linguistic sexism in current upper secondary school english language textbooks tiếng anh 10, tiếng anh 11 and tiếng anh 12 = sự kì thị giới tính về ngôn ngữ trong sách giáo khoa tiếng anh trung học phổ thông

VIETNAM
N
N
A
A
T
T
I
I
O
O
N
N
A
A
L
L


U
U
N
N
I
I
V
V
E
E
R

R
S
S
I
I
T
T
Y
Y
,
,


H
H
A
A
N
N
O
O
I
I


U
U
N
N
I

I
V
V
E
E
R
R
S
S
I
I
T
T
Y
Y


O
O
F
F


L
L
A
A
N
N
G

G
U
U
A
A
G
G
E
E
S
S


A
A
N
N
D
D


I
I
N
N
T
T
E
E
R

R
N
N
A
A
T
T
I
I
O
O
N
N
A
A
L
L


S
S
T
T
U
U
D
D
I
I
E

E
S
S


F
F
A
A
C
C
U
U
L
L
T
T
Y
Y


O
O
F
F


P
P
O

O
S
S
T
T
-
-
G
G
R
R
A
A
D
D
U
U
A
A
T
T
E
E


S
S
T
T
U

U
D
D
I
I
E
E
S
S








N
N
G
G
U
U
Y
Y
Ễ
Ễ
N
N

D
D
O
O
Ã
Ã
N
N


C
C
Ả
Ả
N
N
H
H







LINGUISTIC SEXISM
IN CURRENT UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL
ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEXTBOOKS:
TIẾNG ANH 10, TIẾNG ANH 11 AND TIẾNG ANH 12

Sự kì thị giới tính về ngôn ngữ trong sách giáo khoa tiếng Anh trung học phổ
thông hiện hành: Tiếng Anh 10, Tiếng Anh 11 và Tiếng Anh 12


M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS


F
F
i
i
e
e
l
l
d
d
:
:






E
E
n
n

g
g
l
l
i
i
s
s
h
h


L
L
i
i
n
n
g
g
u
u
i
i
s
s
t
t
i
i

c
c
s
s


C
C
o
o
d
d
e
e
:
:






6
6
0
0


2
2

2
2


0
0
2
2


0
0
1
1









HANOI, 2014

VIETNAM
N
N
A
A

T
T
I
I
O
O
N
N
A
A
L
L


U
U
N
N
I
I
V
V
E
E
R
R
S
S
I
I

T
T
Y
Y
,
,


H
H
A
A
N
N
O
O
I
I


U
U
N
N
I
I
V
V
E
E

R
R
S
S
I
I
T
T
Y
Y


O
O
F
F


L
L
A
A
N
N
G
G
U
U
A
A

G
G
E
E
S
S


A
A
N
N
D
D


I
I
N
N
T
T
E
E
R
R
N
N
A
A

T
T
I
I
O
O
N
N
A
A
L
L


S
S
T
T
U
U
D
D
I
I
E
E
S
S

F
F
A
A
C
C
U
U
L
L
T
T
Y
Y


O
O
F
F


P
P
O
O
S
S
T
T

-
-
G
G
R
R
A
A
D
D
U
U
A
A
T
T
E
E


S
S
T
T
U
U
D
D
I
I

E
E
S
S








N
N
G
G
U
U
Y
Y
Ễ
Ễ
N
N


D
D
O
O

Ã
Ã
N
N


C
C
Ả
Ả
N
N
H
H







LINGUISTIC SEXISM
IN CURRENT UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL
ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEXTBOOKS:
TIẾNG ANH 10, TIẾNG ANH 11 AND TIẾNG ANH 12

Sự kì thị giới tính về ngôn ngữ trong sách giáo khoa tiếng Anh trung học phổ
thông hiện hành: Tiếng Anh 10, Tiếng Anh 11 và Tiếng Anh 12

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS


F
F
i
i
e
e
l
l
d
d
:
:






E
E
n
n
g
g
l
l
i

i
s
s
h
h


L
L
i
i
n
n
g
g
u
u
i
i
s
s
t
t
i
i
c
c
s
s

C
C
o
o
d
d
e
e
:
:






6
6
0
0


2
2
2
2


0

0
2
2


0
0
1
1


S
S
u
u
p
p
e
e
r
r
v
v
i
i
s
s
o
o
r

r
:
:

Assoc. Prof. Dr.
V
V
õ
õ


Đ
Đ
ạ
ạ
i
i


Q
Q
u
u
a
a
n
n
g
g

HANOI, 2014

i
DECLARATION

Student Number: 11045192
I declare that Linguistic Sexism in Current Upper Secondary School English
Language Textbooks: Tiếng Anh 10, Tiếng Anh 11 and Tiếng Anh 12 is my own
work and that all the sources that I have used or quoted have been indicated and
acknowledged by means of complete references.
Hanoi – 6/2014


