Linguisticrelativity:Cangenderedlanguagespredictsexistattitudes?

AmandaJ.Thompson

Advisor:Dr.SusanaSotillo
Readers:Dr.LongxingWei&Dr.DavidTownsend

Spring2014
LinguisticsDepartment
MontclairStateUniversity

Linguisticrelativity:Cangenderedlanguagespredictsexistattitudes?
AmandaJ.Thompson

Abstract
Thepurposeofthisstudyistofindalinkbetweensexismandlanguageswithgrammaticalgender.
Twogroupsof14participantseachwhosenativelanguageshavegrammaticalgenderSpanishand
Russianandacontrolgroupof14nativeEnglishspeakersweregivenanobjectclassificationtaskin
whichtheparticipantshadtochoosewhetheranobjectwouldbemasculineorfeminine.Theywerealso
givenaLikerttypeSocialAttitudesScaletomeasuretheirsexistattitudes.Thegenderedlanguagenative
speakersexhibitedatendencytoclassifyobjectsaccordingtothegrammaticalgenderofthatobjectin
theirrespectivelanguageswhilethegenderassignmentsfortheEnglishspeakerswasmorerandom.
Furthermore,theEnglishspeakersexpressedlesssexistattitudesthandidtheSpanishandRussian
speakers,providingevidencetosupportthetheoryofLinguisticRelativitywhichsuggeststhatlanguage
influencesthought.

Introduction
ThestrongversionoftheSapirWhorfhypothesisstatesthattheinfluenceoflanguageon
thoughtisobligatoryoratleasthabitual:thoughtisalways,orundermostcircumstances,guidedby
language(Maltetal.2003).Thatistosay,thecategoriesanddistinctionsofdifferentlanguagesyield
varyingwaysofperceiving,analyzing,andactingintheworld(Whorf1956citedinBoroditsky2001).
Thereisplentyofevidencetosupporttheweakerversionofthishypothesis:thatlanguageinfluences
thoughtunderspecificandlimitedcircumstances.Therefore,thatthoughtisforthemostpartguidedby
languagehasbeenlongabandonedinthefieldoflinguistics(Boroditsky2001).However,even
definitivelyansweringthelessdeterministicversionhasprovenchallengingtoinvestigate.Apossible

reasonforthisisthatthoughtishighlyaffectedbyrealworldexperience,whichmayinterferewith
linguisticeffectsintaskswhichtesttheinfluenceoflanguage.Inthelinguisticrelativityresearch,areas
commonlyinvestigatedhavetodowithcolorperception(Heider1972,citedinBoroditsky2003),
numbermemory(Ellis1992),andperceptionoftime(Boroditsky2001).Theseareasareusuallyhighly
affectedbynonlinguisticfactorssuchascultureandthereforetheroleoflanguageonthoughtmaynot
beeasilyascertainedwhiletestingthisphenomenon.
Ontheotherhand,researchongrammaticalgenderandthoughtseemstobemuchlessaffected
byrealworldexperiencethanontheaforementionedaspects.Previouslysupposedtobearbitrary,
withoutanysemanticbasisrecentstudiesontheeffectsofgrammaticalgenderassignmentonthought
havesuggestedotherwise.AsstatedinBoroditskyetal.(2003),informationaboutthegenderof
objects,forexample,isonlyfoundinlanguage.Likewise,accordingtoBassetti(2007),theeffectsof
grammaticalgenderarepurelylinguisticbecausethereisnoalternative,inanexperimentalsetting,for
whyachaircouldbeperceivedasfemininebutnotabed.Forthisreason,thepresentinvestigationwill
focusontheeffectsofgrammaticalgenderonthoughttheconsequencesoftheseeffectsrangingfrom
thewayspeakersofdifferentlanguagescategorizeanddescribeobjectstohowtheyperceiverolesof
menandwomeninsociety.
Grammaticalgenderisasystemofnounclassificationfoundinmanyoftheworldslanguages.In
somecases,thegrammaticalgenderofanouncorrelateswithitssemanticcharacteristics,suchas
biologicalsexofthereferent.Forexample,ilragazzoisanItalianmasculinenounmeaningboy.
However,therearealsoinstanceswherethegrammaticalgenderofanounseemstocontrastwiththe
genderofitsreferentforexample,lafraternidadisafeminineSpanishnoun,butreferstoafraternity
orbrotherhood.Acommondistinctioningenderedlanguagesisthatofmasculineandfeminine,foundin

languagessuchasSpanish,French,Italian,andPortuguese.Anotherdistinctionincludesbothmasculine
andfeminineaswellasaneutergender,asexhibitedinGerman.Somelanguageshaveneithera
grammaticalnornaturalgender.Thesearereferredtoasgenderlesslanguages.InFinnish,forinstance,
thewordhnreferstobothheandshe(PrewittFreilinoetal.2012).Additionally,therearemany
languages,includingEnglish,whichdonothaveagrammaticalgendernounsystem.However,itis
relevanttonotethatevenifalanguageisnotgenderedinthisway,therestillmayexistcertain
distinctionsthatreflectnaturalgenderofreferents.Thispointanditssubsequentimplicationswillbe
addressedlaterinthisdiscussion.

