Feminist Stylistics: Female representations in contemporary stories by Pakistani writers.
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to investigate how women are represented in the stories of Pakistani writers. Current research also explores whether the author's genre has any influence on the vocabulary he uses. The proposed study is qualitative in nature. The results also revealed that male Pakistani writers are more sexist in their vocabulary to portray female characters compared to female writers. Future researchers can explore the same data by following the remaining two: sentence and discursive levels of the Mills model (1995). The present study can also be extended to compare two types of genre as writers by future researchers.
References
Ahmadi, A. K., Zamani, M., & Sarzaym, M. (2014). A survey of the spiritual intelligence in organizations with an emphasis on Islamic texts. UCT Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Research, 2(2), 29-36.
Beauvoir, S. D. (1989). The second sex, trans. HM Parshley. New York: Vintage.
Bukhari, F. Y., & Ramzan, M. (2013). Gender discrimination: A myth or truth women status in Pakistan. Journal of Business and Management, 8(2), 88-97.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble, feminist theory and psychological discourse. Feminism /Postmodernism, 323-347.
Calhoun, C. (1999). Moral failure. Feminist Ethics and Politics, 81-99.
Cameron, D. (Ed.). (1998). The feminist critique of language: A reader. Psychology Press.
Campbell, K. K. (1999). “The rhetoric of women's liberation: An oxymoron” revisited. Communication Studies; 50(2), 138-142.
Crawford, M. (1995). Talking difference: On gender and language (Vol. 7). Sage.
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992). Think practically and look locally: Language and gender as community-based practice. Annual review of anthropology, 21(1), 461-488.
Foucault, M. (1981). The hermeneutics of the subject. Lectures at the Collège de France, 1982.
Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality: An introduction, volume I. Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage.
Hachimi, A. (2001). Shifting sands: Language and gender in Moroccan Arabic. Gender across languages: the linguistic representation of women and men, 1, 27-51.
Holder, R. W. (1989). The faber dictionary of euphemisms. London; Boston: Faber and Faber.
Kalimoldayev, M. N., Mamyrbayev, O. J., Ilipov, M. M., & Alimhan, K. (2016). Conclusion Precedent Vectors for the Introduction of Situational. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(5), 1063-1074.
Khosravi, M., & Moghadam, M. (2014). Risk Managment. UCT Journal of Management and Accounting Studies, 2(3).
Lakoff, R. (1975). Linguistic theory and the real world. Language Learning, 25(2), 309-338
Lorber, J., & Farrell, S. A. (1991). The social construction of gender. Newbury Park, 5.
Mills, S. (1995). Feminist stylistics. London: Routledge.
Mills, S. (1997). Discourse. London and New York.
Mills, S. (2008). Language and sexism. Cambridge University Press.
Mueenuddin, D. (2009). In other rooms, other wonders. WW Norton & Company.
Pauwels, A. (2003). 24 Linguistic Sexism and Feminist Linguistic Activism. The handbook of language and gender, 550.
Romaine, S. (2001). A corpus-based view of gender in British and American English. Gender across languages, 1, 153-175.
Schulz, M. R. (1975). The semantic derogation of women. Language and sex: Difference and dominance; 64(75), 134-147.
Shamsie, M. (Ed.). (2015). And the world changed: Contemporary stories by Pakistani women. The Feminist Press at CUNY.
Showalter, E. (1979). Towards Feministic Poetics. Women writing and writing about women. Londres: Croom Helm, 22-41.
Talbot, M. (1998). Attachment theory: The ultimate experiment. New York Times Magazine, 24, 24-30.
Thompson, T. L., & Zerbinos, E. (1995). Gender roles in animated cartoons: Has the picture changed in 20 years? Sex roles, 32(9-10), 651-673.
Vetterling-Braggin, M. (1981). Sexist language: A modern philosophical analysis.
