Misersky et al. (2014) have viewed gender stereotypes as when role nouns are held by one gender
or the other due to the beliefs of people towards those role nouns. Oakhill, Garnham and Reynolds
(2005) also argue that background knowledge affects the construction and the representation of role
nouns. If you read and encounter the characters incorporated into male or female names, you will
create a representation in which those characters are male or female. When you read the role nouns
‘nurse’ and ‘soldier’, you could immediately refer to the female-gendered or male-gendered
representations based on the reader’s prior knowledge and gender stereotype information because
the role nouns lack of specific gendered information. For example, one study examining the effects of
job title vs. job description on occupational sex typing by Jessell and Beymer (1992) showed that job
titles produced more sex typing than job descriptions. The study found that men were more genderstereotypical than women in attitudes towards occupations.
Even though gender is not explicit in role nouns, the mental gendered stereotypes of role nouns
are still available in people’s subconscious thoughts. Banaji and Hardin (1996) have presented that
gender stereotypes activate immediately and automatically. This was similarly shown in Gygax et al.
(2008), who posited that since English does not mark grammatical gender information stereotypebased information is immediately employed. Gygax et al. (2008) revealed this is not always the case
in languages marking the grammatical genders such as German and French. This is due to the
marking providing adequate information of gendered representations to the reader. Irmen (2007)
stated that a general male bias in participants’ comprehension regardless of grammatical and
conceptual gender was found when role nouns processing in German appeared unmarked.
Osterhout et al. (1997) suggested that event-related brain potential (ERP) has sensitivity to gender
stereotype violations since ERP responses could be elicited by these violations of gender-based
occupational stereotypes. Their study showed that when gender of the reflexive pronoun and its
antecedent (role noun in this case) were not matched, amplitude positive wave (600) increased. The
disagreement of reflexive pronouns and their antecedents in gender could cause the brain response
to be provoked. This was similarly claimed by Duffy and Keir (2004), who stated that the mismatch
illustrates how gender stereotypes are automatically activated when grammatical information clashes
with its gender-stereotypical role nouns.
Kennison and Trofe (2003) provided additional evidence that gender stereotypes are influenced
in the use of pronouns referring to their antecedents in their findings. They found that people took
longer when reading the mismatched pronoun and antecedent in gender. This was also demonstrated
in Irmen (2007) who observed that the violation of the role name’s conceptual gender and the anaphor
led to a slower reading time.
Carreiras et al. (1996) argued that if gender information is a strongly stereotyped role noun, there
is instant comprehension by the receiver due to the comprehender’s mental model; if this does not
occur, the comprehender must change their mental model to refer to the indicated gender of the
pronoun. Carreiras et al. (1996) concluded that processing is far harder when the mismatches between
the gender of the pronoun and gender stereotype of the antecedent occur.
On the other hand, gender stereotypes in role nouns could be a result of sexism used in language.
Pauwels (1997: 58-59) discussed that linguistic sexism and its use has continuously been a harsh
reality in societies and cultures. She claimed that a commonality of sexist practices can be exposed
across languages and cultures and it is deeply embedded in the structures and uses of language. She
asserts that language reform is required. In order to achieve linguistic equality of sexes, genderneutralisation is suggested in ‘Verbal Sex Discrimination Act’ (Pauwels 1997: 61; see also Cameron 1985)
by means of minimising gender-specific expressions. Pauwels (1997) has found that the use of ‘they’
could reduce gender-bias when referring to occupations in job ads.
A similarly suggested strategy for language reform by Mucchi-Faina (2005: 194-195) is a
‘pluralizing’ technique: the use of plural nouns or plural pronouns. She contends that this technique
supports the common denominator between genders, making gender irrelevant. Pauwels (1999) also
found that there has been a significant decrease in sexist language used in the media in English
speaking countries.
