The gender-neutral pronoun hen has been added to the Swedish language with the aim to reduce sexism in the language and make language more inclusive. An objection against the implementation of the word is that the word would be cumbersome to read and would take more cognitive capacity to process. The present study examined if that concern is warranted. 209 participants self-paced read five texts with three pronouns each. Participants were randomly distributed to conditions containing only hen, he/she, she, or he as pronouns. No difference was found between reading speed in the condition containing hen as a pronoun in comparison with the conditions using han, hon or han/hon. No overall difference in memory recall was found either. However, sexism was found to be a moderator for memory recall when reading a text including hen, leading to lower memory recall for individuals scoring high on modern sexism.

The effect of gender-neutral language in a survey designed to measure unwanted sexual experiences was examined. Methodological issues pertaining to survey design and significant variability in prevalence estimates of sexual violence demonstrate that further refinement of self-report instruments is necessary. As a variety of macrolevel forces influence individual behavior, the current study contends that coercive tactics used to obtain sex in mixed-gender interactions are normalized by the traditional heterosex script and conveyed through gender-specific language. Reference to respondents’ sexual partners in gender-neutral, as opposed to gender-specific terms, was hypothesized to result in more disclosure of sexually coercive victimization and perpetration experiences. Logistic regression analyses revealed no statistically significant differences in disclosure between language conditions. Null findings are interpreted with reference to the broader gender-neutral language literature and implications for future research are suggested.

I denna uppsats undersöks om, och i så fall hur, man översätter könsneutralt på Europaparlamentet. Man kan översätta könsneutralt genom att till exempel skriva han eller hon, använda passiv eller plural. För att kunna undersöka hur man översätter könsneutralt, redogörs för vad genus och könsneutralt språk är, vilken roll genus spelar för denna typ av översättning, vilka olika genusaspekter som är viktiga för tyska och svenska, och terminologiska aspekter. Den teoretiska utgångspunkten bygger på feministisk lingvistisk och översättningsteoretisk litteratur som Simon, Thüne och Leonardi, Jobin och von Flotow. Material och metod baseras på interna dokument som Europaparlamentet gett ut. Jag har använt mig av Europaparlamentets arbetsordning som material och två rekommendationshäften om könsneutralt språk i Europaparlamentet som utgångspunkt. Därutöver gjorde jag intervjuer med två tyska och två svenska översättare på Europaparlamentet i Luxemburg. Resultaten visar att alla rekommendationer om könsneutralt språk faktiskt inte används, utan att man har valt olika strategier på tyska och svenska. I båda språken används passiv form och plural, medan användningen av pronomen skiljer sig mycket mellan de båda språken. Vidare ansågs omskrivning med substantivering som mycket tveksam och förekom inte heller i arbetsordningsanalysen. Det som undersöktes var adjektivböjningen och användningen av pronomen vad gäller funktionsbeteckningar i Europaparlamentets arbetsordning. Det visade sig vara lättare att översätta könsneutralt på svenska än på tyska. Han eller hon används inte på tyska, inte heller den så kallade Binnen-I med vilkens hjälp man kan markera båda könen på tyska. Sammanfattningsvis kan man säga att översättarna, med hjälp av rekommendationerna i de ovan nämnda häftena och sin egen språkkänsla försöker att formulera sina översättningar könsneutralt, och att könsneutralt språk i stort sett också återspeglas i Europaparlamentets arbetsordning. / This thesis is an empirical study on gender neutral translation at the European Parliament. In order to translate gender neutraly, the translator can write he or she, use passive-constructions or plural. In order to be able to analyze how a translator translates gender neutraly, I will first present how gender and gender neutral language is defined, how gender affects translation, which aspects are of importance for Swedish and German, as well as terminological aspects. The theoretical background is based on feminist linguistic and translation theory such as Simon, Thüne and Leonardi, Jobin and von Flotow. The research material and method are based on internal documents of the European Parliament, videlicet the Rules of Procedure and a broschure on gender neutral language. In addition, I interviewed translators of the European Parliament in Luxembourg, two of them being German and two of them being Swedish. It can be said that not all of the given recommendations for gender neutral language are used and that the usage differs in German and Swedish. Recommendations such as passive-constructions and plural are applied in both languages, while nominalization was considered to be questionable. Furthermore, the usage of functions, pronouns and adjectives in the Rules of Procedure was analyzed. In Swedish translations, the use of he and she is quite common, while it is not recommended for German, nor is the usage of Binnen-I for that matter. Summing up, it can be said that it is easier to translate and write gender neutraly in Swedish as in German and that all translators pay attention to the given recommendations and translate as gender neutral as possible, which is also reflected in the translation of the Rules of Procedure.

