Sex Roles, VoL 6, No.

2, 1980

Sex-Role Stereotyping in the Language of the Deaf 1

Eric J. Jolly
University o f Rhode Island

Charlotte G. O'Kelly
Providence College

One of the most powerful forces for maintaining sex-role stereotypes is

language. Language structures what we perceive and how we perceive it.
Language is not an objective, value-neutral tool for communication; rather,
it is pervaded by evaluations and invidious distinctions. Furthermore, it reflects and thereby reinforces the values and attitudes of the society of which
it is a part. In relation to the issue of sex roles, our language embodies our
cultural stereotypes of both males and females and reflects the subordinate
place of women in our society.
English focuses our attention on males. Masculine terms such as
"man," " m a n k i n d , " "the average m a n , " " m a n p o w e r , " and " m a n m a d e "
are considered to subsume females without including the feminine
counterparts. Similarly, the pronomial form of the sex-indefinite "he" is
supposed to include both males and females (Bodine, 1975). By ignoring
females, these usages present a world that appears in a normative sense to
be populated by males. Females are neutralized; their contributions are
ignored by the language and thus are often unrecognized by the users of the
language. English also often places females in explicitly inferior positions to
males. For example, English usage allows adult women to be referred to as
"girls," while adult males are called " b o y s " only if insult or comradery is
intended. The various usages of the word " l a d y " also illustrate this point.
Although originating as a title o f nobility for females analogous to the
words " l o r d " or " g e n t l e m a n , " " l a d y " is often used today to indicate a

'This article is a revised version of a paper presented at the annual meetings of the American
Sociological Association, September 1978, San Francisco.
285
0360-0025/80/0400-0285503.00/0 Q 1980 Plenum Publishing Corporation

286

Jolly and O'Kelly

lack of seriousness on the part of the individual being described. According

to L a k o f f (1975), when one says, " S h e ' s a lady sculptor," one implies that a
woman is not a serious sculptor; she merely dabbles at it. A male doctor is
not referred to as a "gentleman d o c t o r " or even as a " m a l e d o c t o r . " The
use of " l a d y d o c t o r " or " w o m a n d o c t o r " indicates that medicine is an occupation inappropriate for women. The language tells us that women in this
position are stepping out of their usual place into the world of men.
English has other seemingly equivalent terms which also prove to
be nonequivalent upon inspection: " b a c h e l o r " versus " s p i n s t e r " and
" m a s t e r " versus "mistress,' ' " s i r " versus " m a d a m , " and " p a t r o n " versus
" m a t r o n . " Similarly, the feminine equivalent of m a n y masculine nouns
involves adding the diminutive " e t t e " to the male form, as in " d r u m
m a j o r " versus " d r u m m a j o r e t t e . " The connotation here is not merely o f
female gender but also of being smaller, less important, less serious,
younger, and more childlike.
Out titles for men and women also reflect the subordinate social status
of women. Traditionally women were the property of men or at least were
under the protection of men. Hence, a women is a " M i s s " while she is
under the protection of her father. She becomes " M r s . " when she is
transferred to the protection of a husband. Both titles indicate her
relationship to males. The change of ownership is also signified by the
change of surname f r o m that of her father to that o f her husband. There is
no analogous process for males. " M r . " suffices for both married and unmarried m a l e s because it is not important to indicate their relationship to women. W o m e n do not control or own males. Men are therefore presented in our language as independent adults; women are not.
Largely in response to issues raised by the w o m a n ' s movement, sociolinguists have begun to research linguistic discrimination against females in
depth (For a review of this literature and a detailed examination of these
usages, see Key, 1975; Lakoff, 1975; Thorne & Henley, 1975.) Studies of
sex differences in language have been conducted on standard English
(Burr, Dunn, & Farquar, 1972; Lakoff, 1975), dialects in English (Conklin,
1973, 1974; Thorne & Henley, 1975), on immigrant groups and in multilingual situations (Throne & Henley, 1975), on Blacks and other minority
groups (Hannerz, 1970; Johnson, 197]; Thorne & Henley, 1975), on
children's English (Lakoff, 1975; Sachs, 1975), and on nonverbal or body
English (Henley, 1975; Henley & Freeman, 1975). However, no research has
examined the problem of sexism in the language of the deaf, even though
the deaf community constitutes an important segment of our population.
This article will deal with one aspect of sex differences in the language of the
deaf, that is, sex-role stereotypes in American Sign Language (Ameslan),
the ideographic language of the deaf in the United States.