Nguyễn Doãn Cảnh

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish, first of all, to express my deepest gratitude to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Vo Dai
Quang, my supervisor, who has enthusiastically and generously given me
invaluable assistance and guidance during the process of carrying out the thesis.
The success of my study would have been almost impossible without his support
and encouragement.
My profound thanks are also to all other lecturers for their useful lectures and
materials given during my M.A. course at the Postgraduate Studies Department of
College of Foreign Languages, Vietnam National University, Hanoi, which have
laid the foundation for this research paper.
My special thanks are due to all my colleagues and students at Dong Thanh Upper
Secondary School, Quang Ninh, where I am teaching English now. Their ideas,
opinions and questions have inspired me to undertake this study.
Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my loving wife and son, whose support
and encouragement have seen me through the writing of this thesis.










iii
ABSTRACT
It has been proved that sexism exists in language as well as in language textbooks.

Many studies on linguistic sexism in English as a foreign language (EFL)/ English
as a second language (ESL) textbooks have been internationally published.
However, very few in-depth studies on this topic have been carried out in Vietnam.
Diep (2002) has been an exception but he has just investigated sexism in language
in general so linguistic sexism in particular materials such as school English
textbooks has been still left blank.
This study on linguistic sexism in current Vietnamese upper secondary school
English language textbooks : Tiếng Anh 10, Tiếng Anh 11 and Tiếng Anh 12 was
aimed at finding out how often linguistic sexism occurs in these textbooks and
uncovering the hidden messages conveyed through this linguistic sexism. The study
used content analysis methods to discover the frequencies of occurrences of each
category of linguistic sexism and the content of the messages transmitted via
linguistic sexism in the English textbooks.
The results of the study showed that linguistic sexism occurs rather often in the
three English textbooks and through it the messages of women’s low status are
conveyed. This suggests that more attention should be paid on linguistic sexism so
that it could be avoided in the textbooks because learners may suffer from negative
effects if sexism or gender biases are present in their texts (Mineshima, 2008).







iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
EFL: English as a foreign language
ESL: English as a second language
MOET: Ministry of Education and Training

NCTE: National Council of Teachers of English


LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Linguistic Sexism in Morphology by Book
Table 2. Linguistic Sexism in Semantics by Book
Table 3. Linguistic Sexism in Syntax (Generic Pronoun Use) by Book
Table 4. Linguistic Sexism in Syntax (Word Order Use) by Book
Table 5. Linguistic Sexism by Book and Category









v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ii
ABSTRACT
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
vii

