Language and Speech Models of Gender Stereotype Representation on the Material of the Russian language

Full Text

Introduction

Nowadays, experts register significant transformations of gender in various cultures. It is in the English cultural context that relevant trends of the new gender order and ideology are particularly noticeable, which is associated with the expansion of the English language as an international means of communication and the transmission of Western (primarily American) models of gender socialization through various information channels on a global scale [1].

The relevance of the given research is accounted for by the present-­day collision of globalist and traditionalist tendencies of gender identification, which produce interrelated changes at the basic level of gender categorization, both within the same linguistic culture and among different linguistic communities. The methodology of cognitive linguistics allows us to reconstruct conceptual transformations of gender stereotypes based on the contextual variability of the concepts MAN/WOMAN. The linguistic and speech models of gender stereotypes constructed in the course of the study may serve as a basis for predicting current trends in gender identification and for outlining possible directions of the language policy and social policy of the state.

The aim of the study is to identify the linguistic and speech mechanisms of constructing the most representative features of the concepts MAN/WOMAN in modern discursive practices on the material of the Russian National Corpus (RNC)^[1].

Hypothesis. Proceeding from the fact that cognitive research models are correlation models connecting linguistic and cognitive structures, it is assumed that current trends in the linguistic and speech variability of gender stereotypes in the modern linguistic consciousness of Russian speakers can be reconstructed from the linguistic representation.

Stereotype is one of the key terms of cognitive linguistic research, most often used in scientific discourse as “conceptualization patterns”, “models formed in our consciousness”; “patterns of people’s behavior and actions in society”, “a cultural norm”^[2].

The given study is based on the understanding of a gender stereotype as a stable, socially recognized and lexically expressed combination of the most representative characteristics of masculinity and femininity and typical fulfilment spheres of men and women, functioning as an economical, normative and evaluative scheme of comprehension and linguistic interpretation of gender parameterization of discourse.

The theoretical basis for the research includes: cognitive modeling [2–4]; the theory of language conceptualization and categorization [5–8]; the theory of gender stereotypes in linguistic aspect [9–12]; the theory of gender stereotypes in sociological aspect [13; 14]; the prototype theory [15; 16]; the stereotype theory [17–19]; corpus linguistics [20; 21].

The novelty of the study is as follows: 1) identifying cognitive verbalization mechanisms of stereotypical knowledge on new linguistic material; 2) analyzing acute tendencies of gender identification in various discursive practices; 3) applying a comprehensive research methodology.

Methods and Material

The sample includes a corpus of texts based on the keywords muzhchin*/zhenshchin*, muzhsk*/zhensk*, which includes texts of various genres — the main corpus of the RNC and the media corpus of the RNC (non-­lemmatized texts). The sample includes 4,000 contexts.

RNC enables us to obtain additional information about the analyzed contexts. The contexts of the main corpus, published from 2011 to 2019, belong to journalism, educational and scientific texts, advertising, fiction, and electronic communication texts. The texts are characterized by a variety of topics (administration and management, army and armed conflicts, business, health and medicine, art and culture, history, consumer and food industry, science and technology, education, law, psychology, sociology, technology, transport, private life, economics, etc.). Contexts related to the media corpus were published during 2019; additional information about the type of contexts and their topics is not available.

The analysis of social stereotypes in a cognitive aspect is conducted by applying a comprehensive research methodology: conceptual and definitional analysis of lexical units marking characteristics of masculinity and femininity; cognitive modeling of thematic groups as definition areas of the conceptual characteristics of masculinity and femininity; prototypical analysis of the most representative characteristics of the concepts MAN/WOMAN; methods of corpus linguistics (frequency analysis, concordance analysis, cluster analysis). Software used: AntConc.

Results and Discussion

Based on the conducted research, it can be concluded that the conceptual transformation of gender is projected primarily onto the basic categorial structure of the conceptual-­thematic area of gender-­marked knowledge. The role of a “guide” to the processes of basic conceptualization and categorization belongs to language, since language categories are included in cognitive processes and represent the correlation between the structure of a language category and the cognitive structure of a conceptual-­thematic area of knowledge.

