Women and Language: Portrayal of Women in Turkish Proverbs

Year 2015, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 217 - 230, 20.02.2015

Nazife Aydınoğlu

Abstract

Language is an important element of culture; it both reflects the realities of society and provides the reinforcement and re-establishment of it. This is why it is possible to trace how the secondary status of women is embedded in the language of patriarchal societies and to see its role on the formation of gender roles. Studies on gender and language should be carried out on two different areas: language about women and language women use. The aim of this descriptive study is to find out how Turkish language sheds light on the secondary status of women in Turkish society. To this end, the proverbs under the title of “Women” are studied in Metin Yurtbaşı’s dictionary titled A Dictionary of Turkish Proverbs. Another aim of the study is to give a historical survey of the studies in the field of the language women use. In this part, it is explained how these studies improved together with the three main waves of the feminist movement. As a result, it is found out that women in Turkey are given negative labels and scorned by means of the language.  As languages reflect the realities of a society, strengthen them and form future of cultures, the necessity of eliminating these negative and belittling items in Turkish is highlighted. 

Keywords

Gender; Language; Turkish Proverbs

Kadın ve Dil

Abstract

Kültürün önemli öğelerinden olan dil, bir yandan toplumun gerçeklerini yansıtırken, diğer yandan kültürün yeniden oluşumunu ve devamını sağlar. Bu nedenle ataerkil toplumlarda kadının ikincil konumda olmasının yansımalarını dil üzerinde izleyebildiğimiz gibi dilin toplumsal cinsiyet rollerini oluşturmadaki önemini görebiliriz.  Toplumsal cinsiyet ve dil konusu, kadınların konuştuğu dil ve kadın hakkındaki dil olmak üzere iki farklı alanda incelenmelidir. Bu çalışmanın amacı iki konuya açıklık getirmektir. Bunlardan birincisi, Türkçede kadın hakkında kullanılan dilin onun ikincil konumuna ne derece ışık tuttuğunu araştırmaktadır. Bu amaçla Metin Yurtbaşı’nın A Dictionary of Turkish Proverbs adlı sözlüğünün “Kadın” başlığı altında yer alan atasözleri incelenmiştir. İkinci amaç ise, kadının kullandığı dil ile onun konumu arasındaki ilişkilerini inceleyen araştırmaların tarihsel gelişimini örnek ve açıklamalarla vermektir. Bu yapılırken üç ana dalga feminist hareketle görülen değişiklikler takip edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak Türkçede dil yoluyla kadının olumsuzlandığı ve aşağılandığı saptanmıştır. Toplumun gerçeklerini yansıttığı kadar bu gerçeklerin oluşumunu ve pekiştirilmesini sağlayan dilimizin bu ifadelerden arındırılmasıyla kadının konumunun iyileştirilebileceği konusuna dikkat çekilmek istenmiştir.

Keywords

Toplumsal Cinsiyet; Dil; Türk Atasözleri

References

• AKSAN, D. (1998). Her Yönüyle Dil. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
• BEATTIE, G. W. (1981). Interruption in conversational interaction and its relation to the sex status of the interactants. Linguistics 19,5-35.
• BUTLER, J. (1993). Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex”. New York: Routledge.
• CAMERON, D.(ed) (1990). The Feminist Critique of Language: A Reader. New York: Routledge
• CAMERON, D. (1995). Rethinking Language and Gender Studies: Feminism into the 1990s, S. Mills8ed) Language and Gender: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. London: Longman
• COATES, J. (1986). Women, Men and Language: A Sociolinguistic Account of Gender Differences in Language. London: Longman.
• COATES, J. & CAMERON, D. (ed) (1988). Women in their speech communities: New Perspectives on Language and Sex. New York: Longman.
• ECKERT, P. & McConnell- Ginet, S. (1992). “Think Practically and Look Locally: Language and Gender as Community-Based Practice”, Annual Review of Anthropology. Vol.21, s.461-490.
• FREEMAN, R.D. & McElhinny, B. (1996). Language and Gender, S. MaKay & N. Hornberger (ed), Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• FISHMAN, P. M.(1978). Interaction: The Work Women Do, Social Problems. 25, 397-406.
• GRAY, J. (2012). Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus: The Classic Guide to Understanding the Opposite Sex. London: Harper Collins Publishing.
• GOODWIN, M. (1998). Cooperation and Competition Across girls’ Play Activities, J. Coates (ed) Language and Gender: A Reader. s.121-146, Oxford: Blackwell.
• GREIF, E. (1980). Sex differences in parent-child conversation, Women’s Studies International Quarterly, Vol.3, 253-258.
• JESPERSEN, O.(1992). Language: its Nature, Development and Origin. New York: Henry Holt & Co.
• LAKOFF, R. (1973). Language and Woman’s Place, Language in Society, Vol. 2, No 1, 45-80
• LAKOFF, R.(1975). Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Harper and Row
• O’BARR, W.& ATKINS, B. (1980), “Women’s Language” or “Powerless Language”, S. McConnell-Ginet, R. Borker, N. Furman(ed) Women and Language in Literature and Society. New York: Praeger
• SPENDER, D.(1980). Man Made Language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
• SUNDERLAND, J. (1996). Gender representation in EFL materials: suggestions for teacher development, Teacher Development 32: 21-23
• SUNDERLAND, J.(2004). Gendered Discourse. New york: Palgrave Macmillan.
• SUNDERLAND, J. (2006). Language and Gender. London: Routledge
• TANNEN, D. (1991). You Just Don’t Understand. New York: Ballantine Books,
• YURTBAŞI, M. (2012),. A Dictionary of Turkish Proverbs. İstanbul: Excellence Publishing.
• ZIMMERMAN, D. H. , WEST, C. (1975). Sex Roles, Interruptions and Silences in Conversation, B. Thorne& N. Henley (ed) Language and Sex Difference and Dominance. Rowley MA: Newbury House.