TheoreticalFramework

Howearlyisgrammaticalgenderacquired?InBelacchiandCubelli(2012),implicitknowledge
ofgrammaticalgenderwasfoundinchildrenasyoungasthreeyearsold.Theparticipantsinthis
experimentallnativespeakersofItalian,alanguagewithmasculineandfemininegrammaticalgender
classifiedanimalsaccordingtothecorrespondinggrammaticalgenderofthereferentinItalian.This
effectwasnotfoundwiththecontrolgroupofspeakersofEnglish,alanguagewhichdoesnothave
grammaticalgender(Bellachi&Cubelli2012).Inasimilarstudy,Saalbachetal.(2012)observedthat
Germanspeakingchildrenreliedongrammaticalgenderwhenmakinginferencesaboutsexspecific
biologicalpropertiesofanimals.Theseresultswereatleastinpartattributedtothenatureofthe
task.Tasksthatrequiresuchinferencesaboutsexspecificpropertiesmaybemorelikelytotriggera
connectionbetweengrammaticalgenderandbiologicalsexthantasksthatdosobyaskingaboutentities
withoutabiologicalsex(Saalbachetal.2012).Inotherwords,iftheparticipantsarerequiredtomake
inferencesaboutinanimateobjectsasopposedtoanimals,theywillbelessinclinedtorelyon

grammaticalgenderasacue.Thiscontrastswiththefindingsofotherexperimentsdoneinthefieldof
grammaticalgenderandthought(Basetti2007Kurinski&Sera2011)whichdidindicatethereliance
ongrammaticalgenderwhenclassifyinginanimateobjects.Ramos&Roberson(2011)discussedthe
natureofdifferentclassificationtasksandfoundthateffectsofgrammaticalgenderariseasafunctionof
linguisticprocessinganddemandsofthetaskforexample,ifthetaskincludedanovertreferenceto
grammaticalgenderandinvolvedwordsinsteadofpictorialstimuliratherthanhavingadirectinfluence
onsemanticrepresentations.Portuguesespeakersonlyexhibitedeffectsofgenderwhengenderwas
taskrelevantduringasimilarobjectclassificationtaskbeingusedinthepresentinvestigationorwhen
thestimuliwerewordsratherthanpictures.
Whereastheaforementionedresearchobservedhowspeakersoflanguageswithcontradicting
grammaticalgenderassignmentsforcertainentities,Boroditsky,Schmidt&Phillips(2002citedin
Boroditskyetal.2003)eliciteddescriptionsfromspeakersofSpanishandspeakersofGermanof
objectswhichhadoppositegrammaticalgendersbetweenthetwolanguages.Adjectiveswererated
beforehandbyagroupofEnglishspeakersaseithermasculineorfeminine.TheSpanishandGerman
groupsthenhadtoassigntheseadjectivestoobjects.Aspredicted,masculineadjectiveswereusedto
describegrammaticallymasculineobjectsandtraditionallyfeminineadjectivesforobjectswhichare
grammaticallyfeminine.Forexample,thewordkeyismasculineinGerman,socommonadjectives
generatedbytheparticipantswerehard,heavy,anduseful.InSpanish,keywasdescribedas
lovely,shiny,andlittle(Boroditskyetal.2002citedinBoroditskyetal.2003).
Whilethepreviousfindingsdemonstratetheeffectsofgrammaticalgenderonmonolingual
children,Bassetti(2007)investigatedhowchildrenwhoareexposedtotwogenderedlanguageswhich
assignoppositegenderstovariousentitieswouldclassifysuchentities.Theparticipantswerechildren