The functional aspect of gender conceptualization focuses on the ways of operating gender-­marked knowledge that are realized in language and provide understanding. At the basic level of gender-­marked areas of knowledge categorization, prototypical effects of the gender identification binary model are directly manifested. Profiling of certain characteristics of masculinity and femininity in contexts of RNC depends on the discursive practice: personal characteristics (appearance, age, clothing, character traits) are found mostly in the main corpus of the RNC, whereas professional fulfilment and deviant behavior — in the media corpus of the RNC. The central areas of determining gender characteristics when describing men are “Personal characteristics” (802 contexts), when describing women — “Fulfilment spheres” (1077 contexts) (see Table 1).

Table 1
Comparison of thematic groups of men’s and women’s characteristics in the corpus of texts

Source: compiled by Tatiana V. Romanova, Maria Yu. Tovkes

In the thematic block “Personal characteristics”, character traits in the traditional interpretation become the dominant group. When describing a man, strength markers are mainly used (sila / silnyj ^[3], silnyj harakter), a special type of thinking is emphasized (muzhskoj um, muzhskaya hvatka); adherence to moral norms and principles is highlighted (blagorodstvo, dolg); as well as activity, initiative, innovation (vsegda v dvizhenii, zhazhdushchij novyh vpechatlenij, stremitsya vpered i vyshe, energichnye); restraint in the expression of emotions. The contexts profile a higher adherence to bad habits for men than for women (kurit, zapojnyj pyanica); aggressiveness can be indirectly connected with the presence of the thematic group “Deviant behavior” (agressivnyj, voinstvennost, naryvaetsya na draku). The “female” character is also represented by traditional markers — being observant, attention to detail (vnimatelny k melocham); empathy (serdechnaya / serdechnost / serdobolnye, chutkaya); willingness to cooperate (slyshat chuzhoe mnenie, stremlenie k kompromissu, umet rabotat v komande). The so-­called negative feminine qualities account for 13.4 % of the “Character traits” group (vulgarnaya, zlaya, lzhivaya, etc.).

In this group, there are certain changes in the masculinity and femininity standards, and smoothing out the traditional asymmetry. Specifically, the right of men to express emotions and non-­aggressive masculinity is recognized: Po slovam issledovatelej, muzhchiny primerno v takoj zhe stepeni podverzheny emociyam, kak i zhenshchiny; otkaz muzhchin ot tradicionnogo latinoamerikanskogo “machizma”. The emotionality of women virtually invisible in the corpus of texts, whereas there is a significant number of contexts about high intellectual abilities and good life experience: obrazovannaya, mudraya / mudrost, umnaya.

In the corpus of texts, men’s and women’s appearance and clothing are discussed, as well as their age as an implicit marker of gender identity and social role behavior. Equally, men and women have an attractive appearance, they are well-­groomed, and they prefer to be well-­dressed. The descriptive markers of male appearance are more widely represented than those of women; these markers idealize men’s appearance and emphasize their height and the desire to be in good physical shape (vysokij / vysokogo rost; nakachannyj, podzharyj, podtyanutyj). The description of female appearance is more detailed. Contexts focus on feminine beauty. However, the figure description markers are ambiguous: slimness is not idealized, and the presence of fullness or obesity is stated as a fact and is not accompanied by a negative connotation (strojnaya / ochen strojnaya, tonenkaya, hudaya / hudenkaya / hudoshchavaya; polnaya, krupnaya, dorodnaya, pyshnaya). When describing the age of men and women, significant characteristics are marked using an antonymic pair molodoj/pozhiloj.

Among the new trends, we can observe the expansion of the thematic group “Appearance” and “Clothes” when describing men, as well as highlighting contexts about men’s clothing, fashion and accessories. Attractive appearance becomes a significant, socially approved characteristic of both men and women. Thus, visual gender differences are profiled: for men, the significant markers are attractiveness and good physical shape; for women — attractiveness and youth.