To summarise, the aims of this research are to study how gender stereotypes are involved in role
nouns among Australian university students and to investigate whether or not language reform
exists. The following research questions guided this investigation:
1) The role nouns selected for this paper are based on the norms of gender perception of role
nouns in English proposed by Misersky et al. (2014). The research was conducted at Griffith
University (Nathan Campus), Brisbane, QLD, Australia. It will be a point of interest to
examine whether or not the overall results for the study are similar to those presented in the
norms by Misersky et al. (2014).
2) The gender of the participants can be one factor that affects the results of the study; therefore,
the study will show if there are different results between male and female participants.
3) Several studies have shown that stereotypes influence the cognition process of people (Jessell
and Beymer 1992; Banaji and Hardin 1996; Carreiras et al. 1996; Osterhout et al. 1997; Arnold
et al. 2000; Goddard and Patterson 2000; Kennison and Trofe 2003; Talbot 2003; Duffy and
Keir 2004; Irmen 2007; Gygaz et al. 2008; Misersky et al. 2014). This study will investigate
whether or not it is the case that stereotypes of role nouns play a significant role via the use
of the reflexive pronouns.
4) Gender information plays an important role in the effects on gender agreement rules and
their violation. This also includes use of pronouns to refer to its antecedent in terms of person,
number and gender particularly when gender information is not accessible (Banaji and
Hardin 1996; Carreiras et al. 1996; Osterhout et al. 1997; Arnold et al. 2000; Kennison and
Trofe 2003; Duffy and Keir 2004; Irmen 2007; Gygax et al. 2008; Misersky et al. 2014).
Providing that role nouns are stereotypical to males and females, the study will investigate
whether or not language reform exists.
3. Methodology
3.1 Participants
The participants were forty students from Griffith University, Nathan Campus. Twenty-one were
male and nineteen were female. Their native language was English (Australian English). Two were
born in New Zealand. Participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 30 years old (M = 10, SD = 4.53).
3.2 Materials and Design
A list of seven stereotypical role nouns for each gender was constructed from the norms on
gender perception of role nouns in English proposed by Misersky et al. (2014: 862-871). The authors
(Misersky et al. 2014: 841) claimed that the norms assist researchers to take gender associations into
account when selecting stimulus materials. I selected strong female stereotyped role nouns and
matched them with similarly strong male stereotyped role nouns in English as shown in Table 1:
Male Stereotypes
Female Stereotypes
Role Nouns
M
Roles Nouns
M
Note that higher values represent a higher proportion of women estimated.
Soldier
.22
Stripper
.69
Driver
.38
Nurse
.74
Police
.36
Babysitter
.78
Dentist
.38
Cleaner
.71
Farmer
.27
Flight attendant
.71
Mechanic
.21
Receptionist
.75
Boss
.37
Secretary
.75
Table 1: A list of gender stereotypes in role nouns proposed by Miserky (2014: 862-871)
The participants were asked to choose the reflexive pronouns for each sentence. A list of six role
nouns associated with specific genders by definition (three for each gender) as seen in Table 2 were
selected for the questionnaire. This was to illustrate the definition matches of the role nouns’ gender
and the use of anaphors. According to Chomsky (1981) and Badecker and Straub (2002), the reflexive
pronouns must be co-referent to the role nouns within the same clause. I believe this could provoke
the participants when they have to assign the anaphors to the stereotypical role nouns where gender
information is not explicit.
Definite Males
Definite Females
Husband
Princess
Father
Daughter
Pope
Bride
Table 2: A list of definitionally male and female role nouns
The design of this questionnaire was adapted from the experimental stimuli employed by
Osterhout et al. (1997: 284-285). Three reflexive pronouns were provided for the participants: ‘himself’,
‘herself’ and ‘themselves’. Note that ‘themselves’ was assigned in the questionnaire to observe the
existence of language reform. See example (3) for sample sentences used for eliciting the data (see
also Appendix 1)
(3) a. The princess looked at (himself, herself, themselves) in the mirror.
b. The husband cooked dinner (himself, herself, themselves).
c. The stripper made time for (himself, herself, themselves) after the show.
d. The dirty soldier cleaned (himself, herself, themselves) at the pond.