undertheageofeight,whoallcamefromthesamesocioculturalenvironmentandspokebothItalian
andGerman.Itwasfoundthatgrammaticalgenderdidnothaveaneffectonthesebilingualchildrenin
classificationtasksinwhichsomeobjectswerefeminineinGermanbutmasculineinSpanishandvice
versa.ThisisinstrongcontrasttothecontrolgroupofItalianmonolinguals,whoappearedtoperceive
objectsashavingmasculineorfemininecharacteristics(Bassetti2007).
Althoughmanystudieshavefocusedontheeffectsoflanguageforearlylearners,Kurinskiand
Sera(2011)examinedtheimpactoflearningaforeignlanguagewithgrammaticalgenderinthiscase
Spanishasanadult.TheparticipantsconsistedofbeginningSpanishlearners,advancedSpanish
learners,andnativeSpanishspeakers.TheformertwogroupswereallnativespeakersofEnglish.Inan
objectcategorizationtask,thenativeSpanishspeakersweremoreconsistentwithSpanishgrammatical
genderthanwerethelearnergroups.Thesefindingsindicatethatlearningasecondlanguageasanadult
canaffectcategorization,yettheseeffectsdifferfromthosefoundinnativespeakers.Becauseadults
cognitiveconceptshavealreadybeenformulated,theeffectsofgrammaticalgendermaybelimited
whentheseadultslearnaforeignlanguagewithsuchanattribute(Kurinski&Sera2011).
Asthesestudiesillustrate,languagecanhaveaneffectonthoughtwhenitcomestocertaintasks
suchasobjectcategorization,butwhataboutotherdomains?PrewittFreilinoetal.(2012)positedthat
ifconventionsofgrammaticalgendercanaffectapersonsperceptionsofgendereveninnonhuman
objectsasfoundintheabovestudiescoulditalsoaffecttherealworldsocialrelationsofmenand
women?Thisinvestigationexploredtherelationshipbetweencountriesgenderlanguagesystems
grammaticalgender,naturalgender,orgenderlessandindicationsofgenderequality.Toensurethat
onlytheimpactofgrammaticalgenderremained,otherpotentialinfluencesongenderequalitywere
accountedfor,suchas:geographiclocation,religioustradition,systemofgovernment,andrelative

humandevelopment.Aspredicted,countrieswithagrammaticalgenderlanguagescoredlowerona
GlobalGenderGapscalethancountrieswithanaturalgenderoragenderlesslanguage,suggestinga
relationshipbetweenthegenderingoflanguageatamacrolevelandsocietywideindicatorsofgender
equality(PrewittFreilinoetal.2012).
WassermanandWeseley(2009)exploredtowhichextenttheinfluenceoflanguagecanimpact
apersonsperceptions.Inthiscase,itwastheextenttowhichlanguageswithgrammaticalgender
wouldpromotesexistattitudesinthosewhoreadandspeaksuchlanguages.Participantsconsistingof
English,French,andSpanishspeakersreadapassagefromanovelintheirrespectivelanguagesand
thencompletedaSocialAttitudesScaletodeterminewhetherornottheyexpressedsexistattitudes.It
wasfoundthatparticipantsintheSpanishandFrenchconditionsexpressedmoresexistattitudesthan
thoseintheEnglishcondition.ItmustbenotedthatthemajorityofparticipantsintheSpanishand
FrenchconditionswerenativespeakersofEnglishintheprocessoflearningthoselanguages1.Because
ofthis,asecondtestonSpanishEnglishfluentbilingualswasperformed.Itwasfoundthatthese
participantsexpressedslightlymoresexistattitudeswhenreadingapassageinSpanishthanwhen
readinginEnglish(Wasserman&Weseley2009).ThiscoincideswiththefindingsofPrewittFreilinoet
al.andthenotionthatiflanguageplaysaroleinhowpeopleformtheirattitudesaboutgender,
differencesinthegenderedlanguagesystemsacrosstheworldmightplayasignificantroleinattitudes
abouttherolesofmenandwomeninsociety(2012).
Thediscussedliteraturehasdemonstratedtoasignificantextentthatlanguageswithgrammatical
genderdohaveeffectsonthespeakersofthoselanguages,suchasthinkingofaninanimateobjectas

MuchofthepresentstudyismodeledafterWasserman&Weseley(2009),whileaddressingsome
limitations:choosingnativespeakersoversecondlanguagelearners,andusingapassagethatincludes
dialoguebetweenmaleandfemalecharactersinsteadofonlymalecharacters.
1

feminineormasculineaccordingtoitsgender.Thisisillustratedbyperformanceoncategorizationtasks
ofsuchobjectsandtasksthatelicitdescriptionsoftheobjectsusingmasculineandfeminineadjectives
accordingtothereferentsgrammaticalgender.Furthermore,thesestudieshaveshownthatspeakersof
thelanguagesinquestioncanbeinfluencedbythisaspectoftheirlanguagesomuchsothattheir
attitudestowardsmenandwomenareaffected.Whatarepossiblereasonsforthis?Theexistenceofa
distinctionbetweenmasculineandfemininegrammaticalgendersystemsthemselvescorrelateswith
effectsonclassificationandsexistattitudes,aspreviouslydiscussed.However,theunequaldivisionof
theiruseisrelevanttonote.Forexample,inlanguagessuchasSpanish,themasculinepluralisusedto
refertoanygroupwithamaleelement,evenifitiscomprisedofonlyonemaleandseveralfemales:a
groupoffemalestudentswouldbelasestudiantesbutiftheywerejoinedbyevenasinglemale,they
wouldhavetobereferredtoaslosestudiantes.Similarly,inmanylanguages,themasculinepronounis
typicallyusedasagenericpronoun.Agenericpronounisagenderedpronounusedtorefertoboth
genders(Wasserman&Weseley2009).ThisoccurseveninEnglish:heorhimisoftenused
generically,thoughitsuseisnowgraduallybeingreplacedbygenericthemtoavoidsexistlanguage.
Likewise,thefemininegenderinmanylanguagesismarkedwhereasthemasculineistheunmarked
form.Forexample,inItalianthewordforamaleprofessorisprofessorewhileafemaleprofessoris
professoressa.AsstatedbyPrewittFreilinoetal.,femalecounterpartsformalewordsareoften
derivedfromthemasculineterm,andaremorecomplex,demonstratingthatthemasculineisthegeneric
form(2012).ThistypeofdistinctionisalsofoundinEnglishwhenreferringtoanoccupationwhichis
traditionallyassociatedwithaspecificgender:amalenurseorfemalesurgeon,forexample.These
professionsaremarkedtoshowanexceptiontotherule.Whetheralanguagehasgrammaticalgender
ornot,themarkingofsuchexceptionsaffectsperceptionsofsocialgenderandtherelianceon

