American Journal Of Philological Sciences
50
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue 03 2025
PAGE NO.
50-53
10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue03-14
Study of gender stereotypes based on phraseological
units
Nazarova Mukaddas Yuldashbayevna
PhD student, Karakalpak state university, Nukus, Uzbekistan, Karakalpakstan
Received:
20 January 2025;
Accepted:
18 February 2025;
Published:
17 March 2025
Abstract
:
The article describes gender stereotypes embedded in phraseological units, analyzing their role in
shaping societal perceptions of gender roles. Phraseological units, as integral components of language, reflect
cultural values and social norms, often reinforcing traditional gender roles and expectations. The article examines
how these linguistic expressions contribute to the perpetuation of gender-based stereotypes and investigates
potential shifts in their usage over time. By employing a comparative and semantic analysis of phraseological units
in different languages, this study highlights the linguistic mechanisms through which gender biases are
maintained. The study contribute to a deeper understanding of the intersection between language and gender
perception, offering insights for linguistic studies, gender research, and discourse analysis.
Keywords:
Language and gender, cultural, psychological dimensions, gender-based stereotypes, semantic
analysis, cultural values and social norms.
Introduction:
Gender is perceived as a socially
constructed characteristic rather than a purely
biological one
—
individuals do not inherently possess
gendered behaviors and attitudes but acquire them
through
socialization.
Gender
represents
a
multifaceted
cultural
construct
encompassing
distinctions in roles, behaviors, and psychological as
well as emotional attributes associated with men and
women. Consequently, it is regarded as an established
framework of social relations between genders,
influencing not only interpersonal interactions within
familial structures but also shaping broader societal
relationships within key institutions.
The phraseological system, being inherently selective in
its
nominations,
predominantly
follows
an
anthropocentric orientation. Thus, the examination of
phraseological units that semantically center on human
attributes
holds
significant
importance.
The
interpretation of language as an anthropocentric
phenomenon is increasingly recognized as a dominant
paradigm in contemporary linguistic studies of the 21st
century. This perspective facilitates a more
comprehensive exploration of fundamental theoretical
issues related to “language and people” as well as
“language and culture,” ensuring a holistic analysis of
the ways individuals manifest within and through
language. In this context, one of the most culturally
significant aspects of linguistic representation is not
only the depiction of human identity but also the
expression of gender attributes, highlighting both male
and female dimensions within language [1].
Gender linguistics explores the ways in which language
both reflects and shapes gender identities, roles, and
social interactions. This study examines various
linguistic
elements,
including
lexical
choices,
grammatical structures, syntactic patterns, speech
acts, and communicative strategies that contribute to
gender differentiation in discourse. The research aims
to identify the linguistic mechanisms that reinforce and
perpetuate
gender-related
social
norms
and
stereotypes while also offering insights into strategies
for fostering a more inclusive and equitable linguistic
environment.
By
analyzing
the
theoretical
underpinnings of gender linguistics, this study
underscores the significance of addressing gender
biases in language, deconstructing stereotypes, and
applying gender-sensitive linguistic approaches to
mitigate social inequalities. Consequently, this work
contributes to a broader understanding of how
language functions as a tool in the construction and
maintenance of gender perceptions within society.
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
51
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
METHOD
Language, as a distinctive and adaptable medium of
human communication, serves not only as a reflection
of social attitudes, cultural norms, and ideological
frameworks but also as an active force capable of
shaping and transforming them [3]. Gender linguistics,
a relatively modern subfield of language studies,
explores, among other aspects, the ways in which
language represents men and women. This field
encompasses both fundamental perspectives on
language: first, it considers language as a mirror that
reflects prevailing attitudes toward gender and societal
roles; second, it conceptualizes gender as a
sociocultural construct rather than a strictly biological
binary, recognizing the role of language in both
reinforcing and challenging gender biases and
inequalities in society [6]. Recent efforts have focused
on eliminating the gendered nature of language, driven
by the belief that such linguistic reforms could
contribute to dismantling ingrained gender stereotypes
[4]. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that any
modifications to an existing linguistic system
—
one that
operates with a degree of autonomy
—
require a
comprehensive understanding of its underlying
structures and functions. Consequently, a primary
objective of gender linguistics is to identify and analyze
gender representations within language, examining not
only how language is used but also how it reflects
cognitive and ideological patterns [2].
The influence of social and cultural contexts on the
creation and usage of figurative language, particularly
idiomatic expressions, can manifest in two contrasting
ways. On one hand, idioms often encapsulate and
perpetuate deeply embedded societal attitudes and
stereotypes, which are implicitly shared by members of
a linguistic community. Cuyckens and Geeraerts [5]
assert that idioms constitute “an integral part of the
language that eases social interaction, enhances
textual coherence, and, quite importantly, reflects
fundamental patterns of human thought” (p. 698).
