Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

A Comparative Analysis on Women's Speech in Herland and Kadınlar Ülkesi

Year 2025, Volume: 10 Issue: 3, 1626 - 1645, 28.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.1775596

Abstract

“Sociolinguistics”, analysis of the relation between sociology and linguistics, scrutinizes the relationship between language with social variables such as geography, race, gender, or nationality. Initiated with the development of feminist linguistics in the 1960s and 1970s, studies on “gender and language” are categorized into two: “women’s speech” and depiction of women in “men’s speech”. The relation between gender and language has been one of the most controversial themes in women’s studies by notable sociolinguists such as Deborah Tannen, Janet Holmes, Otto Jesperson, and Robin Lakoff. Lakoff, in her article “Language and Woman’s Place” (1973), clarified “linguistic discrimination”, referring to the language distinctions between men and women. This study, therefore, aims to analyze women’s speech and how men portray women in the Crimean author İsmail Gaspıralı’s Kadınlar Ülkesi (1887) and the American author Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s utopia Herland (1979), regarding Lakoff’s theories. Within this scope, for the analysis part, two utopias were examined in terms of linguistic and lexical variants, used by and for the female characters. The analysis revealed that Gilman’s Herland bears strong similarities with İsmail Gaspıralı’s Kadınlar Ülkesi: both authors emphasized the potential strength of women in actual worlds, female characters were portrayed as both masculine and feminine and Lakoff's theories on women’s speech could be observed in both novels. In conclusion, although they were written in and for different cultures, the female characters, in both novels, are physically and linguistically prominent, while the male characters portray women in a derogatory manner.

Ethical Statement

No ethical consideration.

Supporting Institution

None

Thanks

Thanks for the support of publication teams

References

  • Achard, Pierre (1986). “Analyse de Discours et Sociologie du Langage”. Langage et Société, 37, 5-60.
  • Albinski, Nan Bowman (1988). Women’s Utopias in British and American Fiction. London: Routledge.
  • Arnold, Bridgitte (2006). “It Began This Way: The Synonymy of Cartography and Writing as Utopian Cognitive Mapping in Herland”. Utopian Studies, 17(2), 299-316.
  • Cameron, Deborah (2018). Women in Their Speech Communities. London: Routledge.
  • Cartwright-Jones, Catherine (2013). “Harem”. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Women. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Chang, Li-Wen (2010). “Economics, Evolution, and Feminism in Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s Utopian Fiction”. Women’s Studies, 39(4), 319-348.
  • Connell, Jeanne M. (1995). “Revisiting the Concept of Community: An Examination of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s Utopian Vision”. Peabody Journal of Education, 70(4), 19-33.
  • Çetindaş, Dilek (2013). “The Woman in The Novels And Storıes of Heroes and Ismaıl Gasprınskı Ideal Woman Propasal”. Turkish Studies. 8 (9), 989-1008.
  • Freibert, Lucy M. (1983). “World Views in Utopian Novels by Women”. In Marleen Barr and Nicholas D. Smith (Eds.), Women and Utopia (pp.67-84). USA: University Press of America.
  • Gaspıralı, İsmail (2003). Roman ve Hikâyeleri. İstanbul: Ötüken Neşriyat.
  • Gilman, Charlotte Perkins (1992). Herland and Selected Stories. USA: First Signet Classic.
  • Hausman, Bernice L. (1998). “Sex Before Gender: Charlotte Perkins Gilman and the Evolutionary Paradigm of Utopia”. Feminist Studies, 24(3), 488-510.
  • Holmes, Janet (2008). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. UK: Pearson Education Limited.
  • Holmes, Janet (2013). Women, Men and Politeness. London: Routledge.
  • Jespersen, Otto (1990). “The Woman: Women’s Languages”. In Deborah Cameron (Ed.), The Feminist Critique of Language: A Reader (pp. 220-225). London: Routledge.
  • Kessler, Carol Farley (1995). Daring to Dream: Utopian Fiction by United States Women Before 1950. USA: Syracuse University Press.
  • Koç, Yasemin (2015). The Typology of Women in the Works of Ismail Gaspıralı, Unpublished Master's Thesis, İzmir: Ege University.
  • König, Güray (1992). “Dil ve Cins Kadın ve Erkeklerin Dil Kullanımı”. Dilbilim Araştırmaları, 25-36.
  • Labov, William (1966). The Social Stratification of English in New York City. New York: Center for Applied Linguistics.
  • Lakoff, Robin (1973). “Language and Woman’s Place”. Language in Society, 2(1), 45-80.
  • Maltz, Daniel & Borker, Ruth (1982). “A Cultural Approach to Male-Female Miscommunication”. In John J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and Social Identity (pp. 196-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Register, Cheri (1996). “American Feminist Literary Criticism: A Bibliographical Introduction”. In Mary Eagleton (Ed.), Feminist Literary Theory (pp. 210-216). UK: Blackwell.
  • Showalter, Elaine, Baechler, Lea & Litz, A. Walton Litz (1993). Modern American Women Writers. USA: Collier Books.
  • Spender, Dale (1980). Man Made Language. London: Routledge.
  • Tannen, Deborah (2013). You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Ballentine Books.
  • Topçu, Ümmühan (2014) “Women in Gaspıralı” Hacettepe University Journal of Turkic Studies. Spring (20), 45-62.
  • Vater, Heinz (2002). Einführung in die Sprachwissenschaft. Stuttgart: Utb.
  • Veith, Werner (2005). Soziolinguistik: Ein Arbeitsbuch mit 104 Abbildungen, Kontrollfragen und Antworten. Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.