stereotypeswhenusinggenericpronounsforspecificoccupations.Thatlanguageseemstoreflectthe
stereotypesoftraditionalgenderroles,thegenderingoflanguagewhethergrammaticalornaturalmay
influenceapersonsdesiretoseekcertainemploymentopportunities(PrewittFreilinoetal.2012).
Althoughmuchevidencehasbeenshowntosupportthelinguisticrelativityhypothesis,this
notionhasprovendifficulttofullyconfirm.Asexhibitedbythecarefulconsiderationofresearchersto
controlforculturalvariablesduringinvestigationsontheeffectsofcertainlinguisticfeaturesinthiscase
grammaticalgenderitseemstobeassumedthatculturewouldhaveaninfluenceonlanguage.
Therefore,languagewouldnotbeentirelydeterminedbythoughtbutmerelyinfluencedincombination
withotherfactorssuchasculture.Additionally,iflanguagewereentirelydeterminedbythought,itwould
belikelythateachspeakerofagrammaticallygenderedlanguagewouldbesexist,andtherewouldbe
nosexistspeakersoflanguageswithoutgrammaticalgender.Therealityisthatthereareundoubtedly
sexistattitudesexpressedbybothgroups.However,asthestudiesdiscussedhaveillustrated,thatisnot
tosaythereisnoinfluenceoftheselanguagesandthatthisinfluencedoesnothaveimportant
consequences.Oneoftheseconsequencesisthepossibilityoflanguageswithgrammaticalgender
affectingsocialattitudestowardgenderrolesandequality.AsstatedinWassermanandWeseley,the
roleoflanguagecouldbeunderestimatedinthecontinualexistenceofsexistattitudes(2009).

Hypothesis

Followingthefindingsofpreviousresearchinthefieldoflinguisticrelativity,thesubsequent
researchquestionsareaddressed:1.Towhatextentdogenderedlanguagesinfluenceobject
classificationamongparticipantsrepresentingthreedifferentlanguages,and2.Towhatextentwill
participantsintheRussianandSpanishconditionsclassifyinanimateobjectsaccordingtotheir

grammaticalgenderwhencomparedwithparticipantsintheEnglishcondition?Itispredictedthat
genderedlanguageswillmarkedlyinfluenceobjectclassificationandfindexpressioninsexistattitudes.
ParticipantsintheRussianandSpanishconditionswilltendtoclassifyinanimateobjectsaccordingto
theirgrammaticalgendertoagreaterextentthanparticipantsintheEnglishlanguagecondition,and
expressahigherproportionofsexistattitudes.

Methodology

a.Participants

Theparticipantsforthisprojectaregroupsof14nativeSpanishandRussianspeakers
Speakersoftheselanguageshavebeenchosenbecausetheyarefromdifferentlanguagefamilies.
Additionally,thereisacontrolgroupof14nativeEnglishspeakers.Allofthesegroupsconsistofhalf
malesandhalffemales,withagesrangingfrom18to29.Theywererecruitedthroughundergraduate
linguisticscoursesatMontclairStateUniversityandalsolanguagespecificforumsonReddit,anonline
communityinwhichmemberscontributecontentsuchaspictures,opinions,andfactualinformationon
specificforumsgearedtowardvariousinterests.Linkstothematerialswerepostedtosuchforums
dedicatedtoRussian,Spanish,andanacademicresearchforumcalledSampleSize.Becausemanyof
theparticipantswererecruitedviatheinternet,thegroupsandtheirmembersarenotallfromthesame
countryorregion.Howthismayaffecttheresultsofthisinvestigationwillbediscussedlater.Toreduce
theamountofbiasinparticipantresponses,thetheyweretoldthatthiswasabilingualismstudy.The
reasonforthisisthatiftheparticipantsweretoldthiswasastudyonsexism,theymightnothonestly
answerthequestionsontheSocialAttitudesScale.
b.Materials

