PhD in Lexicography

Title of Dissertation: A Theoretical Model for the Preparation of an Inclusive and Bias-Free Expression Dictionary.

Degree, Field of Study, and Mentor: PhD in Lexicography; degree awarded by Stellenbosch University in April, 2020. Doctoral mentor: Professor Rufus H. Gouws.

Brief summary of the what and why:

Inclusive and bias-free communication are the key to truly effective interpersonal relations, as language, culture, and society are inextricably intertwined. Terms such as freedom, equality, ethics, justice, fairness, and objectivity have a prominent place within all cultural and societal contexts. Any exclusive or biased expression may significantly impair how freedom is protected, equality upheld, ethics adhered to, justice meted, fairness preserved, and objectivity maintained.

Exclusive or biased expression may lead to individuals and groups of people being abused, bullied, dehumanized, stereotyped, and so on. This unjust discrimination can be based on a person’s age, belief system, economic condition, ethnic group, gender, physical ability and/or specific needs, place of origin, political perspective, race, and/or sexual orientation, among many others.

Despite there being widespread biased and exclusive expression in the English language, general language dictionaries do not do an adequate job of alerting users to this usage. Quite the contrary. Anyone accessing these dictionaries is usually only getting a part of the full picture, information that ignores these aspects, or even definitions which promote further biased and exclusive usage.

A problem in the current lexicographic practice is a lack of inclusive and bias-free dictionaries. To date, metalexicography has not assisted practical lexicographers in a sufficient way to plan and compile such dictionaries. Factors including the interplay of exclusionary connotations of words and phrases, and the nuances and gradations of biased expression are beyond the scope of even unabridged general English language dictionaries, hence the need for inclusive and bias-free dictionaries.

The dissertation:

• includes a thorough review of the literature in order to encapsulate the manner in which the English language manifests biased and exclusive usage

• provides a critical analysis of how the main general English language dictionaries perform from the bias and exclusion perspectives

• offers a suggested design of and examples of the types of lemmas to be included in an inclusive and bias-free expression dictionary, and

• describes other aspects such as the typology, macrostructure, microstructure, access structure, electronic resources, and place within a societal dictionary culture for such works.

As far as social relations go, what could be more important than treating others with tolerance, respect, and regard? The deficiencies in coverage from the exclusive/inclusive usage perspectives in the general English language dictionaries point towards the need for another type of dictionary. Inclusive and bias-free expression dictionaries would fill those inclusive/unbiased usage gaps left by the general English language dictionaries, along with offering much, much more. To date, no dictionaries quite like these have ever been written, and this thesis provides a theoretical model for how to prepare such works.

Chapters Two and Three have general relevance to egalitarianism, social justice, representation, and the like, as opposed to those focused on the more technical aspects of lexicography:

In Chapter Two, the vilification and subordination of females, other groups, and non-human animals were exposed for what they truly are: patriarchal drivel. This was accomplished through the use of a sociolinguistic and sociocultural framework based on the insight that analytical methods including critical discourse analysis, intersectionality, and critical reality awareness provide. Two key segments of the population were used as examples: females, the largest oppressed group, and Hispanic Peoples. Myriad manners in which the language evinces bias and exclusion were identified, described, and illustrated, based on some of the origins and current manifestations of the subjugation and oppression of these two groups.

The first part of this chapter started by going into detail on the othering, gendering, and abuse of non-human animals, and how these are mapped over to the oppression of human females, along with the concomitant violence, exploitation, vilification, and subjugation. It was shown how females are linguistically and symbolically closely associated with animals, the latter having been deemed as “inferior,” which helps to “validate” the abuse of both. Within a patriarchal society, human females and non-human animals are demonized, trivialized, othered, commodified, and generally considered to be at the service of human males. Language is a used as a weapon to “rationalize” this oppression and exploitation, and to help “keep women in their place.” Sexism and speciesism are connected; the manner in which females and non-human animals are oppressed and exploited is representative of how all oppression and exploitation work. Key links between patriarchy and “scientific research” that purportedly evidence “female inferiority to males” were explored, including their downplaying of the importance of gestation and mothering in general. This chapter part concluded with a look at how the representation of women in the mass media, and spectacles such as beauty pageants, dehumanize and objectify all females. The ultimate denigration, abuse, torture, and humiliation of females is expressed through rape, sexual slavery, prostitution, and pornography, all of which are patriarchal weapons devoted to keeping all females subjugated.

The second part explored in detail the othering of Hispanic Peoples from the cultural and sociolinguistic perspectives, as expressed through biased and exclusive usage in the English language. Historical background and vivid examples helped place everything in their proper perspective. It was shown how a key component of the marginalization and oppression of Hispanic Peoples is their so often being portrayed through clichés that are equal parts hackneyed and disparaging, especially as seen through the mass media. First, there was some historical background on the contemptible ethnic slur greaser, including its brutally colonialist, xenophobic, and racist origins, along with some of the cultural, institutional, and individual consequences of the use of such a hate-filled expression.

Next, the loathsome racial epithet spic was explored, whose prevalent use “on the streets,” in schools, homes, and workplaces has continued unabated since first coined over a century ago, including frequent appearances in books, television, and movies. A couple of real-life examples of the hate, violence, and murder accompanying the use of this expression were detailed, along with sociolinguistic commentary on power and oppression. This part of the chapter closed with the bandito stereotype, one of many Hispanic/Latin@/Latinx oversimplified and formulaic representations that have been exploited on film, television, print and electronic media, “history” books, internet commentary, and so on. Several examples of their vilifying, denigrating, trivializing, and otherwise othering portrayal in films were also illustrated.