Sex-Role Stereotyping in Language of Deaf

287

A M E R I C A N SIGN L A N G U A G E
In addition to finger spelling and Signed English, which largely repeat
standard English, the deaf also have a language different from English,
American Sign Language.: Ameslan is, of course, related to English, but it
is not a direct manual translation of English and is not merely a series of
pantomines (Frishberg, 1975). It is a practical and fluid language in its own
right.
The American version of sign language was introduced to the deaf
community in the United States in 1817 by Thomas Gallaudet. Although
not the only means of communication, Ameslan is widely used in the
American deaf community. Ameslan, like any other language, reflect and
reinforces the culture of its users. And, like any other language, it changes
and evolves in relation to wider social changes and in response to new
situations, needs, and attitudes and values. For example, the deterioration
of New York City's popular image is reflected in its Ameslan sign. In less
than 25 years, the sign for " N e w Y o r k " evolved from an o v e r the hand
passing of the hand configuration for the letter " Y , " a movement which
resembles the word " c l e a n , " to an u n d e r the hand passing of the letter
" ' y , " a derogatory aspect which can be added to any word. Historical
stereotypy of Mexico is reflected in the sign for " M e x i c o , " which
incorporates the same motions as the sign for " S p a i n , " bringing together
the index fingers of both hands from the corresponding shoulder to just
under the neck, to give the appearance of tying a matador's cape.
" M e x i c o , " however, has the additional movement of a scratch on the left
shoulder, to indicate fleas. 3
Although the above examples indicate the existence of certain forms
of invidiQus cultural stereotypes within Ameslan, the language is relatively
free of negative racial and ethnic epithets. For example, Ameslan has a
neutral word for "Black person," but does not have a word for " n i g g e r . "
To say "nigger" one would have to resort to finger spelling. Similarly,
Ameslan has a word for " g a y " , but does not have derogatory words for
homosexuals such as " f a i r y " or " f a g . " Yet when we examine the Ameslan
gestures for " m e n " and " w o m e n " and the "masculine" and " f e m i n i n e "

2The following analysis of stereotypes within sign language is based on conversational sign.
This less formalized version of signs combines factors of both Signed English and classical
Ameslan. Some examples m a y vary slightly by regional dialect.
~"Proper" Ameslan does not contain this sign as an accepted term; but it is the accepted
gesture for " M e x i c o " in " s t r e e t " Ameslan. Like most languages, A m e s l a n has its high
form and its low form. There are in addition both regional and subcultural variations in
Ameslan usage among the deaf.

288

Jolly and O'Kelly

gestures it attaches to other words, we can see that it includes sex-role

stereotypes which implicitly if not explicitly, treat females as subordinate to
males.

S E X - R O L E S T E R E O T Y P E S IN A M E S L A N
A sign is composed of four aspects: (1) a hand configuration (2) at a
particular location (3) with a specific movement (4) in a specific orientation
to the body. The types of hand configurations often contain certain implied
sex-role stereotypes. For example, the closed first, crossed wrist
configuration is considered a stronger movement in sign language. It is the
configuration used for such words as " w o r k , " " p r o t e c t , " " p o w e r , "
" b r a v e , " and " s t r o n g . " This implies the masculine nature of such
attributes. Such a configuration would rarely be used to indicate tender
emotions, except in the case of " l o v e . " In the signing of the word " l o v e , " a
man will cross his arms at the wrist, with closed fists over his heart. A
woman traditionally uses a more feminine f o r m of open palms gently
crossed over her breasts. (Many deaf signers are now breaking with this
tradition and using the traditionally masculine sign instead.) Such
sex-specific differences in hand configuration and body orientation
symbolize the male, but not the female, as strong and potent, even in areas
related to love.
Perhaps o f greater importance to the issue of sex-role stereotyping in
Ameslan is its use of the head and facial area to sign gender-specific terms.
A pattern is clearly discernible in the body orientation of signs which deal
with males and that which is considered masculine. The face appears to be
divided into two parts for differentiating gender-specific signs? The section
of the face from the center of the ear downward, including the mouth, is the
Ameslan orientation for m a n y female-related words. Conversely, the face
from the center o f the head up, including the brain area, is often used to
indicate masculine orientation. For example, various hand movements f r o m
contact with the face or head above the center of the ear create the
masculine pronouns " h e , " " h i m , " and " h i s " and male referent nouns such
as " m a n , " " f a t h e r , " and " s 0 n . " The corresponding feminine pronouns
" s h e , " " h e r , " and " h e r s " and female referent nouns such as " f e m a l e , "
" w o m a n , " and " g i r l " are formed f r o m the lower portion of the face (see
Table I). A complimentary term for " w o m a n " is, moreover, started at the
female portion of the face below the ear and the hand is then raised to the
din teaching the sign for " m a n , " it is usually explained that the gesture is derived from a m a n
tipping a cap; the sign for "girl" similarly is said to give the appearance o f stringing a bonnet.