LIST OF TABLES
vii
Part A: INTRODUCTION
1

1. Rationale to the research
1

2. Aim and objectives of the research
2

3. Research questions
3

4. Scope of the research
3

5. Significance of the research
3


5.1. Theoretical significance
3


5.2. Practical significance
4

6. Structural organization of the thesis
4

Part B: DEVELOPMENT
5
Chapter 1: Literature Review
5

1.1. Review of previous studies related to the research area of the thesis
5


1.1.1. Studies of sexism in language in the world
5


1.1.2. Studies of sexism in language in Vietnam
8

1.2. Review of theoretical background
10


1.2.1. Sexism
10


1.2.2. Linguistic Sexism
10


1.2.3. Linguistic Sexism in English
11

vi



1.2.3.1. Linguistic Sexism in Morphology
12



1.2.3.2. Linguistic Sexism in Semantics
13



1.2.3.3. Linguistic Sexism in Syntax
16



1.2.3.4. Linguistic Sexism in Pragmatics
17


1.2.4. Influences of Language Textbooks and Sexism in Language
Textbooks
18

1.3. Summary
19

Chapter 2: Research Methodology
20

2.1. Research type
20

2.2. Research setting
20

2.3. Material selection
21

2.4. Methods of the research
21

2.5. Analytical framework of the study
23

2.6. Data collection procedure
23

2.7. Data analysis procedure
24

2.8. Summary
24
Chapter 3: Findings and Discussion
25

3.1. Findings

25


3.1.1. Findings related to research question 1
25



3.1.1.1. Linguistic Sexism in Morphology
25



3.1.1.2. Linguistic Sexism in Semantics
26



3.1.1.3. Linguistic Sexism in Syntax
27


3.1.2. Findings related to research question 2
30



3.1.2.1. Women are exclusive and men are inclusive
30

3.1.2.2. Men are superior and women are secondary
32

vii



3.1.2.3. Women are dependent and men are independent
33

3.2. Discussion of the findings
34

3.3. Pedagogical implications
37

3.4. Summary
38
Part C: CONCLUSION
39

1. Recapitulation
39

2. Conclusions
39

3. Limitations of the research

41

4. Suggestions for future research
41
REFERENCES
42
APPENDICES
I

Sheet 1. Distribution of Linguistic Sexism in Tiếng Anh 10
I

Sheet 2. Distribution of Linguistic Sexism in Tiếng Anh 11
II

Sheet 3. Distribution of Linguistic Sexism in Tiếng Anh 12
IV



1
Part A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale to the research
Once I taught my 11
th
grade students about Neil Armstrong, a famous American
astronaut, a student asked me: ‘Why must it be MAN, but not WOMAN’ when she
read in the textbook Tiếng Anh 11 Neil Armstrong’s quotation: ‘That’s one small
step for man, one giant leap for mankind’ (p. 174). Though I tried to explain to this
girl that man here in this sentence was not a particular man and that it was used to

refer to all the human beings, she still did not accept. After the lesson, I thought
more about her question and began to agree with her that the sentence was
problematic because the quotation seems to reflect the invisibility of females by
containing the words man and mankind. Neil Armstrong’s use of such words as man
and mankind for all the human beings may make people feel that women are not
present in the achievement. This is a representation of sexism or sex discrimination
in the English language.
It can be easy to find other ways of language use that seem to treat men prior to
women. For example, English users often think of male pronouns automatically
whenever the sex of the person is not known. The pronoun his in the sentence
‘Every student must bring his own book’ is a good example. This is a sexist use of
language, which often suggests an inherent male dominance in many fields of life,
and can reinforce the idea of female inferiority. Although both women and men can
work in various job fields, there is a tendency to associate certain jobs with men or
women. For instance, it is often said ‘A director must do his best for his company’,
but ‘A nurse must treat her patients with kindness.’ Of course, we know that not
every man is a director and not every woman is a nurse. This language use tends to
emphasize the idea that it is not normal for women to be in professional, highly-
paid jobs, and it is not natural for a man to work in such a caring role as a nurse.
Sexism in life is various in forms and different at levels. It is probably most readily
associated with economic issues, such as equal pay for equal work. The role played
by language in maintaining and strengthening sexist values, however, is less widely

2
understood or acknowledged. This is probably because linguistic sexism is much
more deeply rooted and far more subtle than other forms of sexism. The fight for
equality of both women and men in such domains as politics and economy has
worked strongly and successfully but in language it seems to be much weaker and
receive far less attention. All normal people must work and most of them know and
require fair for women and men in labour; all normal people must use language but

few of them are aware of fair for men and women in language.
With regards to sexism in research, it has been discussed for a long time in the
world but in Vietnam up to the present, to the author’s knowledge, the first and only
researcher who has systematically investigated into sexism in language is Diep
(2002). However, he mentioned the issue in language generally and an in-depth
study in a specific kind of databases still remains uncovered. That means the
phenomenon of sexism in teaching and learning materials like Vietnamese English
textbooks has never been studied and still a mystery.
The above-mentioned reasons have urged me to carry out the present research to
find out the status of linguistic sexism in the current upper secondary English
language textbooks in Vietnam and hopefully, this research result can be put into
consideration of forthcoming syllabus design in a short-term future when Ministry
of Education and Training (MOET) has recently set up a plan for the innovation of
a series of school textbooks including the English ones.
2. Aim and objectives of the research
The main aim of the research is to investigate the issue of linguistic sexism in the
current Vietnamese upper secondary English language textbooks: Tiếng Anh
10, Tiếng Anh 11 and Tiếng Anh 12 written by Hoang Van Van et al. and published
by MOET.
The main aim above is specified into specific objectives of the research as follows:
(1) to find out the frequencies of linguistic sexism at word and phrase levels exist in
the current Vietnamese upper secondary English language textbooks: Tiếng Anh

3
10, Tiếng Anh 11 and Tiếng Anh 12 and (2) to clarify the hidden message(s)
conveyed via the linguistic sexism at word and phrase levels in these textbooks.
3. Research questions
The research questions central to my study are as follows.
1) How often does linguistic sexism at word and phrase levels occur in the
current Vietnamese upper secondary school English language textbooks: Tiếng