Factors including racialized governmental language policies, unfair treatment in the legal and educational systems, and the use of discourse that exacerbates xenophobic tendencies that foster exclusion and violence against Hispanic Peoples were also surveyed. The thorough exploration of the slurs greaser and spic, along with the bandito stereotype, demonstrated how biased and exclusive expression does nothing but harm. As a whole, this chapter part showed how “just a few well chosen words” can encapsulate a world of fear, hate, vilification, and oppression against entire groups of Peoples, in this case Hispanics. The othering of Hispanic Peoples is representative of the ways that all out-groups are othered.

In Chapter Three, the same analytical framework is employed to meticulously examine the role language plays in the fostering, preservation, and furtherance of power, privilege, oppression, and othering, as demonstrated through the scrutiny of eight example expressions, namely:

• Boys will be boys, which serves as a “poster child” for all that is wrong with patriarchy, male hegemony, gender roles, victimization of females, and the gender binary.

• Senior moment, which is an expression that typifies how older people are othered, along with how stereotypes of all kinds are used to trivialize and denigrate.

• Spinster represents one of the symptoms of the patriarchal oppression of women, as manifested by their not being allowed to make voluntary decisions in their own lives.

• Rape culture provides insight into how the oppression of women extends to sexual violence and rape within a patriarchal and capitalistic society where “violence is sexy,” brutality against females is normalized, and the victims are blamed.

• Victim blaming exposes the mechanisms employed to attribute partial or complete blame to targets ranging from rape victims through the countless people slaughtered by invading armies.

• Policing of masculinity is the observation and regulation of the activities, conduct, and expression of those perceived to be males, in order to ensure compliance with toxic masculine gender-role norms.

• Drama queen highlights the oppressive character of patriarchy, heteronormativity, heterosexism, gender roles, and religious dogma.

• Gender affirmation exemplifies how despite “everybody” being on patrol monitoring “everyone” else to make sure that they comply with all traditions and rituals, that no matter what, a person can nonetheless assert a sense of agency in their own lives.

Please click on this text to download the full dissertation.

Related scholarly work:

Here is a little something from a presentation I made at the 2018 convention of the African Association for Lexicography, titled “Boys will be boys: an example of biased usage.”

The common phrase boys will be boys is defined by most of the best known general and learning English dictionaries.I used this idiom to help illustrate how a seemingly innocuous phrase is nonetheless laden with bias. To accomplish this task I dissected the definitions provided by several dictionaries, including those from Oxford,Cambridge, American Heritage, Collins, and Farlex (from thefreedictionary.com.)

The Oxford Living Dictionaries online defines boys will be boys so: “Used to express the view that mischievous or childish behaviour is typical of boys or young men and should not cause surprise when it occurs.”

Briefly examining this analysis, one can note that mischievous or childish behaviour sounds rather harmless, and if the term were to always be used for that, then that would be one thing. The reality, however, is that this phrase is also often utilised to“justify” all sorts of atrocious behaviours of males of any age. This latter aspect is not even hinted at. Typical and should not cause surprise when it occurs are meant to convey that a) it happens a lot, b) there is no need to make a fuss when it does, and c) boys and young men are “hard-wired” to“inadvertently” cause “harmless” trouble, so there is no point in addressing this conduct in any manner.

A further thorough analysis on how this and other dictionaries perform from the “biased usage” perspective, some of the consequences of such usage, and a suggested definition from an inclusive andbias-free expression dictionary were also presented. The definitions from these dictionaries were contrasted with how an inclusive and bias-free expression dictionary might deal with this phrase:

boys will be boys– A term indicating that rowdy behavior is not just characteristic of boys (and often men,) but tolerable and even welcome. Serves to reinforce stereotypes and traditions that promote harmful behavior in boys and males of any age, while girls and females in general are encouraged (likelier forced) to be subservient and willing to be victimized. As such, it unequivocally nurtures and promotes the patriarchal society, along with sharply defined gender double standards. This phrase has been employed countless times to mitigate and trivialize actions ranging from horseplay through gang rape. If referring to harmless fun, then kids will be kids, children will be children, kids being kids, or children being children are non-biased alternatives.

The assertions made in the definition provided by the inclusive and bias-free expression dictionary are backed up by references such as:

Sanday (2007), who identifies any number of ways in which boys will be boys is utilised to encourage and defend male sexual violence and rape, including how this phrase serves as a mantra employed to excuse gang rape in middle-class environments, while Scales (2008)emphasizes the role played by the “hard-wiring” defence to rape provided by boys will be boys.

Mansfield, Beck, Fung, Montiel,& Goldman (2017) furthermore stress that boys will be boys is so often utilised to excuse subtler forms of sexual harassment that it becomes ingrained in people’s minds to the extent that acts of this ilk are considered natural or acceptable. As such, this dissuades victims from saying anything about these incidents, and in cases where an aggrieved person does report about it they are usually told theyare being too sensitive.

There is plenty of room for improvement among the general language and learning English dictionaries from the “biased usage” perspective, and this paper helped illustrate their current deficiencies through a concrete example, along with providing an alternative inclusive definition.

References from the literature for the boys will be boys example:

Mansfield, K.C., Beck, A.G.,Fung, K., Montiel, M. and Goldman, M., 2017. What Constitutes Sexual Harassment and How Should Administrators Handle It?. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 20(3): 37-55.

Oxford Living Dictionaries online: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/boys_will_be_boys.

Sanday, P.R., 2007. Fraternity Gang Rape: Sex, Brotherhood, and Privilege on Campus.New York, USA: NYU Press.

Scales, A., 2008. Student Gladiators and Sexual Assault: A New Analysis of Liability for Injuries inflicted by College Athletes. Mich. J. Gender & L.,15: pp.205-289.