Where Is She? Gender Occurrences in Online Grammar Guides.

This article examines seven online grammar guides for instances of linguistic sexism. The grammar sentences from .edu Websites were analyzed based on NCTE's "Guidelines for Gender-Fair Use of Language" (2002) using the criteria of generic he and man; titles, labels, and names; gender stereotypes; order of mention (firstness); and ratio of male to female. Of the 3,220 sentences analyzed, 3,020 occurrences of gendered language were found and were analyzed based on gender-fair language criteria. All seven university-affiliated websites contained some occurrences of linguistic sexism; generic "he" and "man" were less of a problem than firstness and male-tofemale ratio.1 Although the raw numbers reveal that the overall instances of linguistic sexism were relatively rare, it is interesting to note the ways in which linguistic sexism persisted in these grammar exercises. Implications of linguistic sexism for users of online academic texts are highlighted. Because sexist language was present in these online grammar guides, writing teachers are encouraged to discuss with their students and with each other why linguistic sexism may occur in such sites and what we can do to prevent and eliminate linguistic sexism more effectively in our own texts and lives, particularly with regard to gender stereotypes, firstness, and maleto -female ratios.

[1]  Deborah Cameron,et al.  11. GENDER ISSUES IN LANGUAGE CHANGE , 2003, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.

[2]  Larry Beason,et al.  Ethos and Error: How Business People React to Errors , 2001, College Composition & Communication.

[3]  Karen L. Porreca.  Sexism in Current ESL Textbooks , 1984 .

[4]  Sara Mills,et al.  Caught Between Sexism, Anti-sexism and `Political Correctness': Feminist Women's Negotiations with Naming Practices , 2003 .

[5]  Thea van der Geest,et al.  The computer as means of communication for peer-review groups , 1994 .

[6]  Judith Fetterley,et al.  The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to American Fiction , 1978 .

[7]  M. Roberton,et al.  Development and Validation of an Instrument to Measure Attitudes Toward Sexist/Nonsexist Language , 2000 .

[8]  T. Sakita.  Sexism in Japanese English Education: A Survey of EFL Texts , 1995 .

[9]  M. Clason.  Feminism, generic ‘he’, and the TNIV Bible translation debate , 2006 .

[10]  J. H. Sandholtz.  Teaching With Technology: Creating Student-Centered Classrooms , 1997 .

[11]  Jeffrey T. Child,et al.  Textbook Technology Supplements: What Are They Good For? , 2005 .

[12]  M. Stubbs.  Grammar, Text, and Ideology: Computer-Assisted Methods in the Linguistics of Representation. , 1994 .

[13]  Ann M. Reed,et al.  The Politics of Grammar Handbooks: Generic "He" and Singular "They.". , 1993 .

[14]  Sarah K. Murnen,et al.  Learning to Be Little Women and Little Men: The Inequitable Gender Equality of Nonsexist Children's Literature , 2004 .

[15]  J. B. Ruscher,et al.  Lady, Girl, Female, or Woman , 2005 .

[16]  L. Madson,et al.  Does Alternating Between Masculine and Feminine Pronouns Eliminate Perceived Gender Bias in Text? , 1999 .

[17]  Nijole V. Benokraitis Joe R. Feagin.  Modern Sexism: Blatant, Subtle, and Covert Discrimination , 1986 .

[18]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Web Search: Public Searching of the Web , 2011, Information Science and Knowledge Management.

[19]  Muriel Harris,et al.  Online Writing Labs (OWLs): A Taxonomy of Options and Issues. , 1995 .

[20]  Bill Daily,et al.  Benefiting from nonsexist language in the workplace , 1993 .

[21]  Zdenek Salzmann,et al.  Language and gender : an introduction , 2000 .

[22]  Sumie Matsuno.  Sexism in Japanese Radio Business English Program Textbooks , 2002 .

[23]  Cynthia L. Selfe,et al.  The Rhetoric of Technology and the Electronic Writing Class , 1991, College Composition & Communication.