The two terms Sex and Gender have always been used with a very distinct meaning. Sex refers to biological category, male and female. Gender, on the other hand, is usually thought of as the learned behavior and culture associated with being male or female. Language that provides a filter to cultural and social reality of the society determines how speaker perceives the world around and the language one speaks helps to build this world view.
The simplest definition of gender is that ‘it is a social construction organized around biological sex. Individuals are born male or female, they acquire gender identity, that is what it means o be male or female.’ Gender is society’s interpretation of maleness or femaleness, that society will determine what should be male or female roles. Children, growing up are encouraged to adopt these characteristics and fulfill their roles. Gender is the package of expectations which society associates with sex. (Susan Backingham, 2000)
During my MA days, made an attempt to explore gender inequalities and sexism in the Axomiya language. I made a questionnaire, distributed it to some native speakers, mixed male and female and get some statistics. I tried to look into the categorization of classifiers in Axomiya which has a wider application in the language and mandatory with each noun, whether the ideal of masculinity is communicated through the use of the classifiers. I picked up some words to see if the feminine marker classifier is added to the bases like philosopher, scientist, managing director etc. which are always being used as prototypes for masculinity. I also included in the questionnaire the stereotype model, which is the Metonymic model, in which the term ‘mother’ have been subcategorized defining social expectations. Some culturally determined categories of profession which is being marked associated with either of the sexes were also looked into. What could be the reason that for some categories we do not have female counterparts or even though we have, that is by feminizing the word denoting masculinity. Is it because speakers of the language are inherently sexist? In spite of the language providing choice, people stick to only one use. Or the language itself restricts use even if any speaker wishes to be non sexist?
Axomiya classifier for masculine is [jon], for feminine its [joni] and gender neutral classifier is [goraki] (equivalent to Hindi [mahoday & mahodaya]). Words that were considered as model words are philosopher, scientist, commentator, managing director, police inspector, mechanic, weaver, boatman, reaper, mahut, mid wife, barber, founding father, rape victim, pilot, dean, servant, dancer, actor, dog, cat. The idea was to see which classifier speakers use with these nouns. Since Axomiya does not have grammatical gender agreement (like Hindi), use of classifiers is the only means to know whether the noun is a male or female.
Sample Questionnaire:
Translate the following sentences:
The great philosopher died at an early age.
The research scientist got the noble prize.
The commentator has not arrived yet.
The new managing director is quite efficient.
The newly appointed police inspector took charge yesterday.
The young mechanic did a good job.
The weaver is from Suwalkusi.
The boatman has gone to that side of the river.
The reaper has finished the work.
The mahut fell down from the elephant’s back.
The midwife of this village is reputed.
The barber never works on Tuesday.
The lecture was delivered by the founding father of linguistics
The pilot caused the accident.
The rape victim approached the people welfare committee.
I met the deam yesterday.
The servant comes at 9 o’ clock in the morning.
The dog named Tomy is the collective farm watch dog.
I am sick of this cat! _____ drank up the milk. (Use a pronoun)
As a native speaker of Axomiya, how do you find the following constructions --- Odd, Funny, Normal, Impossible?
grihini maatree --- ghoruaa pitree (house working mother --- house working father)
karmarata maatree ---- karmarata pitree (working mother ---- working father)
paloniya maatree ---- paloniya pitree (adopting mother --- adopting father)
a-bibaahito maatree ---- a-bibaahito pitree (unwed mother ---- unwed father)
maahi mmak --- xotiya baapek (step mother ---- step father)
The observation displays the exclusive preoccupation with gender differences in Axomiya society. The notion of sexism is so inherent in people’s mind that their selection and creation of images always results in sex stereotypes and attitudes held in respect of them, constitute the social representations of man and woman as distinct groups, the formula for masculinity and femininity. Some professions are absolutely dominated by male like barber, mechanic, boatman etc. But the striking thing is the use of male classifiers for those professions, where women are also equally engaged, still speakers conceive of male sex only when asked. For example, professions like managing director, pilot, dean, scientist etc. There is no explanation for why woman can not constitute the prototype for ‘Mahut’ (all respondents marked masculine classifier for it)? In fact, Assam takes pride in Mrs. Parvati Baruah, the first female mahut of India and have been recognized all over the world.
Generally in Axomiya, feminine gender is formed by adding the suffix (Shtree Pratyaya) [-i] or [-a] after nouns indicating male, like,
gaayak (singer) ---- gaayikaa
But there is no rule for forming feminine for words like philosopher [daarxonik], scientist [boigyanik] etc. At best, the word [mohila] can be prefixed to these words to feminize them. But the classifier used with these words, in most cases, is masculine. Another interesting point is the use of classifier for the word ‘rape victim’. By default, it is marked as feminine, although no dictionary defines the meaning of the word ‘rape’ as ‘sexual harassment of woman by man’. Conversely, the Axomiya word for ‘rapist’ is [balaatkari] and as most of the feminie words are formed by adding either [-i] or [-a], [balaatkari], though ends with [i] is not perceived as female. It is the social perception of the speakers that women are perceived as objects of such kind of harassments.
Representation of man and woman as distinct categories within the society is also influenced by cultural aspects. In every village of Assam, weaving is the most common aspect of life and both man and woman are equally engaged in it. But the prototype model of a weaver is always feminine. The most frequently words used for weaver is [xipini] or [buwoni], both ending in [i] and always marked by female classifier. Another such term is reaper [daawoni]. There is no morphological affix to make these words masculine. So it is not always true that it’s the speakers of the language who are sexist. Sometimes, language too does not provide grounds for delimiting the use of sexist terms. Even some profession like ‘mid wife’ [dhaai] which are not in use now, still speakers associate it with females.
Semantic of Gender:
Trying to explore the use of gender specific classifiers and the pronouns like ‘he’ and ‘she’, not only for human beings, but also for animals and things. The use pronoun ‘he’ for dog and ‘she’ for cat, are based on sexual simile. Andrew Pawley (1995), what he calls an ‘animated style’ refers to the use of ‘he’ for portable goods to express an attitude of detachment, objectivity and indifference. Humanizing attitude to animals like dog (using masculine pronoun), reflects the view of man as brave, gallant, loyal etc. And use of ‘she‘ for cat reflects the view that woman are kept as prized possession as cats are kept as pets or for catching mice.
Metonymic Model for Mother:
The socio cultural orientation in the manipulation of gender can be looked into through the effect of Metonymy, a situation as Roach (1978) stated – “the same subcategory or member or sub model is used to comprehend the category as a whole”. The clustering of Mother based on social expectation finally shows that one of them (house mother) has a socially recognized stature standing for the whole. A mother is one who gives birth to a child, nurtures and raises the child and in any case a mother who stays in the house is better than any subcategory of Mother like working mother, adopting mother, unwed mother etc. Even word like unwed mother [abibaahito maatri] is not socially acceptable (but the word exists in the language). In contrast to this, in case of the concept of Father, we do not have such categories (Is there any need for word like working father?!). In the cognitive model, father is supposed to be working. Term like unwed father does not even exist in the language. Since there is no difference between house father and working father, no question arises about the degree of attention and care given to the children by the father.
A language is called Sexist if it embodies, affirms or reinforces discrimination against woman. Language, linked with the manipulation of gender, usually have to do with the speakers’ attitude to a person rather than with any inherent feature. They themselves are sexist, sticking to some prejudices. Sometimes language itself restricts non sexist use due to absence of rules in the language.