<p>Abstract</p><p>In English usages such as mankind and job titles ending in -man (fireman, chairman) when referring to people in general are considered sexist. Sexist language makes a distinction between women and men and it can exclude, trivialize or diminish women. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to study the sexist or non-sexist use of occupational terms in The San Diego Union Tribune and The Daily Aztec. The questions that were investigated were how the newspapers used affixed terms ending in –man and -woman, if they added female/woman/lady to refer to women, but also how they referred to traditional female professions (nurse, midwife). The study was conducted by hand by using a textual analysis, which was both qualitative and quantitative in nature. The study showed that the newspapers primarily use non-sexist occupational terms and avoid using female markings, even when reference is being made to women who have traditional male professions. The sexist usage that was most common was the affixed terms ending in –man and –woman. One conclusion that could be drawn was that The San Diego Union Tribune follows The Associated Press Stylebook’s policy about the usage of coined words such as chairperson and spokesperson.</p>

Abstract In English usages such as mankind and job titles ending in -man (fireman, chairman) when referring to people in general are considered sexist. Sexist language makes a distinction between women and men and it can exclude, trivialize or diminish women. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to study the sexist or non-sexist use of occupational terms in The San Diego Union Tribune and The Daily Aztec. The questions that were investigated were how the newspapers used affixed terms ending in –man and -woman, if they added female/woman/lady to refer to women, but also how they referred to traditional female professions (nurse, midwife). The study was conducted by hand by using a textual analysis, which was both qualitative and quantitative in nature. The study showed that the newspapers primarily use non-sexist occupational terms and avoid using female markings, even when reference is being made to women who have traditional male professions. The sexist usage that was most common was the affixed terms ending in –man and –woman. One conclusion that could be drawn was that The San Diego Union Tribune follows The Associated Press Stylebook’s policy about the usage of coined words such as chairperson and spokesperson.

Am 01.04.2013 ist in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland eine neue Straßenverkehrsordnung (StVO) in Kraft getreten, die Frauen gleichermaßen ansprechen soll wie Männer. Die vorliegende Arbeit stellt die Frage, inwieweit die sprachliche Gleichbehandlung der Geschlechter in der StVO tatsächlich umgesetzt werden konnte. Auf Grundlage einer Online-Befragung wird zudem die öffentliche Einstellung zu den in der StVO primär verwendeten Formen genderneutraler Sprache untersucht.

This paper focuses on the use of English epicene pronouns in discourse which most individuals are exposed to on an everyday basis. Gender-based linguistic reforms have been implemented since the beginning of the 1970s, to achieve a more non-sexist language. In the present study Corpus linguistics has been applied to investigate the use of personal pronoun he and the personal pronoun singular they in relationship with these linguistic reforms. The present study uses data from both written and spoken English between the 1930s and 2019. The data is collected from corpora COHA and COCA to diachronically study patterns of the use of generic he and singular they when used as anaphoric reference to an antecedent of unknown gender. To narrow the searches in corpora, indefinite compound pronouns are used in collocation with the epicene pronouns as linguistic features. Systematic sampling and mapping of the data lay the ground for the analysis that determines if patterns in the language can be related to the gender-based linguistic reforms. The evidence from the data collected for the present study shows that there are changes in use of male biased pronouns before and after the gender-based linguistic reforms. From the data conducted for the present study the evidence shows trends in the figures that the neutralization strategy can be related to the changes, to some extent. The diachronic development is discussed in connection with reforms, guidelines and previous conducted studies in more detail and suggestion on further studies are presented.