The markers of professional fulfilment of women (thematic block “Fulfilment spheres”) in the corpus of texts are 2 times more widely represented than those of men. Also, a woman realizes herself in traditional family roles. Motherhood, the purpose of a woman to become a mother (the search query beremenn* is used 96 times in the corpus); marital status of a woman; the stereotypical role of a woman as a housewife are discussed in the corpus. The contexts emphasize the idea that pregnant women and women with young children are an unprotected group of citizens who need to be supported, particularly at the legislative level. For example: Deputat dobavila, chto materinstvo — samaya bolshaya zhenskaya privilegiya, poskolku svyazana s chudom rozhdeniya rebenka, ego poyavleniya na svet, vospitaniya i otkrytiya s nim krasivogo mira.

At the same time, the family topic becomes relevant when describing men: attention is focused on the increasing role of men as the head of the family and as a father raising children, including the legislative (the right to receive state financial support) and institutional levels (establishing the Council of Fathers, Father’s Day, etc.): Neobhodimost povysheniya socialnoj roli otca, vovlecheniya muzhchin v semejnye dela i vospitanie detej, sovershenstvovaniya propagandy otvetstvennogo otcovstva podchyorkivaetsya v Koncepcii gosudarstvennoj semejnoj politiki, napomnili ranee v Mintrude. The role of men as teachers in the educational process, primarily for boys, is also highlighted: Malchikam bez prepodavatelya-­muzhchiny voobshche nelzya vospityvatsya.

Among the new trends, we can observe the development of new fulfilment fields for men — beauty contests and rhythmic gymnastics — as well as an emphasis on combining career and family when describing women. The professional realization of a woman is actualized, including the “traditionally male” sectors of public life: running your own business, technology, working in senior positions, public service, politics, transport and science. For example: V to zhe vremya snimayutsya ogranicheniya na rabotu zhenshchin v tom chisle v kachestve aviamekhanikov po planeru, dvigatelyam, priboram, elektro- i radiooborudovaniyu.

Contexts involving a male–female pair (366 contexts) compare physiological, psychological and personal characteristics; the gender asymmetry in professional fulfilment is partially smoothed out — equal rights for men and women, including their historical aspect, the development of new spheres of public life by women, issues of equality between men and women are actively discussed (see Figure 1).

Contexts marking manifestations of patriarchal gender asymmetry and androcentrism are less frequent (45 contexts). When discussing gender identity issues (38 contexts), we can observe the “traditional” understanding of gender relations as a relationship between a man and a woman. To a lesser extent, new forms of gender identity are marked (transgender — 5 contexts, interseks — 1, agendernyj — 1, etc.) and it is highlighted that personal characteristics do not depend on biological gender.

Fig. 1. Thematic groups of contexts involving a male–female pair
Source: compiled by Tatiana V. Romanova, Maria Yu. Tovkes.

In contexts with a male–female pair, the following speech models are realized:

• opposition for the purpose of traditional contrast of character traits, or physiological characteristics: Muzhskoj kollektiv bolshe sosredotachivaetsya na obshchej kartine i na perspektivah razvitiya, a zhenskij udelyaet vnimanie detalyam i resheniyu operacionnyh problem;
• typification: U tipichnogo top-­menedzhera ne zhenskoe lico — 84 % vsekh vysshih dolzhnostej zanimayut muzhchiny;
• evaluative judgments: Pri etom konkursnye zayavki chashche vsego podayut muzhchiny, tak kak zhenshchinam zachastuyu ne hvataet hrabrosti i uverennosti v sebe;
• reference to authority: Po dannym GIBDD, opublikovannym v marte etogo goda, chashche vsego vinovnikami DTP v Rossii stanovilis muzhchiny v vozraste ot 30 do 40 let. Muzhchiny zhe sovershili 81 procent vsekh avarij s pogibshimi i postradavshimi;
• attribute characteristics: U nas muzhskie professii davno otkryty dlya zhenshchin, a evropejcy schitayut, chto u nih nedostatochno.
• predication combined with opposition. When describing gender relations in Russia, their definition is given and, at the same time, the model of gender relations in other countries is contrasted: Kak by ni traktovali eto na Zapade i ni navyazyvali nam tolerantnoe otnoshenie k institutu braka, v Rossii semya — eto dobrovolnyj soyuz muzhchiny i zhenshchiny;
• explanation: On — interseks, to est rodilsya i vospityvalsya kak devochka, no v podrostkovom vozraste polovoe sozrevanie poshlo po muzhskomu tipu;
• metaphorization: No on upiraetsya v “steklyannyj potolok”: v tekh sferah, gde obrazovanie svyazano s neposredstvennym dostupom k materialnym blagam. Gendernaya distanciya ostaetsya ochen bolshoj — v polzu muzhskogo pola.