According to example (3), sentences (a) and (b) are used to test definitionally gendered matches
while (c) and (d) are employed to examine gender stereotypes for females and males and for the
occurrence of language reform.
Stereotypically and definitionally male and female role nouns served as the subjects of the
sentences while reflexive pronouns were the objects of verbs or prepositions. The twenty sentences
were arranged randomly in order to avoid the consistency of possibly predicted answers.
3.3 Procedure
The questionnaire was administered by face-to-face collection at Griffith University. The first
part of questionnaire was used to screen participants for general background information such as
age, gender, place of birth, nationality, native language, and occupation (see Appendix 1). The
participants for this research were Australian students, aged between 18 and 30, and whose native
language is English (Australian English).
In Part 2 of questionnaire, subjects were requested to underline one of the reflexive pronouns to
complete the sentence with the most appropriate choice. Participants were directed to select the first
answer that came into their mind, not the answers that they thought should be provided.
4. Results
The overall results from all participants are demonstrated in Figure 1, which was calculated
based on the percentages from all participants.
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Definitionally
female
Definitionallymale
himself
herself
Stereotypically
male
Stereotypically
female
themselves
Figure 1: Overall results from all participants.
Unsurprisingly, all participants grammatically matched the reflexive pronouns to the specific
gendered role nouns since gender information was available for the participants. There were great
variations found when participants assigned reflexive pronouns to stereotypically gendered role
nouns. 66.43 percent of the participants (M = 13.30, SD = 2.10) assigned ‘himself’ to the stereotypically
male role nouns while 52.14 percent of the participants (M = 10.40, SD = 2.90) referred ‘herself’ to the
stereotypically female role nouns. Interestingly, the results of the survey showed 30.36 percent of the
participants (M = 6.10, SD = 2.10) referred to ‘themselves’ in the stereotypical male role nouns, this was
matched by 36.07 percent of the participants (M = 7.20, SD = 1.80) referring to ‘themselves’ in
stereotypical female noun roles.
Male Participants
Conceptual Genders
Female Participants
Anaphors
of Role Nouns
Male stereotype
Himself
%
M
SD
%
M
SD
64.63
13.60
2.10
68.42
13.00
2.20
Female stereotype
Herself
2.04
0.40
1.10
4.51
0.90
1.20
Themselves
33.33
7.00
2.30
27.07
5.10
1.60
Himself
12.24
2.60
1.80
11.28
2.50
1.90
Herself
49.66
10.40
2.50
54.89
10.40
2.20
Themselves
38.10
8.00
1.50
33.83
6.40
1.70
Table 3: The comparison of the results between male and female participants.
The effect of gender stereotypes towards the use of anaphors is shown in the results from both
male and female participants in Table 3. The results demonstrate that male participants in the survey
in 64.63 percent of answers (M = 13.60, SD = 2.10) chose the male reflexive pronoun ‘himself’ to the
role noun’s conceptual gender which is stereotypically male. This is in comparison to female
participants in the survey who selected ‘himself’ for stereotypically male gendered role nouns in 68.42
percent of answers (M = 13.00, SD = 2.20).
The results for stereotypically female role nouns presented in the survey were slightly different
from both sample groups in the effect of gender conceptual role nouns and their anaphors. 49.66
percent of male participants (M = 10.40, SD = 2.50) and 54.89 percent of female participants (M = 10.40,
SD = 2.20) assigned ‘herself’ to stereotypical female role nouns.
More varied results were found when participants chose the gender anaphors for their femalestereotyped antecedents. 12.24 percent of male participants (M = 2.60, SD = 1.80) and 11.28 percent of
female participants (M = 2.50, SD = 1.90) chose the male third person singular reflexive pronoun
‘himself’ to the female-gendered stereotypical role nouns. It was noted that there was a higher
percentage of participants selecting ‘themselves’; 38.10 percent (M = 8.00, SD = 1.50) and 33.83 percent
(M = 6.40, SD = 1.70) from male and female subjects, respectively. This shows that more participants
were aware of avoiding gender bias in comparison to male-stereotyped role nouns.