Anh 10, Tiếng Anh 11 and Tiếng Anh 12 ?
2) What message(s) is/ are conveyed via the occurrence of linguistic sexism at
word and phrase levels in these textbooks?
4. Scope of the research
Sexism can be found in various materials, especially in teaching and learning
materials such as textbooks. In Vietnamese English textbooks, to the author’s
knowledge, there has never been any study of sexism before. However, this study
does not mention sexism in all the Vietnamese English textbooks. Besides, the
study can hardly cover a comprehensive analysis of sexism in these English
textbooks because sexism in textbooks may be portrayed in other aspects such as
images for illustration. Neither does the research deal with sexism at all levels of
word, phrase, sentence and discourse. Therefore, this thesis only focuses on
linguistic sexism at word and phrase levels in texts used in three current upper
secondary school English language textbooks: Tiếng Anh 10, Tiếng Anh
11 and Tiếng Anh 12 by Hoang Van Van et al.
5. Significance of the research
5.1. Theoretical significance
This research focuses on linguistic sexism in specific English teaching materials
with the hope of contributing to existing knowledge on sexism in language. In
Vietnam, from the first research on sexism in language entitled Sự kỳ thị giới tính

4
trong ngôn ngữ qua cứ liệu tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt (Sexism in language through
English and Vietnamese databases) carried out by Diep (2002), no other
Vietnamese researchers have investigated into the issue in specific types of
language materials. The study would be an illustration of sexism in language used
in a particular context: Vietnamese English textbooks.
5.2. Practical significance
Hopefully, this study may urge Vietnamese educators and textbook designers take
linguistic sexism into serious consideration. They will pay more attention to sexism

in language in general and in Vietnamese English language textbooks in particular.
The findings of the study could also be beneficial in the school environment
because it will help to raise awareness of learners and teachers on the issue of
linguistic sexism and they will try to avoid sexist language in their lessons and
language activities as well.
6. Structural organization of the thesis
My thesis is organized as follows. After providing an overview of the research and
its purpose in Introduction Part, Development Part will be presented in three
chapters. Chapter 1 provides the review of literature related to the study. Chapter 2
deals with the methodological choices for the study: sample collection, methods of
data collection, data collection procedures, and analysis procedures. Chapter 3 gives
the findings, discussion with reference to the literature reviewed in Chapter 1 and
pedagogical implications of the study. The conclusion is presented in Conclusion
Part, which summarises the study, gives some conclusion points to the study,
discusses the limitations of the study and supplies suggestions for further research.
The next part will first review the literature on sexism in language, then present
methodology of the research, and finally deal with the findings and discussion of
the study.


5
Part B: DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 1: Literature Review
This chapter will take an in-depth look at the previous studies on sexism in the
world as well as in Vietnam. It will also provide the theoretical background of the
research issue.
1.1. Review of previous studies related to the research area of the thesis
The issue of sexism in language has been of a great deal of interest to researchers in
the world for several decades but not many researchers in Vietnam have
investigated the phenomenon. In this section, a review of previous studies related to

sexism in language both in the world and in Vietnam will be discussed.
1.1.1. Studies of sexism in language in the world
Language is not merely a means of exchanging information but it is also an
important means of establishing and maintaining social relationship with other
members of the speech community. Sex-based linguistic variation is an example of
the sort of social function that is fulfilled by language. In fact, sex differences are a
fundamental fact of sociolinguistic life. For example, there are certain forms of
language which are thought to be appropriate only for men to use and other forms
which only women can use. In some cases, these differences depend not only on the
sex of the addresser, but also on the sex of the addressee. According to Fasold
(1990), sex-linked linguistic variation involves ‘the differential use of certain status-
marking forms by sex’ (p. 115).
One of the major issues in sociolinguistic studies has been the relationship between
sex and language and how it is represented. In fact, the study of language and
gender began in 1975 by the publication of three books which have continued to
significantly influence sociolinguistic works: Male/Female Language (M. R. Key),
Language and Women’s Place (R. Lakoff), and Difference and Dominance (Thorne
& Henley). Since then, sociolinguists have fundamentally shown a great deal of

6
interest in sex and language relationship mostly with respect to the presence or
absence in a few languages of linguistic forms that are used only by speakers of one
sex or the other.
Sexism in textbooks has been studied in Europe and America since 1970s. To my
knowledge, the most relevant studies of sexism and its manifestations in ESL/EFL
textbooks that can be tracked down are Hartman and Judd’s (1978) Sexism and
TESOL Materials, Hellinger’s (1980) For Men Must Work, Women Must Weep:
Sexism in English Language Textbooks Used in German Schools, and Porreca’s
(1984) Sexism in Current ESL Textbooks.
Hartman and Judd’s review in 1978 of several then-current TESOL textbooks

