Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą

AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ Institute of the Lithuanian Language ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0002-3755-7406 Research areas: neology, word formation, stylistics, Internet linguistics. DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all87-11 NEW NAMES ACCORDING TO SEX DIFFERENCE New Names Based on Gender Attribution ABSTRACT The article examines, from the perspective of word formation, gender-marked neologisms presented in the Database of Lithuanian Neologisms. It briefly reviews feminist linguistic activism (in English, feminist linguistic activism) and language reform (in English, feminist language reform, gender-based language reform, non-sexist language reform, etc.), as well as the Vilnius University Guidelines for Gender-Sensitive Language, hypothesizing that these may have influenced the creation of gender-marked neologisms. The article identifies the most productive word-formation types and means for such formations; describes how many and what kinds of new names according to sex difference (stylistically marked or neutral) are formed using traditional and innovative word-formation means (not characteristic of this word-formation category); and finally presents statistics on the prevalence of gender-marked neologisms on the Internet. KEYWORDS: neologisms, neologisms, word formation, feminist linguistic activism, language reform. ANNOTATION The article addresses new gender-denoting coinages present in the Database of Lithuanian Neologisms from the formational point of view. It furthermore offers a brief overview of the feminist linguistic activism and the feminist language reform (also known as the gender-based language reform, non-sexist language reform, etc.), as well as the Gender-sensitive Guidelines of Vilnius University, advancing a hypothesis that this could have played a role in the appearance of new gender-denoting coinages in the Lithuanian language. The article identifies the most productive methods and tools of the formation of such coinages; describes the quantity of new names based on gender attribution that are made with the traditional and novel (or unconventional as far as this category of formation is concerned) 224 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą tools of formation, as well as the nature of the new words (that can be stylistically charged or neutral); and concludes with the statistics on the dissemination of gender-denoting new Lithuanian coinages on the Internet. KEYWORDS: neologisms, new coinages, word-formation, feminist linguistic activism, language reform. INTRODUCTION Feminism is considered the principal social movement of this century (Pauwels 2001: 137), which prompted language reform (in English, feminist language reform, gender-based language reform, non-sexist language reform, etc.) aimed at eliminating the gender inequality embedded in language. Although studies in some countries show that such language reform is difficult to implement because society is accustomed to using traditional forms (Maldonado 2015: 247), although it is emphasized that language changes alone will not ensure equality between different sexes if men and women are not equal in society (Hong 2018: 702)1, and although it is asserted that language cannot be artificially changed (Laugesen 2019: 256), the effort to reform language has spread and continues to spread in many countries around the world. This language reform has not bypassed Lithuania either. In 2021, the Vilnius University Guidelines for Gender-Sensitive Language (hereinafter VU GSLG, the guidelines) were published. They state that “the convention of using the grammatical masculine gender as neutral is outdated and discriminatory in many cases.” Although in Lithuanian, when referring to a person, the unmarked form is always the name for a male person (Holvoet, Semėnienė 2006: 106), such use of masculine-gender words in a generalizing sense is unacceptable and reprehensible in many countries around the world. This document—the guidelines—prompted an investigation into the extent to which creators of neologisms engage in what the guidelines’ authors call the “area of awareness and linguistic creativity.” After excluding loanwords, the object of the study was the neologisms presented in the Database of Lithuanian Neologisms (hereinafter ND, the database), belonging to the category of names ¹ By the way, Laimantas Jonušys writes about this in the article “On ‘Sensitive’ Grammar”: “There really is discrimination against women in Lithuania. Violence in the intimate environment remains a widespread phenomenon. The problem is not only the violence itself, but also the fact that part of society believes that the victim herself provokes the violence. In some areas, it is harder for women than for men to pursue a career and occupy important positions. We also have positive developments. I would truly rejoice at the current government, which some mockingly call ‘the female one.’ True, the attitude toward this government probably depends more on devalued political and ideological views than on attitudes toward women, but perhaps that is how it should be. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the contemptuous attitude toward women ministers often clearly reeks of misogyny. Yet it would be difficult to imagine that all these problems and positive developments (not only in government) are in any way related to the use of grammatical gender in language” (15min.lt 2021-10-18). Straipsniai / Articles 225 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ according to sex difference, i.e. native formations and formations with a borrowed root (hybrids). On May 5, 2022, the ND contained 7,691 linguistic units (words, word combinations, and abbreviations). There were 3,124 Lithuanian nouns, from which 55 new names according to sex difference were selected. The aim of the article is to investigate how and with what word-formation means new names according to sex difference are formed. It should be noted that Lithuanian as a whole “has not been studied in any more comprehensive way with regard to the ‘balance’ of gender expression” (Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 57), except for the latest