With AntConc corpus manager, it was possible to identify stable nominative phrases with attributive characteristics ‘male’/‘female’, emphasizing phenomena typical only for men or women (see Table 2):

Table 2
Nominative phrases characterizing men and women in the corpus of texts

Men	Women
- a certain standard of decent behavior, adherence to moral norms and principles: man’s word, male action, male obligation, male solidarity, male upbringing;	- general description of character: female nature, female gender, female soul;
- style of thinking: male logic / male fact-­based logic;	- style of thinking: female logic, female memory, female instinct, female intuition;
- views of life: male happiness;	- views of life: female happiness, female destiny;
- special expression of emotions: men’s tears;	- expression of emotions: woman’s tears;
- communication standards: male friendship / strong male friendship, male conversation, male response;	- communication style: female conversations;
- support: male shoulder, male arm.	- typically feminine themes: women’s things, women’s secrets, women’s agenda, women’s joys.

Source: compiled by Tatiana V. Romanova, Maria Yu. Tovkes

Thus, it is possible to generalize the mechanisms of linguistic and speech representation of current trends in gender identification:

1. The lexical and grammatical representation of the gender stereotype in the corpus of texts is expressed by the following means:
   
   • the part of speech choice when describing stereotypical characteristics of masculinity and femininity is determined by the thematic group: when describing character traits, derived nouns with the Abstract semantics of ‘characteristic, trait’ are mainly used (sila, chestnost, blagorodstvo, um, aktivnost, voinstvennost, muzhestvo); for appearance — single-­root adjective–noun pairs; for clothes — concrete nouns; for age — compound adjectives with a quantitative root morpheme, the means with the semantics of approximate quantity are numbering phrases with reverse word order and prepositional-­case forms of cardinal numerals in the genitive and dative cases (k, okolo). Less frequently, adjectives derived from the same noun root (energichnyj, agressivnyj) and derived nouns used as apposition (smelchak, zashchitnik, krasavica) are employed to describe character and appearance.
   • when analyzing the thematic groups “Character traits” and “Appearance”, we observe the semantics of lexical units with a positive connotation, which mark stereotypically approved personal traits, attractive appearance, and good physical shape. When analyzing the thematic groups “Clothes” and “Age”, lexical units have a neutral connotation and label items of clothing or age characteristics (srednih let);
   • corpus analysis reveals that attributive features, nominative phrases, coordinated (moshchnyj sportivnyj tors, zastenchivyj vzglyad) and non-­coordinated (s sereznymi namereniyami) adjectives, metaphorical attributes (basketbolnyh razmerov, bochkoobraznyj, tuchnyj, zhenshchina ostrogo i nestandartnogo myshleniya) are registered much more frequently than predicative features. Predicative features are present only within the thematic group “Character traits”;
   • certain lexical units belonging to the groups “Appearance” and “Age” form synonymic rows with common semantic components “tall”, “attractive appearance”, “good physical shape”, “excessive weight”, “middle age”, etc. In the group “Character traits”, the synonymy mechanism (blagorodnyj, vernyj, vypolnyat svoj dolg, poryadochnyj) is also observed. The most frequent characteristic in describing the age of men and women are the antonymic pairs molodoj/pozhiloj; molodaya/pozhilaya;
   • to convey a strong degree of quality, the description of men’s and women’s appearance and clothing employs intensifiers and hyperbolization, expressed by appropriate morphemes or lexical units. For example: zdorovennyj, zhenskaya giperaktivnost (intensifiers); ogromnyj rost (hyperbolization).
   • women’s characterization employs a greater number (compared to male characteristics) of set expressions and proverbs marking traits of female character, appearance and age: predpriimchivaya zhenshchina ne zhdet u morya pogody, vykruchivaetsya kak mozhet.
2. The speech representation of the gender stereotype in the corpus of texts is expressed by the following means:
   