10

Thisexperimentconsistsofthreetasks:readingapassagefrompopularliteratureinthe
participantsnativelanguage,aclassificationtaskofinanimateobjects,andaSocialAttitudesScaleon
genderequality.Beforeperforminganyofthesetasks,theparticipantsfilledoutademographic
questionnaireinEnglish.Allofthesecomponentsofthisexperimentwerecreatedonasurveyappcalled
GoogleForms.ThesurveyswerealltitledBilingualismStudyfollowedbythenameofthelanguagein
whichthesurveywasbeingtaken(forexample,BilingualismStudySpanish).Sinceparticipatingin
theexperimentrequiredenoughknowledgeofEnglishtoatleastreadandunderstandthefirstsetof
instructionsandtheconsentforms,thiswasasuitablealternativetitle.
ThepassagethattheparticipantsreadfromHarryPotterandthePrisonerofAzkaban
(Rowling1999)contains~100wordsdependingonthelanguage.Thepurposeofthistaskwastoget
theparticipantstothinkinthelanguageinwhichtheyweregoingtocompletethesubsequenttasks.
HarryPotterandthePrisonerofAzkabanwaschoseninparticularbecauseitiswidelytranslatedand
moreimportantly,containsseveralexchangesbetweenstrongmaleandfemalemaincharacters:
IfanyoneslookingoutofthewindowHermionesqueaked,lookingupatthecastle
behindthem.
Wellrunforit,Harrysaiddeterminedly.Straightintotheforest,allright?Well
havetohidebehindatreeorsomethingandkeepalookout
Okay,butwellgoaroundbythegreenhouses!saidHermionebreathlessly.Weneed
tokeepoutofsightofHagridsfrontdoor,orwellseeus!WemustbenearlyatHagridsby
now!
Stillworkingoutwhatshemeant,Harrysetoffatasprint,Hermionebehindhim.They
toreacrossthevegetablegardenstothegreenhouses,pausedforamomentbehindthem,then
setoffagain,fastastheycould,skirtingaroundtheWhompingWillow,tearingtowardthe
shelteroftheforest....(Rowling1999).

Thesecondpartofthisexperimentconsistsofagendercategorizationtask.Simple,blackand

11

whiteillustrationsofteninanimateobjects2weregiventotheparticipants,whowereaskedtodecide
whethertheobjectsshouldbemaleorfemaleinahypotheticalfictionalstory.Toavoidthepossibilityof
deducingthatparticipantscategorizationisduetothephysicalcharacteristicsofobjects,theobjects
chosenforthistaskhavecontrastinggenderinSpanishandRussian.Thegrammaticallymasculine
objectsinRussiantable,house,bicycle,key,andbackpackarefeminineinSpanishwhilethe
masculineSpanishobjectsfork,book,bone,plate,andboatarefeminineinRussian.Although
Russiannounscanalsohaveaneutergender,objectsinthiscategorywereleftoutbecauseSpanish
onlyhasabinarydistinction.Afterchoosingagenderforeachobject,theparticipantswerethenasked
toexplainwhytheymadesuchaselection.
Finally,theparticipantscompletedaLikerttypescale3inwhichtheyrateaseriesofstatements
havingtodowithgenderequalityaccordingtowhethertheyagreeordisagree.TheEnglishversionof
thisscalewastakenfromWasserman&Weseley(2009)andtranslatedintoRussianbyanative
speaker.TheSpanishtranslationwasmodifiedfromtheoriginalWasserman&Weseleyversionbythe
primaryinvestigatorwiththeassistanceofanativeSpanishspeaker.

Results
TheparticipantsintheRussiangroupexhibitedaverystrongtendencytoclassifyallofthe
objectsaccordingtotheirgrammaticalgender.Forthepurposesofthisstudy,astrongtendencywill
bedefinedasmorethan75%oftheparticipantsrespondingaccordingtotheassignedgrammatical
genderoftheirlanguage.Infact,noneoftheresponsesfellunder85%foranyRussianobject,with4
outof10oftheobjects(plate,boat,bicycle,fork)unanimouslyclassifiedaccordingtotheir

2
3

SeeAppendixB
SeeAppendixC

12

grammaticalgender.ThetendencyforthoseintheSpanishconditiontoclassifyobjectsbasedontheir
grammaticalgenderwaslessthanthatoftheRussiangroup.Onlyonewordwasunanimous(bone),
withhalfoftheclassifiedobjectsdemonstratingmorethana75%tendencytowardtheirgrammatical
gender.However,possiblereasonsforthisdisparityarediscussedbelow.

Figure1:Russianparticipantscategorizationofobjects(m)denotestheobjectisgrammatically
masculine,(f)grammaticallyfeminine.

13

Figure2:Spanishparticipantscategorizationofobjects(m)denotestheobjectisgrammatically
masculine,(f)grammaticallyfeminine.

Figure3:Englishparticipantscategorizationofobjects.