I den stora hen-debatten under 2012 saknades barnens perspektiv. Syftet med denna uppsats är att belysa det genom att ta reda på vilka pronomen förskolebarn använder i sitt samtalande om barnboken Kivi och monsterhund som endast innehåller könsneutrala pronomen. Materialinsamlingen gjordes genom barnintervjuer i fokusgrupper där fyra- och femåriga förskolebarn fick samtala om boken och som analyseringsmetod har en mestadels kvantitativ metod använts för att ta reda på pronomenens frekvens. Resultaten visar att barnen inte reagerade nämnvärt på hen och använde det inte heller själva. Kivi omnämndes av barnen som han medan monsterhunden refererades till som den eller han.  Hypotesen att barnen skulle tillskriva Kivi sitt eget kön visade sig inte stämma då skillnaderna i pronomenanvändning pojkar och flickor emellan var minimala. Resultaten kan bero på att mannen ses som norm och kvinnor som ”det Andra” (de Beauvoir 2002) samt att barnlitteraturen domineras av pojkar. Resultaten överensstämmer också med tidigare forskning av Merrit &amp; Kok (1995) som visar att karaktärer med könsneutrala namn tenderar att tillskrivas manligt kön. / In the great debate over the gender-neutral pronoun hen in 2012, the perspective of the children was missing. The aim of this bachelor essay is to shed light on that perspective by investigating which pronouns pre-school children use in conversation about the children’s book Kivi och monsterhund which contains only gender-neutral pronouns. The material was obtained through children’s interviews in focus groups where four- and five-year-old pre-school children talked about the book and the material was analyzed by using a mostly quantitative method to find out the frequency of the used pronouns. The results show that the children scarcely reacted to hen nor did they use it themselves. Kivi was referred to by the children as he while monsterhunden (the monster dog) was referred to as it or he. The hypothesis that the children would ascribe Kivi their own gender proved to be incorrect as the differences in use of pronouns between boys and girls were minimal. The results may be an effect of the man being viewed as the norm and women as “the Other” (de Beauvoir 2002) and the dominance of boys in children’s literature. The results also correlate to previous research by Merrit &amp; Kok (1995) that show that characters with gender-neutral names tend to be ascribed male gender.

Language and culture are deeply intertwined. Language reflects and influences the attitudes, perceptions and behaviors of its users. Therefore, the use of non-sexist language can contribute to achieving gender equality in society. This study focuses on the perceptions of a group of Mexican teenagers towards inclusive language. In particular, their acceptance degree towards various gender morphemes are studied and compared to the generic use of the masculine gender. The results of the survey show a clear preference for the alternatives that are easy to pronounce, so called, normative gender morphemes, including the generic use of the masculine compared to new, non-normative gender morphemes that are inclusive but difficult to pronounce. Women prefer the splitting strategy (“desdoblamiento”) to a larger degree than men do. Men have a more conservative posture and prefer the generic use of the masculine and reject non-normative gender morphemes. The differences among informants of different socioeconomic levels are smaller. Still, it seems that informants of a higher socioeconomic level have a more conservative attitude towards inclusive language than informants of a lower socioeconomic level.

Användningen av en istället för man som nominativform för det svenska generiska pronomenet har varit en av den feministiska språkpolitikens stora frågor under det senaste decenniet. Den här studien har undersökt hur användningen faktiskt ser ut på nätet, både genom en diakron delstudie på bloggar under perioden 1998-2017 och genom en synkron jämförelse mellan olika texttyper. Därtill har studien undersökt ifall andelen nominativt en ökar i relation till dess motsvarighet man. Resultatet av dessa undersökningar är att användningen ökar, både över tid och i andelar, men att det går långsamt och att användningen av man fortfarande uppgår till omkring 99% av alla förekomster av det generiska pronomenet i subjektsposition. Olika argument har föreslagits av olika forksare angående hur nominativt en faktiskt kan användas, med begränsningar till vissa kontexter eller till vissa referenter. Resultaten från den sista delstudien i den här uppsatsen visar att en kan användas i samma kontexter och med samma referenter som man. Sedan diskuteras resultaten i relation till tidigare studier vad det gäller hur en och man kan användas.