Similarly, Kövecses [8] highlights that
“many, or
perhaps most, idioms are products of our conceptual
system and not simply a matter of language (i.e., a
matter of lexicon). An idiom is not just an expression
that has a meaning that is somehow special in relation
to the meanings of its constituting parts, but it arises
from our more general knowledge of the world
embodied in our conceptual system” (p. 201). On the
other hand, as Omazić [7] suggests, “phraseology and
figurative language challenge the idea of accepting
things at face value and exemplify going beyond
commonly accepted language boundaries” (p. 14).
These perspectives indicate that idioms not only
reinforce established thought patterns but also serve as
a means of questioning and redefining them.
DISCUSSION
Compared to other branches of linguistics with a long
history of development, the study of gender and
language is relatively recent. It is widely acknowledged
that this field gained prominence with R. Lakoff’s
seminal work Language and Woman’s Place [12]. The
Kazan School of Phraseology has primarily focused on
comparative studies of phraseological units across
different linguistic groups and families [14]. Despite
phraseology being a highly promising area for gender
research, the present study marks the first attempt by
representatives of the Kazan School to analyze
phraseological units from a gender perspective. Since
phraseology reflects cultural values, it provides
valuable insights into key cultural concepts such as
“man” and “woman”. The publication of V. N. Telija’s
monograph served as a catalyst for further research
into the concepts of “woman” and “man” in the
phraseologies of various languages, paving the way for
a broader exploration of gender representations in
linguistic and cultural contexts. E. S. Gritsenko
examined gender asymmetries and stereotypes in
English phraseology [13]. The researcher conducted an
experiment involving native speakers, which revealed
that the absence of explicit gender-specific
components in the structure of a phraseological unit
does not necessarily indicate its gender-neutral nature.
To describe this linguistic phenomenon, Gritsenko
introduced the term hidden gender markedness.
Additionally, several comparative studies have been
conducted on gender-related peculiarities within the
phraseological systems of various languages [15]. O.A.
Vaskova explored the lexicographic representation of
gender-specific phraseological units in English [16]. The
first stage of her study involved a diachronic analysis,
which identified significant shifts in the presentation
and description of phraseological units in dictionaries
due to socio-cultural and linguistic transformations. For
instance, the rise of political correctness has influenced
language usage. The second stage consisted of a
synchronic analysis of lexicographic sources, leading to
the classification of phraseological units into four
categories: (1) phraseological units with meta-gender
reference, (2) phraseological units with masculine
reference, (3) phraseological units with feminine
reference, and (4) phraseological doublets. I. V. Zykova
also approached the study of English phraseology from
a gender perspective [17], producing one of the most
comprehensive works in the field. Her extensive
research led to the introduction of several new terms
to describe linguistic phenomena that were first
identified in her study. These terms include gender
markedness (structural and semantic; full and partial),
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
52
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
dual gender markedness, closed and open systems of
gender oppositions, gender reference (masculine,
feminine, and inter-gender; direct and indirect), gender
asymmetry at morphological and conceptual levels,
and phraseological gender lacunarity. Regarding the
terminology used in gender-based analyses of
phraseological units, it is important to note that this
study primarily adopts the terms introduced by I. V.
Zykova [14].
CONCLUSION
Phraseological units in the English language serve as
significant linguistic markers that reflect cultural
norms, social values, and underlying ideologies,
including gender-based stereotypes. The examination
of these linguistic expressions reveals how they
contribute to the reinforcement of traditional gender
roles by encoding asymmetrical power dynamics and
biased representations. A comparative and semantic
analysis of English phraseological units indicates a
noticeable pattern of gendered attributions. For
instance, idiomatic expressions referring to men often
emphasize strength, intelligence, leadership, and
assertiveness, such as a man of his word or strong as an
ox. Conversely, phraseological units associated with
women frequently highlight appearance, emotions, or
submissiveness, such as as pretty as a picture or a
shrinking violet. This asymmetry in representation
perpetuates stereotypical gender roles, reinforcing
traditional expectations of masculinity and femininity.
Moreover, the evolution of these expressions over time
suggests shifts in linguistic attitudes influenced by
social change. The rise of political correctness and
feminist linguistic movements has contributed to a
decline in the use of explicitly sexist phraseological
units, while more neutral or inclusive alternatives have
emerged. For example, terms like fireman and
policeman have gradually been replaced by firefighter
and police officer, reflecting a move towards gender-
neutral language. Additionally, certain derogatory
expressions related to women, such as old maid or
hysterical woman, are becoming less common in
contemporary discourse, indicating a gradual shift in
societal
perceptions.