14

TheEnglishcontrolgroupclassifiedobjectsmorerandomlythantheothergroups,butthis
classificationwasnotcompletelyrandom.Elevenoutoffourteenparticipantsclassifiedtable,key,
andforkasmasculine,withboneunanimouslycategorizedasmasculine.Plateandhousewere
deemedfeminineobjectsby11and13participants,respectively.Theremainingfourobjects(boat,
bike,book,andbackpack)weremoreevenlysplitbetweenmasculineandfeminine.

SocialAttitudesScale
Group:
Englishmean
SD
Spanishmean
SD
Russianmean
males
40.57
6.97
37.43
8.40
32.14
females
43.57
2.76
36.57
9.24
37
total
42.07
5.33
37
6.63
34.57
Figure4:meanscoresandtheirstandarddeviationsontheSAStotalpossiblescore:50

SD
9.53
6.63
8.28

TheresultsfortheSocialAttitudesScale(SAS)testareasshowninFigure4.Thescoreis
inverselyproportionaltothedegreeofsexism:ahigherscoreindicateslesssexistattitudes.A3
(Language:English,Spanish,Russian)x2(Gender:Male,Female)AnalysisofVarianceshowsa
significanteffectoflanguage(p<.04).

Discussion

ThegroupwhichexpressedthemostsexistattitudesoverallthenativeRussianspeakerswas
alsothegroupthathadthestrongesttendencytocategorizeobjectsaccordingtotheirgrammatical
gender.Intheexplanationsforchoosingaparticulargenderoveranother,themostcommonhadtodo
withthegrammaticalgenderoftheobjects.Thus,thisappearstofigureprominentlyinthegendered
classificationofinanimateobjectsbyRussianspeakers.
Asaforementioned,notalloftheobjectswereclassifiedasstronglymasculineorfeminineby
thoseintheSpanishcondition.Themostcontroversialwordbarco,boatwhilegrammatically

15

masculine,wasclassifiedasfeminineby6outof14participantsHowever,basedonthereasonsgiven
forsuchaclassification,thisispossiblyduetodialectaldifferencesandthatthereareseveraldifferent
wordsforboatinSpanish:

Reason
LAlanchaartculofemenino
Lacanoa.La
"LAcanoa."

Translation
"THEboatfemininearticle"
"Thecanoe.The"
"THEcanoe."
"theboat(fem),inordertosoundalittle
labarca,paraserunpocomaspoticos
morepoetic"
Yaquemehavenidoalamenteantes
"Sinceboat(fem)cametomindbefore
barcaquebarco
boat(masc)"
"Labarca"
"theboat(fem)"
Figure5:ResponsesforwhySpanishparticipantsclassifiedboatasfeminine

Aspredicted,theparticipantsintheEnglishconditionclassifiedobjectsmuchmorerandomly
thantheothergroups.However,asstatedearlier,thereweresometendenciestostronglyclassify
objectsasmasculineorfeminine.Thegeneralexplanationsforthesechoicesseemtobedueto
stereotypes:forinstance,housebeingstereotypicallyassociatemorewithwomenthanmen.Similarly,
platewasalsodeemedfemininebythemajorityofparticipantsbecauseitisrelatedtofoodand
cooking,whichagainstereotypicallyandculturallyhavetodowithwomen.Furthermore,physical
characteristicsoftheobjectshadaninfluenceoncategorization.Acommonresponseforwhy
participantscategorizedkey,fork,andboneasmasculinewasthattheseobjectslookphallic.
Likewise,tablewasdescribedasstrong,sturdy,andhard,whichtheparticipantsexplainedare
masculineadjectives.
Alsoaspredicted,theEnglishgroupperformedbetterontheSocialAttitudesScalethandidthe
othertwogroups.However,theresultsdonotnecessarilysupportWasserman&Weseley(2009)s
findingsinwhichthefemaleparticipantsexhibitedmoresexistattitudesthanthemaleparticipants.The

16

researchersexplainedthatdisadvantagedgroupsinthiscasewomenhavebeenshowntorationalize
thesocietythatoppressesthemandthereforeembracetheirinferiority(Wasserman&Weseley2009).
Inthepresentstudy,thiswasonlytrueforthoseintheSpanishconditionandevenso,themeanscores
differedbylessthan1pointbetweenthemaleandfemalegroups.
AlthoughtheEnglishparticipantsexpressedlesssexistattitudesthandidthoseintheSpanish
andRussianconditions,itisrelevanttonotethestereotypeorientedresponsesinthejustificationsfor
theirchoicesintheobjectclassificationtask.ThesefindingsaresimilartothoseinBoroditskyetal.
(2002citedinBoroditskyetal.2003).Themasculineandfeminineadjectivesasreferencedatthe
beginningofthisdiscussionarereflectiveofstereotypesandgenderrolesinsociety.Thefactthat
usefulisconsideredamasculineadjectivewhilesuperficialwordslikeshinyandlittledenote
femininequalitiesisglaringlyproblematic.TheEnglishparticipantsinthepresentstudyusedsimilar
explanations:atableisstrongandthereforemasculine.Conversely,platewasclassifiedasfeminine
byaparticipantwhoexplainedthatplatesareshinyandroundedged,whichIassociatewith
femininity.However,platewasclassifiedasmasculinebyaparticipantthatdescribeditasautility
objectmorethansomethingofbeauty.Characteristicstraditionallyvaluedinwomenacrosscultures
havetodowiththeirappearancemoresothanbeinguseful,productivemembersofsociety,anattribute
traditionallyvaluedinmen.Thisdemonstratesjusthowdeeplyrootedsexismisinourlanguageand
perceptionsoftheworld.