The average for the overall results for male and female stereotypical role nouns was 13.30 and
10.40, respectively. If the average for each role noun is above the overall average, it indicates that
those role nouns are more likely gender-stereotyped. Compared to Misersky et al. (2014) norms on
the gender perception of role nouns in Table 4, the stereotypically male role nouns were not
significantly changed with the exception of police (M = 13.00, SD = 0.00), dentist (M = 12.00, SD = 1.40),
farmer (M = 12.50, SD = 0.70) and boss (M = 10.50, SD = 0.70). When comparing the stereotypically
female role nouns, there was a slight change noted in stripper (M = 9.50, SD = 2.10), babysitter (M =
9.00, SD = 0.00) and cleaner (M = 6.50, SD = 0.70).
Misersky et al (2014)’s
The Paper’s Results
Language Reform
Results
Types of
Anaphors
Role Nouns
Rating
SD
M
SD
M
SD
Mean
Soldier
.22
.13
15.00
1.40
5.00
2.80
Driver
.38
.13
14.00
1.40
6.00
2.80
Police
.36
.13
13.00
0.00
7.00
1.40
Dentist
.38
.15
12.00
1.40
5.00
0.00
Farmer
.27
.15
12.50
0.70
7.50
0.70
Mechanic
.21
.14
16.00
2.80
3.50
0.70
Boss
.37
.13
10.50
0.70
8.50
2.10
Stripper
.69
.17
9.50
2.10
6.00
1.40
Nurse
.74
.12
13.00
1.40
5.50
0.70
Babysitter
.78
.12
9.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
Female
Cleaner
.71
.14
6.50
0.70
8.50
2.10
stereotype
Flight
7.00
1.40
Male
stereotype
.71
.15
11.00
0.00
Receptionist
.75
.10
12.00
0.00
7.00
1.40
Secretary
.75
.14
12.00
0.00
6.50
0.70
attendant
Table 4: The comparison of Misersky et al.’s (2014) norms on the gender perception of role nouns
and the results of paper and language reform.
Role nouns becoming less stereotypically male and female are above the overall average of
language reform (M = 6.10 for male stereotype and M = 7.20 for female stereotype) as highlighted in
Table 4.
5. General Discussion
The study provides evidence for the role nouns’ conceptual genders involved in the use of
anaphors. The six definitionally male and female role nouns were grammatically matched since the
gender information was accessible. The results indicate that the syntactic along with semantic aspects
regarding gender signals in the role nouns are used in the process.
In terms of stereotypically male and females role nouns, gender stereotypes generated
automatically when cues of conceptual gender were missing. The result provides a strong indication
that the stereotypes influence the cognitive process of people. This result further supports findings
such as those of Jessell and Beymer (1992), Banaji and Hardin (1996), Carreiras et al. (1996), Osterhout
et al. (1997), Arnold et al. (2000), Kennison and Trofe (2003), Duffy and Keir (2004), Irmen (2007),
Gygax et al. (2008), and Misersky et al. (2014), which suggest that when participants read and
encounter a strongly stereotypical gendered role nouns, their stereotype information activates
immediately and automatically.
The results in this study were somewhat different from those presented by Misersky et al. (2014)
as some of the gender stereotypical role nouns such as ‘police’, ‘farmer’, ‘boss’, ‘cleaner’ and ‘babysitter’
were not as visible in my findings. The first three role nouns are male gendered stereotypes and the
final two are female gendered stereotypes in the norms suggested by Misersky et al. (2014). Those
role nouns become less gender specific by the use of language reform as the participants have more
than two options to choose from; the generic plural reflexive pronoun ‘themselves’ was provided as
the third option. Some role nouns were still found to be strongly stereotyped to refer to males such
as ‘soldier’, ‘driver’ and ‘mechanic’. The role nouns ‘nurse’, ‘flight attendant’, ‘receptionist’ and ‘secretary’
were all found to be strongly stereotyped to refer to females.