Sex-Role Stereotyping in Language of Deaf

289

male portion above the center ear, implying that the masculine is positive or
superior and, therefore, complimentary when applied to a female. An
analogous situation is found in English when one ways that a woman
"thinks like a m a n . " A compliment is intended for the particular woman,
but the effect is to denigrate females as a group by implying that they
usually do not think like men.
Studies of sex-role stereotypes in standard English also note that such
stereotypes are c o m m o n in words related to the world of work, such as
" c h a i r m a n , " "businessman," " r e p a i r m a n , " "cleaning l a d y , " and
" m a i d . " A similar gender-based occupational terminology exists in sign
language. For example, we may compare the signing for " p r e s i d e n t " and
"secretary." In Ameslan the word "secretary" appears as a combination of
" g i r l " and " w r i t e , " or, literally, " a girl who writes." In the term
"president," the primary term is " m a n , " done with a rising flare or salute
from the forehead. These signs, of course, imply that presidents are male
and secretaries are female.
Stereotypic views of male and female personality traits and mental
capacities can also be seen in the manner in which other words are signed
using the implicit male or female body orientation. An examination of the
terms presented in Table I reveals certain important patterns. Words referring to the intellectual realm are masculine or neutral; they are rarely signed
with the female orientation. Such words as " c l e v e r , " "wise," " t h i n k , "
" l e a r n , " and " c o n c e n t r a t i o n " use the masculine orientation. This category
also includes such negative terms as " i g n o r a n t , " " s t u p i d , " " f o o l i s h , " and
" f o r g e t . " But even these latter terms refer to mental capacities and serve to
focus our attention on the masculine nature of the intellect. Similarly, terms
referring to decision m a k i n g - - " j u d g e , " " d e t e r m i n e , " " r e a s o n " - - u s e the
masculine orientation. The female orientation, however, is used for terms
referring to emotion and f e e l i n g - - " s a d , " " v a i n , " " p a t i e n t , " and
" l o n e l y " - - a n d for words dealing with a quality such as personal
appearance--"pretty," "ugly," "thin," "fat," "dirty."
It might be argued that the use of the masculine orientation for intellectual and decision-making concepts is primarily ideographic. That is,
since these signs refer to processes of the mind, it is only reasonable to
gesture towards the cranial area. However, we argue that it is not by chance
that the cranial area is the locus for masculine terms. This in itself reflects
our sex-role beliefs of male rationality versus female expressiveness
(Parsons, 1954). Similarly, terms relating to speech are either feminine or
neutral in orientation (see Table I). Hence, " a n n o u n c e , " " t a l k , " and
"conversation" are found concomitant with female referent terms. One can
again argue that this is because the female area includes the mouth, and the
ideographic nature of sign language leads it to sign speech-related words

290

Jolly and O'Kelly

Table I. Comparison of Words Signed With the Masculine Orientation With Words
Signed in the Feminine Orientation
Masculine orientation

Feminine orientation

1. Male referent nouns and pronouns

boy
brother
father
grandfather
husband
lord
man
male
son
uncle

1. Female referent nouns and pronouns

aunt
daughter
female
girl
grandmother
lady
mother
niece
sister
wife

2. Words referring to intellect

attention
believe
clever
concentration
concept
dream
foohsh
forget
hope
idea
ignorant
imagination
inform
intellect
know
learn
memorize
mind
misunderstand
philosophy
remember
smart
teach
think
understand
wondering
wise

woman
2. Words referring to emotion and feeling
ashamed
bear
cross
endure
humble
lonely
patient
sad
vain
vanity

3. Words referring to decision making

because
decide
determine
goal
guess
invent
judge
reason
resolve
suspect

3. Words referring to speech

announce
answer
conversation
gossip
letter
mock
promise
scream
speech reading
talk
vow
4. Words referring to quality
cute
dirty
false
fat
funny
lie
odd
pretty
quiet
red
sour
thin
true

291

Sex-Role Stereotyping in Language of Deaf

Table I. Continued
Masculine orientation
will
worry
4, Animals
cow
horse
lion
rooster
wolf
5. Other words
bastard
crown
devil
governor
politician
president
rebel