Comparatively,
gendered
phraseological units across different languages exhibit
both universal and culture-specific characteristics.
While many languages share common gendered
metaphors
—
such as associating strength with
masculinity and delicacy with femininity
—
there are
unique cultural nuances that influence the formation
and interpretation of phraseological expressions. These
differences highlight the intricate relationship between
language and cultural identity, illustrating how gender
constructs are both globally persistent and locally
adapted. The study of gendered phraseological units in
the English language reveals their significant role in
shaping and perpetuating gender stereotypes. Through
comparative and semantic analysis, it becomes evident
that language is not merely a reflection of social norms
but also a tool that reinforces and legitimizes them. The
asymmetry in gender representation within idiomatic
expressions underscores the deep-seated cultural
biases that have historically influenced linguistic
structures.
However, language is not static, and societal progress
has led to a reevaluation of gendered linguistic
expressions. The gradual shift towards gender-neutral
and inclusive language demonstrates the dynamic
nature of phraseology and its responsiveness to socio-
cultural
changes.
While
traditional
gendered
expressions persist in colloquial speech, their
decreasing prevalence in formal and public discourse
suggests an evolving linguistic landscape. Future
research should continue to explore the diachronic
development of gendered phraseological units across
various languages, analyzing how globalization and
cultural exchange influence their transformation.
Additionally, further studies could examine the role of
media, literature, and digital communication in shaping
contemporary
attitudes
towards
gender
in
phraseology. By fostering awareness of linguistic bias
and promoting inclusive language practices, society can
contribute to a more equitable representation of
gender in communication.
REFERENCES
Tomenchuk M., Martynovych M. The gender-specific
features of the phraseological units denoting “woman”.
–
2022.
DOBIÁŠOVÁ S. Representations of Men and Women in
English Idioms.
Mooney, A., Peccei, J. S., Labelle, S., Henrikson, B. E.,
Eppler, E., Irwin, A., Pichler, P., Preece, S., & Soden, S.
(2011). Language, Society and Power: An Introduction
(3rd ed.). London/New York: Routledge.
Moser, Ch., & Devereux, M. (2016). Gender neutral
pronouns: A modest proposal. In ternational Journal of
Transgenderism
https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2016.1217446
Cuyckens, H., & Geeraerts, D. (Eds.). (2010). The Oxford
Handbook of Cognitive Linguis tics. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Talbot, M. (2020). Language and Gender (3rd ed.).
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Omazić,
M. (2015). Phraseology through the Looking
Glass. Osijek, Croatia: University of Osijek.
Kövecses,
Z.
(2002).
Metaphor.
A
Practical
Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
American Journal Of Philological Sciences
53
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps
American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN
–
2771-2273)
Utebaev T., Sarsenbaeva Z. Linguoculturological
analysis of proverbs //Berlin Studies Transnational
Journal of Science and Humanities.
–
2021.
–
Т. 1. –
№.
1.5 Pedagogical sciences.
Sarsenbaeva Z. J. Pedagogical Peculiarities of forming
linguocultural competence of higher education
students in Karakalpakstan //EPRA International
Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (IJMR)-Peer
Reviewed.
–
2021.
–
Т. 7. –
№. 2021. –
С. 161
-166.
Sarsenbaeva Z. J., Utebaev T. T. Role of phraseology in
developing communicative competence //EPRA
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research
(IJMR).
–
2020.
–
Т. 6. –
№. 9. –
С. 47
-53.
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New
York, NY: Harper & Row.
Gritsenko, E. S. (2005). Gender asymmetries and
stereotypes in English phraseology (candidate
dissertation).
Linguistics
University
of
Nizhny
Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia.
Ayupova, R. A. (2014). Macrostructural parameters of
unilingual Russian phraseological dictionaries. Life Sci.
J.,
11(6),
511-515.
Retrieved
from
http://www.lifesciencesite.com
Artyomova,
A.
V.
(2000).
Emotive-evaluative
objectification of the concept “woman” in semantics of
phraseological units (based on English and Russian
phraseology) (candidate dissertation). Pyatigorsk State
Linguistic University, Pyatigorsk, Russia.
Vaskova, O. A. (2006). Gender as a subject of
lexicographic description (candidate dissertation).
Moscow State Linguistic University, Moscow, Russia.
Zykova, I. V. (2003). Methods of constructing gender in
English phraseology. Moscow, Russia: Editorial URSS.
Konopleva N. V., Kayumova A. R. Phraseological units
semantically oriented to a male person in the English
language //Asian social science.
–
2015.
–
Т. 11. –
№.
19.
–
С. 120.
