Traditional prescriptive grammar for English states that the epicene or gender neutral pronoun for third person singular use is he. Research into speaker perceptions has clearly demonstrated that he is not perceived as neutral. Research has also shown traditionally proscribed epicene pronouns such as he or she and singular they to be commonly used, despite the long-standing proscriptions against them. The author examines the endurance of such proscribed options through the lens of markedness theory, considering the impact of cultural values on speakers' epicene pronoun choices. Gender in language is also considered, as well as Kuryłowicz‘s 4th Law of Analogy as a means for understanding patterns of language change. Second person pronoun change is considered as a model for understanding third person pronoun changes currently underway in Modern American English. The author conducts and reports on a corpus study designed to assess the current usage of three epicene pronouns in Modern American English, namely he or she and its variant she or he; one; and singular they. The results of the study are considered in terms of medium, spoken or written, and register, colloquial, standard, or formal. The study suggests that they is generally the preferred epicene pronoun, particularly in spoken language, but that one is the preferred epicene pronoun for formal writing.

As people become aware that society treats women unfairly, they also perceive related shortcomings in the way that Modern English references women. For example, many have objected to the so-called generic he, the third-person masculine pronoun employed to refer to a person of unknown gender, and provided several alternatives, few of which have been widely adopted. Nonetheless, change is evident in the case of they becoming an increasingly common solution to refer to a person of unidentified gender. The intentional reform of the Modern English language, both in the past and present, has been a result of people's reactions to what is often perceived as a bias or a deficiency with what is possible to say given the words at their disposal. The rhetorical significance of reform is profound, and scholars continually broach the subject from the perspective of different disciplines. Explored here are the approaches of three of those fields, feminism, linguistics, and rhetoric; how each reacts to and even influences reform is an important part of the study. What is evident is that, regardless of the particular field, reform remains a force of change, even while it may not be broadly recognized. Further, traditional grammatical rules provide an insufficient means for tackling inequalities in Modern English, and are in part responsible for such imbalance. As such, writers must be aware of the present expectations of their audience and the situation of particular words.

In English the personal pronouns are morphologically marked for grammatical number, whilst the third-person singular pronouns are also obligatorily marked for gender. As a result, the use of any singular animate antecedent coindexed with a third-person pronoun forces a choice between he and she, whether or not the biological sex of the intended referent is known. This forced choice of gender, and the corresponding lack of a gender-neutral third-person singular pronoun where gender is not formally marked, is the primary focus of this thesis. I compare and contrast the use of the two main candidates for epicene status, singular they and generic he, which are found consistently opposed in the wider literature. Using corpus-based methods I analyse current epicene usage in written British English, and investigate which epicene pronouns are given to language-acquiring children in their L1 input. I also consider current prescriptions on epicene usage in grammar texts published post-2000 and investigate whether there is any evidence that language-external factors impact upon epicene choice. The synthesis of my findings with the wider literature on epicene pronouns leads me to the conclusion that, despite the restrictions imposed on the written pronoun paradigm evident in grammatical prescriptivism, singular they is the epicene pronoun of British English.

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.

A corpus of terms for human beings collected from 18th century novels is studied from a broad sociolinguistic perspective. A summary of recent linguistic theories and a survey of 18th century culture and society are provided as background. The basic assumption is that the meaning of words is dependent on human beings and their society and that shifts in meaning are linked to changes in attitudes, culture and social structure. Terms used for men and women therefore mirror the concepts of 'male' and 'female' in a society. Gender differences found in various semantic fields are presented and discussed. Prototypes for certain terms are suggested by means of frame analysis. Sense developments are traced and related to societal changes. Differences in male and female usage are discussed. The findings are analyzed in terms of the following contrasts within the concepts of 'male' and 'female': spirit/matter; power/dependency; active/passive; varied/limited. / digitalisering@umu