Feminine orientation
ugly
warm
wrong
5. Animals
bird
cat
fox
mouse
pig
turkey
6. Other words
apple
bitch
flower
food
foxy
hide
menstruation
private (sign for female genitalia)
secret
secretary
sugar
thief
wine

from the mouth. But what is ideographic about using this area to sign "female" or " h e r " ? The suggestion offered by sign language manuals that the
signs for females indicate the stringing of a bonnet, while the sign for males
are derived from the tipping o f a hat is not an adequate explanation. Why
didn't Ameslan's creators decide to use the top of the head for females to
indicate arranging one's hair? And the bottom of the head for males t o indicate shaving? Again we suggest that it is reflective of wider sex-role
imagery to sign female referent nouns and pronouns in the same area as
"gossip," " m o c k , " and " t a l k . " In this manner sign language reinforces
the stereotypic view of women as talkative and emotional and males as
rational and intellectual.
The feminine-signed terms might also be viewed in terms of the
traditional division of women into " g o o d " and " b a d " women. (See
Janeway, 1971 ,,for a discussion of these distinctions in Western civilization
and of their implications for women's behavior and personality structure.)
One set of these terms includes the accepted feminine virtues " p a t i e n t , "
" b e a r , " " e n d u r e , " " c u t e , " "sweet," and " p r e t t y . " Another set features

292

Jolly and O'Kelly

the familiar deprecatory stereotypes of w o m e n as shrews:

"odd," "dirty," "pig," "fox," "cat," and "bitch".

"gossip,"

CONCLUSION
Like s t a n d a r d English, A m e s l a n i n c o r p o r a t e s sex-role stereotypes of
males as strong, intelligent, workers superior to the weaker, m o r e tender,
patient, a n d sometimes shrewish females. As L a k o f f (1975) notes,
" L i n g u i s t i c i m b a l a n c e s are worthy of study because they b r i n g into sharper
focus real-world i m b a l a n c e s a n d i n e q u i t i e s " (p. 43). I n the l a n g u a g e of the
deaf i m b a l a n c e s exist in its t r e a t m e n t of males a n d females. A m e s l a n did
not create these imbalances, b u t it does reflect them. A n d in reflecting them,
it subtly reinforces them. But languages are subject to change. If the
feminist m o v e m e n t has sufficient i m p a c t o n the A m e r i c a n deaf c o m m u n i t y ,
we m a y see changes in A m e s l a n ' s p o r t r a y a l of sex-role stereotypes in its
signs.

REFERENCES

Bodine, A. Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: Singular "they," sex-indefinite "he"

and "he or she." Language m Society, 1975, 4(September), 129-146.
Burr, E., Dunn, S., & Farquar, N. Womenand the language of inequality. Social Education,
1972, 36,(December), 841-845.
Conklin, N. F. Perspectives on the dialects o f women. Paper presented at the meeting of the
American Dialect Society,
, 1973.
Conklin, N. F. Toward a feminist analysis of linguistic behavior. University o f Michigan
Papers in Women's Studies, 1974, 1(1), 51-73.
Frishberg, N. Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language.
Language, 1975, 51(September), 696-697.
Hannerz, U. Language variation and social relationships. Studia Linguistica, 1970, 24,
128-151.
Henley, N. Power, sex, and nonverbal communication. In B. Thorne & N. Henley (Eds.),
Language and sex." Difference and dominance. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1975.
Henley, N., & Freeman, J. The sexual politics of interpersonal behavior. In J. Freeman (Ed.),
Women: A feminist perspective. Palo Alto: Mayfield, 1975.
Janeway, E. Man's world, woman's place. New York: Delta, 1971.
Johnson, K. Black kinesics: Some nonverbal communication patterns in the Black culture.
Florida FL Reporter, Spring/Fall 1971, pp. 17-20.
Key, M. R. Male~female language. Metuchen, N.J." Scarecrow, 1975.
Lakoff, R. Language and woman's place. New York: Harper & Row, 1975.
Parson, T. Age and sex in the social structure of the United States. In Parsons, T. (ed.),
Essays in sociological theory. New York: Free Press, 1954.
Sachs, J. Cues to the identification of sex in children's speech. In B. Thorne & N. Henley
(Eds.), Language and sex." Difference and dominance. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury
House, 1975.
Thorne, B., & Henley, N. Language and sex." Difference and dominance. Rowley, Mass. :
Newbury House, 1975.