examined three categories of sexism: the images of women and men, firstness (the
order of female-male mention), and stereotyped roles for males and females. They
demonstrated that ‘since sexist usage is built into our language (English), it is little
wonder that textbooks, including ESL texts, model this usage to the students’
(p.390). For each category, they found evidence that ELT materials reflect sexist
attitudes and values. And they believed this ‘reinforces the second-place status of
women and could, with only a little effort, be avoided’ (p. 390).
Hellinger (1980), a native German, carried out a study of 131 passages from three
ELT textbooks used in German schools. She found that men were present in more
than 93% of the passages, while only about 30% of the texts included women. What
is more, she proved that 80% of the speakers were male and that women were rarely
participated in demanding, interesting, or successful activities, while males played
their roles in a wide range of jobs.
Porreca (1984) investigated how sexism is manifested in 15 ESL textbooks and with
what consequences by using content analysis method. The author paid attention to
omission (the ratio of females to males) both in texts and illustrations, firstness,
occupations, the frequency of male nouns to female nouns, female-exclusive
masculine generic constructions, and adjectives for men and women. In a content
analysis of the textbooks, she found that ‘there is evidence that sexism continues to

7
flourish in ESL textbooks’ (p. 718). She reported that although females comprise
slightly over half the population of the United States, they are represented only half
as often as males in both texts and illustrations.
Beside the above important studies of sexism in textbooks, there are some other
studies on sexism in teaching and learning materials that should be mentioned.
Coles (1977) examined five sets of popular adult basic education materials and
found that in the total of 150 stories, men outnumbered women by a ratio of 3:1.
Britton and Lumpkin (1977) compared reading, literature, and social studies
textbooks published before and after the year 1970 to determine whether guidelines

to correct sexism had resulted in any positive consequences. The changes, however,
were not what to expect: they found that females portrayed as major characters had
increased only by 2%, up to 16% in the new textbooks. Hoomes (1978) investigated
28 high school literature anthologies for grades 9 through 12 and found evidence
that the overall ratio of total female characters to total male characters in the books
was 1:3.5. She also found that the mean ratio of available professions for females to
those for males was 1:5 in texts and 1:7 in illustrations.
In the 1990s, Peterson & Kroner (1992) conducted an examination of gender biases
in textbooks for psychology and human development. Their findings demonstrated
that representation of work, theory, and behavior of males significantly exceeded
those of females; and females were frequently portrayed in negative and gender-
biased ways. Poulou (1997) explored differences in the discourse roles of men and
women in dialogs of textbooks for teaching Greek as a foreign language to adults.
Her focus on whether sexist differences could affect negatively the pedagogical
value and goals of textbook dialogs and she demonstrated that the effect was quite
obvious.
Most recently in the early 21
st
century, Sydney (2004) investigated gender role
stereotyping in 40 textbooks in primary schools in Tanzania and found that female
characters depicted were fewer compared to males. Bahiyah et al. (2008) found that
children understanding about the world and the relationship within the society were
acquired through Malaysian textbooks, which allowed linguistic sexism and gender

8
roles stereotyping to permeate into the mind of the students and later reproduce in
their everyday life. The study by Otlowski (2003) discussed the importance of
Japanese textbook selection for EFL students with regards to the portrayal of gender
representation in the targeted culture. In many cases, the representation of women in
EFL textbooks in Japan portrayed a stereotypical role of women as mothers and

homemakers. Another Japanese linguist, Mineshima (2008), studied gender
representations in an EFL textbook to investigate how it portrays the two genders.
She examined sexism in three categories including number of females versus males,
number of their utterances and firstness. The results of the research showed that
females were under-represented and overloaded with traditional stereotype roles
whereas males appeared only as cooperative and optional.
From the above mentioned studies, it is easy to realize the attraction of sexism in
language to the world researchers during nearly half a century from Europe through
America to Asia. In many teaching and learning materials examined, it was found
that females are less visible than males and that there is sex bias against women.
The question I have raised for myself is whether or not the issue of sexism exists in
Vietnamese English textbooks. If so, is it the same or different in comparison with
the problem in the textbooks studied before?
1.1.2. Studies of sexism in language in Vietnam
In Vietnam, some researchers have been interested in the relation between language
and gender since 1990s. Binh (2000) studied some gender differences in children’s
language while Dung (2002) demonstrated females’ politeness in communication.
Khang (2000) agues that sex discrimination in language may be found in such
categories as words with male factor showing male dominance in society, the use of
he/his instead of she/her, the use of titles like Mr, Mrs and Miss, and stereotype
attitudes in phrases like unwed mother and unwed father.
The first Vietnamese linguist who has systematically studied sexism in language is
Diep (2002). In his works entitled Sự kỳ thị giới tính trong ngôn ngữ qua cứ liệu
tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt (Sexism in language through English and Vietnamese