   • the most frequently used speech models of gender stereotyping are predication (novatorstvo v lyubom dele — missiya muzhskogo pola), explanation or parenthetic constructions (silnye muzhchiny (i ya sejchas govoryu sovsem ne o muskulature)), evaluative judgment conveying the speaker’s opinion (Opredelyayushchee, na moj vzglyad, zabluzhdenie svyazano s vozrastom zhenshchin), detailing the semantics of the situation — concretization, where the attributive feature is a trait of character, a detail of appearance or clothing (silnyj harakter, muzhskoj um), description (muzhskoj tip, kogda nuzhno postoyanno chto-­to preodolevat i sovershat podvigi);
   • conceptual characteristics of masculinity and femininity are objectified by naturomorphic and sociomorphic metaphorical models when describing character traits (muzhchiny vypleskivayut svoyu agressiyu, muzhchina v bolshej stepeni issledovatel bolshogo mira za predelami doma); a metonymic transfer is revealed only in the characteristics of clothing, when the garment becomes an indirect marker of occupation (v voennom kitele, v gonochnom shleme, v seryh rizah);
   • the analysis of female characteristics in the groups “Character traits” and “Appearance” reveals a description based on a prototype and a typing mechanism, when the author cites the features of a certain stereotypical image with a set of appropriate characteristics (nastoyashchaya russkaya zhenshchina s rusoj kosoj);
   • periphrasis, parenthetic constructions, predicative phrases, inversion, comparative structures, quoting, opposition and negation modality are the least frequent speech models when describing men, and are found mainly in one of the identified thematic groups. Parenthetic constructions, inversion, frame and mode of negation are the least frequently used speech models when describing women. For example: periphrasis — zdorovoe otnoshenie k realnosti (pragmatism); opposition — muzhchina prezhde vsego dolzhen vypolnyat svoj dolg, a ne ukazaniya mamy; quotations, intertextuality — “krasivyj, umnyj i v meru upitannyj muzhchina v samom rascvete sil”;
   • a positively evaluative mode can be identified in the groups “Character traits” and “Appearance”, when the speakers construct a stereotypically positive image of a man and a woman (traits, behavior and appearance aspects which are acceptable and approved);
   • the propositional model of the situations “Character traits”, “Appearance”, “Clothes” includes the following components: the subject as a marker of characteristic, characteristic/predicative — character trait/appearance trait/garment; the action through which the characteristic, trait /object/attribute manifests itself (I, tem ne menee, vsegda pomnite: vy — muzhchiny, a muzhchiny dolzhny umet terpet, staratsya, preodolevat sebya i vypolnyat svoj dolg; My ved zhenshchiny, my nablyudatelnye, vnimatelny k melocham). The propositional model of the “Age” situation includes the components of the subject — a marker of characteristic, a predicate with the “characteristic, trait” semantics.

The analysis of language and speech models of gender stereotype representation makes it possible to identify the traditional binary model as the dominant method of gender categorization, which represents idealized images of men and women, which have gained collective approval and enable us to differentiate between the norm and deviations from it. Conceptual rearrangements of the binary model of gender differences do not affect the prototypical core of the concepts MAN/WOMAN, but reveal themselves in the expansion of non-­prototypical components, their ranking, the degree of asymmetry of mutual correlations: the preservation of traditional patriarchal asymmetry, neutralization of gender differences in certain types of discourse, as well as feminist trends and the dominance of women in certain contexts. The asymmetries of the binary model reveal the adherence to fundamentalist values and guidelines of Russian linguistic culture and at the same time adapt it to the challenges of globalization.