Conclusion,Limitations,andFurtherStudy

Thisstudyinvestigatedwhetherspeakersoflanguageswithgrammaticalgenderwouldclassify
objectsaccordingtotheircorrespondinggrammaticalgenderinthatlanguageandwhetherthose

17

speakersexpressedmoresexistattitudesthanspeakersofanongenderedlanguage.Theresults
supportthefirsthypothesisthatspeakersofSpanishandRussianwouldtendtocategorizeobjects
basedontheobjectsgrammaticalgender.However,theEnglishgroupdidnotperformasrandomlyas
initiallysupposed.Thiswaspossiblyduetoculturalstereotypesandtheappearanceofsomeofthe
objects,whichweredescribedbyparticipantsasphallic.Thesecondhypothesisissupportedinthat
EnglishspeakersachievedthehighestscoresontheSocialAttitudesScalewhiletheSpanishand
Russiangroupsscoredlower.
Althoughtheinitialhypothesesaresupported,itisworthnotingthatothervariablessuchas
culturewerenotcontrolledinthisstudy.Therefore,theresultsmayhavebeenduetoinfluenceofculture
ratherthaninfluenceoflanguage.Toeliminatethispossibility,itwouldbebeneficialforfutureworkto
haveallparticipantsbefromthesamegeographicalareaandsocioeconomicclass.Additionally,alarger
samplesizewouldyieldagreaterrepresentationofthepopulationandthereforestrengthenthe
conclusionsofthepresentstudy.
Certainlytherewouldbeneedofgreatsocialandpoliticalreformtoabsolutelychangeexisting
genderinequalities,butfurtherexploringtheimpactofgrammaticalgenderacrosslanguagesonthe
genderrelationsofmenandwomeninsocietywouldbebeneficialtoraiseawarenessofthisissue.
Furthermore,basedonthenativeEnglishspeakersrelianceonstereotypesforgendercategorization,
theinfluenceofotheraspectsoflanguageonsexistattitudesinadditiontogrammaticalgenderwould
beworthinvestigatingaswell.

Acknowledgements
TheobjectsfortheclassificationtaskweredrawnbygraphicartistKristinHolzer.Instructions

18

foralltasksandtheSocialAttitudesScaleweretranslatedtoRussianbyAnastasiyaFatiy.Alfredo
OquendoassistedineditingtheSpanishtranslations.

References

Bassetti,B.(2007).Bilingualismandthought:Grammaticalgenderandconceptsofobjectsin
ItalianGermanbilingualchildren.InternationalJournalofBilingualism,11,251273.

Belacchi,C.&Cubelli,R.(2012).Implicitknowledgeofgrammaticalgenderinpreschoolchildren.
JournalofPsycholinguisticResearch,41,295310.

Boroditsky,L.(2001).Doeslanguageshapethought?:MandarinandEnglishspeakersconceptionsof
time.CognitivePsychology,43,122.

Boroditsky,L.,Schmidt,L.A.,&Phillips,W.(2003).Sex,syntax,andsemantics.InD.Gentner&S.
GoldinMeadow(Eds.),Languageinmind:Advancesinthestudyoflanguageandthought,(pp.
6179).

Ellis,N.(1992).Linguisticrelativityrevisited:Thebilingualwordlengtheffectinworkingmemoryduring
counting,rememberingnumbers,andmentalcalculation.Advancesinpsychology,83,137155.

Kurinski,E.&Sera,M.D.(2011).DoeslearningSpanishgrammaticalgenderchangeEnglishspeaking
adultscategorizationofinanimateobjects?Bilingualism:LanguageandCognition,14,203220.

Malt,B.C.,Sloman,S.A.,&Gennari,S.P.(2003).Speakingversusthinkingaboutobjectsand
actions.InD.Gentner&S.GoldinMeadow(Eds.),Languageinmind:Advancesinthestudyof
languageandthought,(pp.81111).

PrewittFreilinoJ.L.,Caswell,T.A.,&Laakso,E.K.(2012).Thegenderingoflanguage:A
comparisonofgenderequalityincountrieswithgendered,naturalgender,andgenderlesslanguages.
SexRoles,66,268281.