9
database), he argues that sexism in language can be found not only against females
but also against males (2002, p. 9). However, sex bias against women is paid more
attention to in his study and it is seen in the following categories.
i) Gender in grammar and its relation with sex in biology: there are some

different points of view on the relation between gender in grammar and sex in
terms of biology. Some agrees that there must be some relation between them
but some others do not. But the thing should be concerned about is the display
of sexism in the use of gender in language. The male pronouns like he, his and
him are used to include both the two sexes in some cases.
ii) Markedness of sex in language: Many words showing the jobs of females
are derived from the words showing the jobs of males. For instance, actress
and waitress are formed by adding the suffix ess to actor and waiter.
iii) Unbalance of words related to females and males in terms of meanings:
Words can have different meanings when they are used to describe men or
women. For example, the word professional has different meaning depending
on sex: he is a professional means he is excellent in a particular aspect while
she is a professional means she is a prostitute.
iv) Sexism in naming/ titles: names and titles are used to show sex and marital
status. In the past, a married woman is entitled Mrs. while Miss is used for an
unmarried one. However, thanks to the fight for equality in using titles, Mrs.
and Miss are now replaced by Ms.
v) Stereotypes of sex in language: Stereotypes in describing females in English
can be found in such words/ phrases as a gorgeous blonde, wives of, devoted to
a husband, looking after husband and children.
The review of the previous studies related to the issue shows that there are not many
researchers in Vietnam concerning sexism in language although it has been a heat
topic in the world sociolinguistic research for some decades now. The first study of
the topic carried out by Diep (2002) provides a general view on sexism in language

10
but there is a shortage of deep investigation into the phenomenon in a specific type
of materials. This has partly urged me to perform the present research.
1.2. Review of theoretical background
1.2.1. Sexism

There are a variety of ways in which sexism can be defined. The definition of
sexism in the Collins Cobuild English Dictionary (1995) is the belief that the
members of one sex, usually women are less intelligent or less capable than those,
of the other sex and need not be treated equally. This definition means that women
suffer from sexism more often than men. Wardhaugh (1986) explains that sexism is
any discrimination against women or men because of their sex, and made on
irrelevant grounds. So according to this distinction, not only women but men can
also be the victims of sexism. The Oxford English Dictionary (1989) defines sexism
as the assumption that one sex is superior to the other and the resultant
discrimination practiced against members of the supposed inferior sex, esp. by men
against women; also conformity with the traditional stereotyping of social roles on
the bases of sex. From these definitions, it can be inferred that sexism is simply the
overestimation of one sex and/ or the underestimation of the other sex. In other
words, it is generally considered as anything that conveys that one sex is superior to
the other.
1.2.2. Linguistic Sexism
Sexism may be found in many fields of life such as sexism in business (business
sexism), sexism in politics (politic sexism) and sexism in language (linguistic
sexism). Linguistic sexism is also called with other terms like sexist language,
gender-bias language or sexism in language.
Many linguists have investigated and given their viewpoints of sexism in language.
Cameron (2005) concluded that ‘our languages are sexist: that is they represent or
name the world from a masculine viewpoint and in accordance with stereotyped
beliefs about the sexes’ (p. 12). This means that language encodes a culture’s

11
values, and in this way reflects sexist culture. According to Umera-Okeke (2012),
sexist language is considered to be any language that is supposed to include all
people, but, unintentionally (or not) excludes a gender - this can be either males or
females. Sexist language is especially common in situations that describe jobs –

common assumptions include that all doctors are men, all nurses are women, all
coaches are men, or all teachers are women. This definition seems to be too specific
because it just gives one case of linguistics sexism – sex exclusiveness in language.
Atkinson (1993) defines linguistic sexism as ‘a wide range of verbal practices,
including not only how women are labeled and referred to, but also how language
strategies in mixed sex interaction may serve to silence or depreciate women as
interactants’ (p. 403). This definition appears to be too broad for the purpose of the
present study because only the language in the upper secondary school English
textbooks used in Vietnam now is investigated in this research.
If sexism refers to attitudes and/or behaviours that denigrate one sex to the
exaltation of the other as being mentioned in the previous part, then it follows
Miller and Swift’s (1976) statement that ‘sexist language is any language … that
assumes the inherent superiority of one sex over the other’ (p. 291).
However, for the purposes of the study, it is interesting to note that these definitions
have one thing in common: linguistic sexism is the portrayal of women and/or men
that intentionally or unintentionally overvalues one sex and/or devalues the other.
Any use of words, phrases, and expressions that unnecessarily differentiate between
females and males or exclude, trivialize, or diminish one particular sex is clearly
sexist in language. The unequal portrayal can be seen through linguistic features in
terms of morphology, semantics, syntax and pragmatics.
1.2.3. Linguistic Sexism in English
Does linguistic sexism exist in English? The answer is it does definitely. According
to Umera-Okeke (2012), many sociolinguistic studies over the years have shown
that the English language favors the masculine gender rather than the feminine. The
problem with sexism in English goes beyond questions of vocabulary: it is built into