Herland ve Kadınlar Ülkesi'nde Kadınların Konuşması Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analiz

Year 2025, Volume: 10 Issue: 3, 1626 - 1645, 28.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.1775596

Abstract

Sosyoloji ve dilbilim arasındaki ilişkiyi inceleyen "Sosyodilbilim", dil ile coğrafya, ırk, cinsiyet veya uyruk gibi sosyal değişkenler arasındaki ilişkiyi inceler. 1960'lar ve 1970'lerde feminist dilbilimin gelişmesiyle başlayan "cinsiyet ve dil" çalışmaları iki kategoriye ayrılır: "kadınların konuşması" ve "erkeklerin konuşmasında" kadınların tasviri. Cinsiyet ve dil arasındaki ilişki, Deborah Tannen, Janet Holmes, Otto Jesperson ve Robin Lakoff gibi önemli sosyodilbilimciler tarafından kadın çalışmalarında en çok tartışılan konulardan biri olmuştur. Lakoff, "Dil ve Kadının Yeri" (1973) adlı makalesinde, erkekler ve kadınlar arasındaki dil ayrımına atıfta bulunarak "dilsel ayrımcılık" kavramını açıklığa kavuşturmuştur. Bu çalışmada, Kırımlı yazar İsmail Gaspıralı’nın Kadınlar Ülkesi (1887) ve Amerikalı yazar Charlotte Perkins Gilman’ın Herland (Kadınlar Ülkesi) (1979) adlı eserlerinde Lakoff’un kuramları ışığında kadınların söylemi ve erkeklerin kadınları nasıl betimlediği analiz edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Bu kapsamda, analiz bölümünde iki ütopya, kadın karakterler tarafından ve onlar için kullanılan dilsel ve sözcüksel varyantlar açısından incelenmiştir. Analiz, Gilman'ın Herland ütopyasının İsmail Gaspıralı'nın Kadınlar Ülkesi ile güçlü benzerlikler taşıdığını ortaya koymuştur: her iki yazar da kadınların gerçek dünyalardaki potansiyel gücünü vurgulamış, kadın karakterler hem erkeksi hem de kadınsı olarak betimlenmiş ve Lakoff'un kadınların konuşma biçimine ilişkin teorileri her iki romanda da gözlemlenebilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, farklı kültürlerde ve farklı kültürler için yazılmış olmalarına rağmen, her iki romanda da kadın karakterler fiziksel ve dilsel olarak öne çıkarken, erkek karakterler kadınları aşağılayıcı bir şekilde tasvir etmektedir.

Ethical Statement

Etik ihlal söz konusu değildir.

Supporting Institution

Yok

Thanks

Emekleri için yayın ekibine teşekkür ederiz.