The male and female participants provided differing results; this demonstrated that the gender
of the participants is a factor that can affect the results of the study. When the gender of the
participants matched the gender stereotypes of the role nouns and the pronouns, the results
demonstrate that they were more likely to choose their own gender. These results are similarly shown
in Kennison and Trofe (2003) who suggested that the male worldview is composed of greater male
oriented roles. They also suggested that females may view the world through a prism of female
dominated roles.
The results demonstrated that male participants used language reform more than female participants.
This was particularly evident in selecting anaphor to female stereotypical role nouns. I would contend that
these results are driven by participants’ decisions due to their own perceptions. Male participants may be
overly sensitive to criticisms in regards to using gendered role nouns as they would have deduced from the
questionnaire that this exercise was to determine responses from the participant population.
The language reform observed in the results is evidence of the reduction of sexism in English.
Miller and Swift (1980) argued that communication symbols, or in this case stereotypical role nouns,
do not reflect changes in society. They argued that the terminology that was once gender stereotyped
is now anachronistic. The evidence of language reform and a significant number of participants
choosing ‘themselves’ rather than specific gendered anaphors might be evidence of paradigm shift.
6. Conclusion
In this paper, both definitionally and stereotypically gendered role nouns and the use of
anaphors were tested among Australian students from Griffith University (Nathan Campus). This
paper investigated gender stereotypes and language reform. The notion that language influenced our
cognition was demonstrated because gender stereotypes activate when the unspecific gendered role
nouns appear. People make references about the gender of the people when choosing reflexive
pronouns to unmark gendered antecedent role nouns. The research concluded that men and women
perceive and think about the role nouns slightly differently due to the gender’s characteristics and
gender-orientations (Kennison and Trofe 2003). Language reform was present in the study. Male
students used generic plural anaphors more than female students. The results from the questionnaire
were similar to results observed by other authors cited in the literature review. The use of language
reform caused the results to slightly differ from those found by Misersky et al. (2014). Using
unmarked gender pronouns or using the pluralising strategy (Irmen 2007) is a positive indication that
people are more aware of sexism in the language. The study presents clear evidence that people’s
perspectives towards role nouns have changed even though the majority of participants still create
mental representations of gender based on gender stereotype information when gender cues are
inaccessible.
Author notes
Nattasart Kotchaprapa is a second year student completing a Bachelor of Languages and
Linguistics, majoring in International English and Linguistics at Griffith University, Brisbane,
Australia. His main areas of interest are phonology, syntax, sociolinguistic and translation. He
intends to pursue post graduate studies in the linguistics field.
References
Arnold, J., Eisenband, J., Brown-Schmidt, S., and Trueswell, J. 2000. The rapid use of gender information:
Evidence of the time course of pronoun resolution from eyetracking. Cognition 76: B13-B26.
Badecker, W. and Straub, K. 2002. The processing role of structural constraints on the interpretation of
pronouns and anaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28: 748769.
Banaji, M. and Hardin, C. 1996. Automatic stereotyping. Psychological Science, 7: 131-141.
Cameron, D. 1985. Feminism and Linguistic Theory. London: Macmillan.
Carreiras, M., Garnham, A., Oakhill, J., and Cain, K. 1996. The use of stereotypical gender information in
constructing a mental model: Evidence from English and Spanish. Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology 49A: 639-663.
Carroll, J.B., ed. 1956. Language, Though and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge: MIT
Press.
Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Duffy, S.A. and Keir, J.A. 2004. Violating stereotypes: Eye movements and comprehension processes when
text conflicts with world knowledge. Memory & Cognition 32: 551-559.
Goddard, A. and Patterson, L. 2000. Language and Gender. Cornwell: Routledge.
Gygax, P., Gabriel, U., Sarrasin, O., Oakhill, J., and Garnham, A. 2008. Generically intended, but specifically
interpreted: When beauticians, musicians and Mechanics are all men. Language and Cognitive Processes
23: 464-485.
Irmen, L. 2007. What’s in a (role) name? Formal and conceptual aspects of comprehending personal nouns.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 36: 431-456.