12
the way the language is structured, and the very concepts each of us uses to describe
ideas about language. Goddard and Patterson (2001) (cited in Umera-Okeke, 2012)
argues that the English language is a sexist language based on three facts:

i) It is a language that is made up of sex-exclusive vocabulary. For example,
we use hunk to refer to a man and chick to a woman.
ii) It contains linguistic items that remain the same but change in meaning
when referring to a man or a woman. For instance, he is a professional means
he is a specialist but she is a professional means she is a prostitute.
iii) It is a language that carries within it a shared understanding about how men
and women are meant to behave and the characteristics they are meant to
possess. For example, the sayings men make house and women make it home
implies that the role of men is earning money for the family while women are
responsible for doing the housework and looking after children and husbands.
The classification of linguistic sexism in the English language appears to be a
complicated job. It is difficult to make clear-cut categories and sometimes some
elements of linguistic sexism in English may overlap.
1.2.3.1. Linguistic Sexism in Morphology
Derived words with sex-marked morphemes are the manifestation of sexism in
morphology. According to Umera-Okeke (2012), markedness in linguistics refers to
the way words are changed or added to give a special meaning. The unmarked
choice is just the normal meaning. It is quite easy to realize that in English the male
term is for the most part unmarked while the female term is marked because it is
created by adding a bound morpheme to the male term or by combining the male
term with the word referring to females. This is an obvious evidence of linguistic
sexism in English morphology. Some examples are the followings.
manager -> manageress prince -> princess god -> goddess
author -> authoress mayor -> mayoress count -> countess
shepherd -> shepherdess steward -> stewardess host -> hostess

13
According to Diep (2004), there are around 200 pairs of words like these, of which
the male words are considered original words and the female ones are derivationals.
However, there exists sexism against men when the word bridegroom is formed by

adding the suffix groom to the root bride.
Another evidence of sexism in English morphology is that there are many words
which are clearly male-oriented in that they contain the element man while they can
in fact apply to both sexes. Some examples are bushman, milkman, sportsmanship,
draftsman, freshman, cameraman, salesmanship, etc.
On the other hand, when a word has a negative meaning, a female word is a major
component and a masculine suffix is attached to the feminine word. For example, if
the marriage ends in death, the woman is a widow and the suffix er is added to it to
make the word widower. If marriage ends in divorce, the woman gets the title of
divorcee while the man is described with a statement such as He is divorced (Nilsen
et al., 1979, p. 104).
In compound words or expressions, an unnecessary element or gender marker like
woman/ women/ lady/ female/ women’s is often added to a word to mark that
something is for women. Trask (2004) argues that men play golf and cricket, while
women play women’s golf and women’s cricket. A man can be a doctor, but a
woman must often be a woman doctor/ lady doctor. This is a way of highlighting or
spotlighting a person's gender in a demeaning way which may imply that it is
unusual for women to have the position. Some other examples are women’s
football, women’s volleyball, women’s basketball, female president, female prime
minister, woman mayor.
1.2.3.2. Linguistic Sexism in Semantics
In English, there are the same words that possess different meanings when they are
used for women and men and there are sex-pairs of words that contain different
colours of meanings for women and men. Linguistic sexism in semantics is against
both of the two sexes but the terms used for females outnumber those for males.

14
In English, a word may have different connotations when it is collocated with a
male term or a female term. When used for women, the same words are likely to
narrow and assume sexual connotations. The following examples of the typical

words will help to illustrate the point.
Example 1: Professional. When this word is put in the sentences like (i) ‘He’s a
professional’ and (ii) ‘She’s a professional’, it has different meanings. In (i), the
normal conclusion is that he is a doctor or a lawyer or a football player or a member
of one of the respected professions. Sentence (ii) could be interpreted in this way, or
it could also be interpreted to mean that she is either a prostitute or promiscuous.
Example 2: Tramp. ‘He is a tramp’ says he is as a person with no home or job, who
wanders from place to place, or a drifter but ‘She is a tramp’ suggests another
thought: this woman can be considered to be sexually immoral, a prostitute for
example.
From the examples above, we can see that the same word shifts from being positive
male to being negative female. The way meaning is created in the society depends
upon dividing the world into positive-masculine and negative-feminine according to
the semantic sex prototypes.
Besides, there are pairs of words with semantic changes for females and males.
Diep (2004) remarks that there are a lot of sex-pair words like man – woman, male
– female, boy – girl, masculine - feminine, which are quite different from each other
according to their semantic meaning. Many words tend to be negative when they
shift into female sphere. In English, the terms for man and woman who remain
single at the age of marriage are bachelor and spinster. Both represent unmarried
denotatively, but bachelor is simply an unmarried man while spinster is an
unmarried woman who is no longer young. Bachelor is a neutral term while spinster
is always used pejoratively, with connotations of prissiness and fussiness. A master
is a powerful or skilful man; a mistress is a woman kept for sexual purposes. A
courtier is a polished man of high social status; a courtesan is just an up-market
whore. The word governor is explained as a man who exercises a sovereign

