Author
Listed:
- Carolin Müller-Spitzer
(Leibniz Institute for the German Language (IDS))
- Samira Ochs
(Leibniz Institute for the German Language (IDS))
- Alexander Koplenig
(Leibniz Institute for the German Language (IDS))
- Jan Oliver Rüdiger
(Leibniz Institute for the German Language (IDS))
- Sascha Wolfer
(Leibniz Institute for the German Language (IDS))
Abstract
Research on gender and language is tightly knitted to social debates on gender equality and non-discriminatory language use. Psycholinguistic scholars have made significant contributions in this field. However, corpus-based studies that investigate these matters within the context of language use are still rare. In our study, we address the question of how much textual material would actually have to be changed if non-gender-inclusive texts were rewritten to be gender-inclusive. This quantitative measure is an important empirical insight, as a recurring argument against the use of gender-inclusive German is that it supposedly makes written texts too long and complicated. It is also argued that gender-inclusive language has negative effects on language learners. However, such effects are only likely if gender-inclusive texts are very different from those that are not gender-inclusive. In our corpus-linguistic study, we manually annotated German press texts to identify the parts that would have to be changed. Our results show that, on average, less than 1% of all tokens would be affected by gender-inclusive language. This small proportion calls into question whether gender-inclusive German presents a substantial barrier to understanding and learning the language, particularly when we take into account the potential complexities of interpreting masculine generics.
Suggested Citation
Carolin Müller-Spitzer & Samira Ochs & Alexander Koplenig & Jan Oliver Rüdiger & Sascha Wolfer, 2024.
"Less than one percent of words would be affected by gender-inclusive language in German press texts,"
Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
Handle:
RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03769-w
DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03769-w
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03769-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.