The research outlines linguistic and speech models representing typical signs of masculinity and femininity and current trends in gender identification typical of the Russian-­speaking linguistic culture. The analysis is based on the materials of a certain time period. At the same time, the cognitive research methodology of gender stereotypes allows us to correlate these models with gender models of other linguistic cultures. The new gender order of anglophone cultures challenges the naturalness of heterosexuality and the heteronormativity of gender categorization up to the complete neutralization of gender differences. On the basis of changing standards of femininity and masculinity, relativism of gender differences, scientific discourse concludes that the binary model of gender identification, categorization and institutionalization of the “third sex” has been overcome [22]. We believe that the tendency to remove gender labeling in English-­speaking cultures is complemented by a tendency to restoring it. At the linguistic level, this process is represented in an affixal way: the affix trans– is relative to removal, and the affix cis– means the restoration of gender labeling [23]. Cisgender/transgender becomes a new binary opposition at the basic level of categorization with the dominant element of opposition “transgender”. Thus, the semantic content of the prototypical components of binary opposition categories is changing, binarity remains at the subordinate level of gender categorization (implicitly: lesbiyanki, gomoseksualisty; explicitly: muzhchiny, stremyashchiesya k zhenskomu; zhenshchiny, stremyashchiesya k muzhskomu, etc.). The deliberate rejection of gender normalization presupposes the knowledge of gender differences and is performed in relation to them (agender, panseksualy, interpolovye; ni muzhchiny, ni zhenshchiny, etc.)^[4]. This type of asymmetry is represented and reinforced by the oppositions binary model/non-­binary model, heteronormative language/non-­heteronormative language; therefore, we should talk not of overcoming the binary model of gender categorization in anglophone cultures, but of modernizing it in a globalist context [24; 25].

Conclusions

Conceptual transformations of gender differences in Russian-­speaking culture manifest themselves not in reducing gender to a marker of sexuality and self-­identification, but in expanding gender constructs, re-­evaluating gender asymmetry, understood not as unification of gender differences or assimilation to the male norm, but as an increase in diversity within and among gender individuals. The modernization of gender identity particularly affects the semantic content of the concept WOMAN. This occurs in the direction of restructuring the dominant gender construct of the “working mother” in the Soviet period, which reflected the dual employment of women in the family and in the public life and emphasized her high status mainly in the private sphere.

In the modern, collectively approved view, the gender stereotype as a mechanism of structuring conceptual and thematic fields of gender knowledge, objectified in a contextually interpreted linguistic and speech representation, constructs traditional asymmetries and certain egalitarian tendencies: overcoming discursive invisibility of women; their discrimination on the basis of intellect; the expansion of men’s rights in the family sphere; partial overcoming of aggressive, “toxic” masculinity; expansion of social fulfilment spheres of men and especially of women; the importance of personal fulfilment, moral motivation of behavioral reactions and a successful public image for men and women.

 

 

^{1 The Russian National Corpus. URL: https://ruscorpora.ru/ (accessed: 01.08.2022).}

^{2 Romanova, T.V. (Ed.) (2022). Project dictionary-­reference book of cognitive terms. Nizhny Novgorod: DECOM. P. 176. (In Russ.).}

^{3 Hereinafter, the writers’ spelling is preserved.}

^{4 Königer, S. (2017, November 30). How did the German politician puzzle the parliament? Arguments and facts. URL: https://aif.ru/politics/opinion/chem_nemeckiy_deputat_ozadachil_parlament (accessed: 10.10.2023).}

About the authors

Tatiana V. Romanova

HSE University

Author for correspondence.
Email: tvromanova@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1833-2711
SPIN-code: 6424-1929
Scopus Author ID: 56556988800
ResearcherId: L-6068-2015

Dr.Sc. (Philology), Professor, Leading Researcher of Fundamental and Applied Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities

25/12 Bolshaya Pecherskaya street, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation, 603155

Maria Yu. Tovkes

HSE University

Email: tovkes.m@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4714-1287
SPIN-code: 9461-4655
ResearcherId: AAL-3548-2020

PhD in Philology, External Lecturer, Department of Fundamental and Applied Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities

25/12 Bolshaya Pecherskaya street, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation, 603155

References

Supplementary files