Jessel, J.C. and Beymer, L. 1992. The effects of job title vs. job description on occupational sex typing. Sex Roles
27: 73-83.
Kennison, S.M. and Trofe, J.L. 2003. Comprehending pronouns: A role for word-specific gender stereotype
information. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32: 355-378.
Miller, C. and Swift, K. 1980. The Handbook of Non-Sexist Writing: For Writers, Editors and Speakers. New York:
Lippincott & Crowell.
Misersky, J., Gygax, P., Canal, P., Gabriel, U., Garnham, A., Braun, F., Chiarini, T., Englund, K., Hanulikova,
A., Öttl, A., Valdrova, J., Stockhausen, V.L., and Sczesny, S. 2014. Norms on the gender perception of
role nouns in Czech, English, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, and Slovak. Behavior Research
Methods 46: 841-871.
Mucchi-Faina, A. 2005. Visible or influential? Language reforms and gender (in)equality. Social Science
Information 44: 189-215.
Oakhill, J., Garnham, A., and Reynolds, D. 2005. Immediate activation of stereotypical gender information.
Memory & Cognition 33: 972-983.
Osterhout, L., Bersick, M., & McLaughlin, J. 1997. Brain potential reflect violations of gender stereotypes.
Memory and Cognition 25: 273-285.
Pauwels, A. 1997. Of handymen and waitpersons: A linguistic evaluation of job classifieds. Australian Journal
of Communication 24: 58-69.
Pauwels, A. 1999. Feminist language planning: Has it been worthwhile? Linguistik Online 2; available at
<http://www.linguistik-online.de/heft1_99/pauwels.htm>
Talbot, M. 2003. Gender stereotypes: Reproduction and challenge. In The Handbook of Language and Gender, ed.
J. Holmes and M. Meyerhoff. Cornwall: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Appendix 1: Research’s Questionnaire
Questionnaire on Gender Stereotypes and Language Reform
(This questionnaire is conducted to study how gender stereotypes are involved in role nouns and to
investigate whether or not language reform exists. This project is part of Language and Gender’s final
assessment.)
PART 1
Please fill in the following information:
1. Age: o 18-20 o 21-23 o 24-26 o 27-30
2. Gender: o male o female
3. Place of Birth: __________________
4. Nationality: __________________
5. Occupation: __________________
6. Native language(s): ________________________________
(Please mention all languages, if bought up bilingual/multilingual.)
PART 2
Read the following sentences and underline one of the pronouns (himself, herself, themselves) which
is the most appropriate. Select the answer that FIRST comes into your mind: NOT the answer you
think it ought to be.
1. The princess looked at (himself, herself, themselves) in the mirror.
2. The stripper made time for (himself, herself, themselves) after the show.
3. The dirty soldier cleaned (himself, herself, themselves) at the pond.
4. The racing car driver pulled (himself, herself, themselves) through the window.
5. The nurse cut (himself, herself, themselves) while helping the patient.
6. The husband cooked dinner (himself, herself, themselves).
7. A foreign babysitter taught (himself, herself, themselves) to speak English.
8. The police officer trained (himself, herself, themselves).
9. The dentist tried to make (himself, herself, themselves) popular with his patients.
10.
The old cleaner at shopping centre bought (himself, herself, themselves) a new broom.
11.
The father promised (himself, herself, themselves) that he would get a job.
12.
The flight attendant spilled orange juice on (himself, herself, themselves).
13.
The Brissie farmer enjoyed (himself, herself, themselves) at the EKKA.
14.
His daughter bought (himself, herself, themselves) an I-pad.
15.
The mechanic hurt (himself, herself, themselves) while fixing the car.
16.
The new receptionist introduced (himself, herself, themselves) to the guests.
17.
The boss bought (himself, herself, themselves) a new car.
18.
The pope enjoyed (himself, herself, themselves) in Manila.
19.
The secretary congratulated (himself, herself, themselves) on their promotion.
20.
The bride prepared (himself, herself, themselves) for the wedding.