References

  • Achard, Pierre (1986). “Analyse de Discours et Sociologie du Langage”. Langage et Société, 37, 5-60.
  • Albinski, Nan Bowman (1988). Women’s Utopias in British and American Fiction. London: Routledge.
  • Arnold, Bridgitte (2006). “It Began This Way: The Synonymy of Cartography and Writing as Utopian Cognitive Mapping in Herland”. Utopian Studies, 17(2), 299-316.
  • Cameron, Deborah (2018). Women in Their Speech Communities. London: Routledge.
  • Cartwright-Jones, Catherine (2013). “Harem”. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Women. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Chang, Li-Wen (2010). “Economics, Evolution, and Feminism in Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s Utopian Fiction”. Women’s Studies, 39(4), 319-348.
  • Connell, Jeanne M. (1995). “Revisiting the Concept of Community: An Examination of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s Utopian Vision”. Peabody Journal of Education, 70(4), 19-33.
  • Çetindaş, Dilek (2013). “The Woman in The Novels And Storıes of Heroes and Ismaıl Gasprınskı Ideal Woman Propasal”. Turkish Studies. 8 (9), 989-1008.
  • Freibert, Lucy M. (1983). “World Views in Utopian Novels by Women”. In Marleen Barr and Nicholas D. Smith (Eds.), Women and Utopia (pp.67-84). USA: University Press of America.
  • Gaspıralı, İsmail (2003). Roman ve Hikâyeleri. İstanbul: Ötüken Neşriyat.
  • Gilman, Charlotte Perkins (1992). Herland and Selected Stories. USA: First Signet Classic.
  • Hausman, Bernice L. (1998). “Sex Before Gender: Charlotte Perkins Gilman and the Evolutionary Paradigm of Utopia”. Feminist Studies, 24(3), 488-510.
  • Holmes, Janet (2008). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. UK: Pearson Education Limited.
  • Holmes, Janet (2013). Women, Men and Politeness. London: Routledge.
  • Jespersen, Otto (1990). “The Woman: Women’s Languages”. In Deborah Cameron (Ed.), The Feminist Critique of Language: A Reader (pp. 220-225). London: Routledge.
  • Kessler, Carol Farley (1995). Daring to Dream: Utopian Fiction by United States Women Before 1950. USA: Syracuse University Press.
  • Koç, Yasemin (2015). The Typology of Women in the Works of Ismail Gaspıralı, Unpublished Master's Thesis, İzmir: Ege University.
  • König, Güray (1992). “Dil ve Cins Kadın ve Erkeklerin Dil Kullanımı”. Dilbilim Araştırmaları, 25-36.
  • Labov, William (1966). The Social Stratification of English in New York City. New York: Center for Applied Linguistics.
  • Lakoff, Robin (1973). “Language and Woman’s Place”. Language in Society, 2(1), 45-80.
  • Maltz, Daniel & Borker, Ruth (1982). “A Cultural Approach to Male-Female Miscommunication”. In John J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and Social Identity (pp. 196-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Register, Cheri (1996). “American Feminist Literary Criticism: A Bibliographical Introduction”. In Mary Eagleton (Ed.), Feminist Literary Theory (pp. 210-216). UK: Blackwell.
  • Showalter, Elaine, Baechler, Lea & Litz, A. Walton Litz (1993). Modern American Women Writers. USA: Collier Books.
  • Spender, Dale (1980). Man Made Language. London: Routledge.
  • Tannen, Deborah (2013). You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Ballentine Books.
  • Topçu, Ümmühan (2014) “Women in Gaspıralı” Hacettepe University Journal of Turkic Studies. Spring (20), 45-62.
  • Vater, Heinz (2002). Einführung in die Sprachwissenschaft. Stuttgart: Utb.
  • Veith, Werner (2005). Soziolinguistik: Ein Arbeitsbuch mit 104 Abbildungen, Kontrollfragen und Antworten. Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
There are 28 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Linguistics (Other)
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Senem Üstün Kaya 0000-0001-6537-9769

Ümmühan Bilgin Topçu 0000-0003-1509-8445

Submission Date September 1, 2025
Acceptance Date December 20, 2025
Publication Date December 28, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 10 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Üstün Kaya, S., & Bilgin Topçu, Ü. (2025). A Comparative Analysis on Women’s Speech in Herland and Kadınlar Ülkesi. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi, 10(3), 1626-1645. https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.1775596