Cette thèse porte sur les particularités de la reprise anaphorique des pronoms indéfinis et des noms épicènes qui ont pour référents des individus humains indéfinis. Nous allons essayer de distinguer les différents facteurs (morphosyntaxiques, sémantiques et pragmatiques), qui influent sur le choix du pronom anaphorique. Ce choix ne sera pas toujours objectif. Il ne sera pas obligatoirement conforme aux règles d’accord syntaxique, puisqu’il dépendra de la décision de l’énonciateur concernant la pertinence du sexe ou du nombre d’individus faisant l’objet du discours. Ainsi, il est prouvé que le pronom personnel de la troisième personne du pluriel they est le meilleur candidat que ce soit dans les contextes où l’énonciateur et ses co-énonciateurs ignorent le sexe et/ou le nombre des personnes évoquées, dans les contextes génériques ou bien dans les contextes où l’énonciateur ne souhaite pas être précis sur l’identité de la personne dont il ou elle parle. Les pronoms personnels de la troisième personne du singulier he / she ne sont pas préférés dans ces contextes puisqu’ils rendent le référent plus défini qu’il l’est dans le discours en ajoutant des propriétés telles que le sexe et le nombre. Le choix que l’on fait pour se référer ou se coréférer sous-entend la prise d’un point de vue vis-à-vis des référents ou vis-à-vis des interlocuteurs. L’étude de plusieurs corpus, écrits comme oraux (BNC, COCA, SOAP, CHILDES, le corpus littéraire, le corpus de presse et d’émissions de télévision), nous a dévoilé que les locuteurs anglophones savent en quelque sorte manipuler le système pronominal conventionnel afin de rendre explicite ou de mettre en avant certains éléments ou bien d’en sous-spécifier ou d’en taire d’autres. / This dissertation investigates the peculiarities of pronominal reference to indefinite pronouns and epicene nouns that refer to indefinite human beings. It brings to light morphosyntactic, semantic and pragmatic factors which influence the choice of the anaphoric pronoun. This choice is not always objective, and does not necessarily match the rules of syntactic agreement. It tends to depend on the speaker’s decisions about the relevance of the sex and/or the number of individuals that are the topic of discussion. Thus, the third person plural pronoun they proves to be the best candidate when the referent’s sex and/or number is unknown by both the speaker and the hearer, as well as in generic contexts or when the speaker wishes to remain vague about the identity of the person he or she is referring to. The third person singular pronouns he / she do not fit in these contexts, since they render the referent more definite than it actually is in the discourse by adding such properties as sex and number. The choices that we make when referring or coreferring reveal our attitudes towards either referents or addressees. The study of both written and oral corpora (BNC, COCA, SOAP, CHILDES, literary, press and talk show corpora) reveals how English speakers are able to manipulate the conventional pronominal system so as to render explicit or highlight certain attributes and to underspecify others.

No description available.

This dissertation attempts to fill a void in early modern English drama studies by offering an in-depth, cross-gendered comparative study emphasizing representations of women’s discursive agency. Such an examination contributes to the continuing critical discussion regarding the nature and extent of women’s potential agency as speakers and writers in the period and also to recent attempts to integrate the few surviving dramas by women into the larger, male-dominated dramatic tradition. Because statements about the nature of women’s speech in the period were overwhelmingly male, I begin by establishing the richness and variety of women’s attitudes toward marriage and toward their speech relative to marriage through an examination of their first-person writings. A reassessment of the dominant paradigms of the shrew and the silent woman as presented in male-authored popular drama—including The Taming of the Shrew and Epicene—follows. Although these stereotypes are not without ambiguity, they nevertheless considerably flatten the contours of the historical patterns discernable in women’s lifewriting. As a result, female spectators may have experienced greater cognitive dissonance in reaction to the portrayals of women by boy actors. In spite of this, however, they may have borrowed freely from the occasional glimpses of newly emergent views of women readily available in the theater for their own everyday performances, as I argue in a discussion of The Shoemaker’s Holiday and The Roaring Girl. Close, cross-gendered comparison of two sets of similarly-themed plays follows: The Duchess of Malfi and The Tragedy of Mariam, and A Midsummer Night’s Dream and Love’s Victory. Here my examination reveals that the female writers’ critique of prevailing gender norms is more thorough than the male writers’ and that the emphasis on female characters’ material bodies, particularly their voices, registers the female dramatists’ dissatisfaction with the disfiguring representations of women on the maledominated professional stage. I end with a discussion of several plays by women—The Concealed Fancies, The Convent of Pleasure, and Bell in Campo—to illustrate the various revisions of marriage offered by each through their emphasis on gendered performance and, further, to suggest the importance of the woman writer’s contribution to the continuing dialectic about the nature of women and their speech.