Ramos,S.&Roberson,D.(2011).Whatconstrainsgrammaticalgendereffectsonsemantic
judgements?EvidencefromPortuguese.JournalofCognitivePsychology,23,102111.

19

Rowling,J.K.(1999).HarryPotterandthePrisonerofAzkaban.NewYork:Scholastic.

Rowling,J.K.(2001).HarryPotteryelprisionerodeAzkaban(trans:MuozGarca,A.&Martn
Azofra,N.)Barcelona:Salamandra.

Rowling,J.K.(2002).GarriPotteriuznikAzkabana(trans:Litvinova,M.D.)Moscow:Rosman.

Saalbach,H.,Imai,M.,&Schalk,L.(2012).Grammaticalgenderandinferencesaboutbiological
propertiesinGermanspeakingchildren.CognitiveScience,36,12511267.

Wasserman,B.D.&Weseley,A.J.(2009).Qu?Quoi?Dolanguageswithgrammaticalgender
promotesexistattitudes?SexRoles,61,634643.

AppendixA
Passagesforthereadingtask:

Sialguienseasomaraalaventana..!chillHermione,mirandohaciaatrs,haciaal
castillo.
HuiremosdijoHarrycondeterminacin.Nosinternaremosenelbosque.Tendremosque
ocultarnosdetrsdeunrboloalgoas,yestaratentos.
Deacuerdo,peroiremospordetrsdelosinvernaderos!dijoHermione,sinaliento.
TenemosqueapartarnosdelapuertaprincipaldelacabaadeHagridodelocontrarionos
veremosanosotrosmismos!Yadebemosestarllegandoalacabaa.
PensandotodavaenlasintencionesdeHermione,Harryechacorrerdelantedeella.
Atravesaronloshuertoshastalosinvernaderos,sedetuvieronunmomentodetrsdestosy
reanudaronelcaminoatodavelocidad,rodeandoelsauceboxeadoryyendoaocultarseenel
bosque(Rowling2001).

....
,..
.
,.
.!
,,,
.,
,,
(Rowling2002).

AppendixB

20

Objectsforclassificationtask:

21

AppendixC
SocialAttitudesScale:

English
Instructions:Pleaseratethe
followingstatementsfrom1to5:1
meaningyoustronglyagree,5
meaningyoustronglydisagreeand
3meaningyouarenotsure.

1.Thereisnomoreprejudice
againstwomenwhoworkin
America.
*2.In2014,itismoredifficultfora
womantogetandkeepajobthanin

Spanish
Porfavor,lealassiguientes
declaracioneseindiquedel1al5:1
significandoqueustedest
absolutamentedeacuerdoy5
significandoqueustedest
totalmenteendesacuerdo3
significaqueustednoestseguroo
neutral.

1.Yanoexistenprejuicioscontralas

Russian

15.1

.3,
.5

1.

22

pastyears.
3.Womenshouldnotgowhere
theyarenotwanted.
4.Womenshouldwaitforchange,
becausechangewillcomeifthey
arepatient.
*5.Ifbusinesswerefair,menand
womenwouldhaveanequalchance
togetajob.
6.Itwouldbedifficulttoworkfora
femaleboss.
7.Womencomplaintoomuchabout
theinequalitybetweenmenand
women.
8.Thegovernmenthasgiventoo
muchtowomenrecently.
9.Moneyiswastedonwomenwho
attendexpensivecollegesbecause
theywillquittheirjobstoraisetheir
children.
10.Inordertobefair,businesses
hirewomenwhoarenotcompetent
enoughtodothejob.

mujeresquetrabajanenlosEstados
Unidos.
*2.Enelao2014,esmsdifcil
paraquemujeresobtengany
mantenganuntrabajoqueenel
pasado.
3.Lasmujeresnodebenirdonde
ellasnoestnaceptadas.
4.Lasmujeresdeberanesperarun
cambioporqueelcambiovendrsi
ellassonpacientes.
*5.Sienelmundodelosnegocios
fueranjustos,loshombresylas
mujerestendranunaoportunidad
igualparaobteneruntrabajo.
6.Seradifciltrabajarparaunjefe
femenino.
7.Lasmujeressequejandemasiado
sobreladesigualdadqueexiste
entrehombres
ymujeres.
8.Elgobiernoleshadado
demasiadoalasmujeres
recientemente.
9.Eldineroestmalgastadoporlas
mujeresqueasistenauniversidades
prestigiosasporqueellas
abandonarnsustrabajosparacriar
asusnios.
10.Paraserjustos,losnegocios
empleanamujeresquenosontan
competentespara
hacereltrabajo.

Anasterisk(*)indicatesitemwasreversescored.

.
*2.2014

.
3.
.
4.
,

*5.
,

.
6.

.
7.

.
8.

.
9.

.
10.,