15
authority in a colony, territory or state whereas for the feminine word governess, the
explanation is a chief nursemaid. The word Mr. is used for all men while Miss is for

women who are unmarried and Mrs. is for married women. In English compound
words like call boy and call girl, the former indicates a male waiter hotel or man
who greeting cinema actor to go onto stage to act while the latter means a phone
call prostitute.
Another signal of sexism in semantics is that English excludes females by the use of
generic nouns. It is completely accepted that man and woman are two equal
components of human race but actually not equal in the way they refer to people.
Generic noun man, besides its reference to male human being, can also refer to the
whole race. It is not surprised that man, and men can generically refer to both male
and female but woman and women cannot. For example, the word man in the
sentences like ‘Man needs food to survive’ and ‘Man is the highest form of life on
earth’ refers to the whole human race.
Furthermore, words implying sexism with metaphorical meanings are also worth
mentioning. Metaphorical items are often derogatory to both men and women but it
must be admitted that most of the cases are to trivialize and/or sexualize women.
First, many items naming various kinds of food with the taste of sweet and with
color are used to refer to women: cupcake, peaches, honey, cookie, melons, candy,
tomato, cherry, tart, pudding, pumpkin, buns, etc. while the ones with the taste of
spicy and of rich nutrition are related to men: beefcake, wiener, hot dog, hunk, big
cheese, shrimp, etc. Second, soft and colorful plants like rosebud, sweet pea,
wallflower, clinging vine, shrinking violet, late bloomer, buttercup, etc. are
metaphors for women while strong plants such as pansy, lily-livered, bean-pole,
mighty oak, etc. are for men. Third, animal-related words are frequently employed
to describe people’s appearance as well as characters. Most of them show
stereotyped notions of both women and men. Words like chicks, kitten, pussy,
bunny, old bat, bird, spider, filly, sow, cow, lamb, queen bee, whale, hippo are for
women and the ones like dog, fox, snake, rat, ape, pig, cock, bull, tomcat, shark,
tiger, worm, wolf, ox, gorilla, monkey are for men. Finally, objects which are strong

16

or powerful are generally personified as males, while those which are weak, passive
or receptive are personified as females. Thus the sun is seen to be male while the
moon (which receives light from the sun) is seen to be females.
1.2.3.3. Linguistic Sexism in Syntax
In English syntax, ignoring women by allowing masculine pronouns to be used
specifically refer to males and generically to refer to human beings in general is an
example of sexism. English users often choose he, him, his and himself both in the
literal masculine sense and in the generic sense to mean a person of either sex.
When such terms are used generically, misinterpretation can result and females are
unintentionally excluded. On formal occasions, he, his or him must be used to refer
to such indefinite pronouns as each, everyone, no one, nobody, anyone, anybody
and somebody. Herbert and Nykiel-Herbert (1986) give the following examples.
i) Each student intending to graduate in 1983 must submit an official
Declaration of Candidacy form signed by his advisor.
ii) I asked for volunteers, but nobody raised his hand.
iii) In such a circumstance, that layer will be registered as an Officer of the
Course. As such, he will be responsible for … (p. 50)
Looking at the sentences above, people may sometimes question why it is always
his/ he that are used in such cases and why they should not be replaced by her/ she.
This use of pronounces makes women invisible in language and relegates women to
a secondary position dependent on men.
Besides, word orders also help to describe sexism in syntax. It is happy and proud
for women to hear the phrase lady and gentleman in conferences, meetings and
forums. However, it is very easy to find many cases in which masculine terms are
given first and then feminine terms follow. There are many such examples as man
and woman, husband and wife, father and mother, son and daughter, Mr. and Mrs.,
prince and princess, his and her, boys and girls, King and Queen, brothers and
sisters and so on.
It is not difficult to see that words denoting male sex are usually put in front of
female sex. The firstness is very important in nearly all cultures. When meeting an