and apparently only study of neologisms from the perspective of gender expression (Murmulaitytė 2021: 51–69). To achieve this aim, the following objectives are set: 1) to manually select from the ND neologisms—names according to sex difference; 2) to conduct a word-formation analysis of such neologisms; 3) to investigate and describe the word-formation types and means of names according to sex difference; 4) to determine how many such formations are made using traditional and innovative word-formation means (not characteristic of this word-formation category); 5) to investigate the relationship between stylistically marked and stylistically neutral names according to sex difference; 6) to investigate how widespread new names according to sex difference are in Internet usage; 7) to check which gender-marked neologisms have been included in the Dictionary of Standard Lithuanian (hereinafter BŽ), which is currently being prepared; and 8) to determine what share of the latest Lithuanian lexis in the ND is made up of such formations. Research methods: synchronous word-formation analysis is applied when segmenting neologisms morphologically; the analytical-descriptive method is applied when investigating and describing the word-formation and usage characteristics of Lithuanian neologisms; the search method is applied when examining the prevalence of new names according to sex difference on the Internet; and the counting method is applied when quantitatively investigating the numerical frequency expressions of formations and their most productive word-formation types and means. 1. FEMINIST LINGUISTIC ACTIVISM This concept (in English, feminist linguistic activism) is understood “as conscious activity aimed at achieving one or another change in the conventional language, the form and semantics of its units” (Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 42). In the authors’ view of the popular-science study “On the Correctness of Words: Native and Imported,” “[a]t first glance, its aims appear reasonable: to seek gender equality in linguistic expression, to foreground women’s experience and women’s perspective, that is, to express the world through women’s eyes” (Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 42). 226 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą The origins of this feminist linguistic activism date back to 1970², when language came into the focus of feminists (Cameron 2003: 453; Pauwels 2003: 551; Braun, Sczesny, Stahlberg 2005: 1; Lee 2007: 285; Laugesen 2019: 241, 244), and efforts therefore began to eliminate this inequality embedded in language and to change the patriarchal thinking established over centuries (Penelope 1990: 213, cited in Ehrlich, King 1992: 156–157; Pauwels 2001: 138; on language as a tool of patriarchy, see also Pauwels 2001: 137). This language reform acquired another name—verbal hygiene (in English, verbal hygiene; Deborah Cameron’s term, see Laugesen 2019: 241; see Cameron 1995 for more). A considerable number of works have been published abroad discussing the effects of sexist language and its harm to society (see Parks, Rober­ton 1998: 478; 1998a: 446 for more). Naturally, most of the research was conducted in English³, showing that (a) occupations with high social status, such as professor, are masculine, whereas occupations with low social status, such as teacher, are feminine. These words are used with the generalizing meaning of the masculine or feminine gender even when the biological sex of the person practicing a particular profession is unknown or appears irrelevant and does not alter the essence, e.g., professors work at the university, while female teachers work in schools (Fuertes-Olivera 2007: 225; for more on social status, see Arvydas Matulionis’s article in the Universal Lithuanian Encyclopedia (hereinafter VLE), available online at: https://www.vle.lt/straipsnis/socialinis-statusas/);; (b) negatively connoted words—names for women (in English, shrew, bitch)—have no masculine-gender equivalents (Lakoff 2003: 162); (c) terms used in sexology relate to the male position, that is, what a man does to a woman, rather than vice versa (Ehrlich, King 1994: 59–60), and many others. The greatest criticism directed at various languages of the world concerns the use of the masculine gender in a generalizing sense⁴ (see also Braun, Sczesny, Stahlberg 2005: 1, 3). Lithuanian is naturally no exception, since “[v]iewed in quantitative terms, it is obvious that the ‘balance’ of gender expression is violated in many respects in Indo-European languages” (Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 42). The authors of the aforementioned popular-science study draw attention not only to the unequal ‘balance’ of gender expression (to the “superiority of men” in Lithuanian, as observed by Egidijus ² In 1960, the terms sexism and racism emerged to draw attention to forms of discrimination against women (Wodak 1997, cited in Formato 2016: 375). These may be regarded as the first feminist linguistic innovations (Ehrlich, King 1994: 61). ³ Here some scholars immediately distinguish between English and other languages, emphasizing that the results of English-language research cannot be generalized or applied to structurally different languages (Braun, Sczesny, Stahlberg 2005: 1). ⁴ Cf. in Lithuanian, “In cases of generalization, only the masculine gender is used: [...] council of rectors” (Paulauskienė 2007: 72), when this council includes both male and female rectors. Straipsniai / Articles 227 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ Zaikauskas), but also to the particular dominance of feminine-gender nouns denoting essential, most important concepts: A quarter of a century ago, when there were not yet any manifestations of feminist linguistic activism in Lithuania, Egidijus Zaikauskas, having reconsidered Lithuanian grammar and the levels of lexis and word formation with regard to feminism and masculinism, concluded that Lithuanian reflected the “superiority of men.” The examples supporting this claim are taken from his conference presentation at the time. The root vyr-: the meaning of the verb VY Rauti, the noun didVYRė⁵; the root tėv-: TĖVynė, TĖVai (father and mother); [...] (Zaikauskas 1994: 27). Thus, it cannot be said that feminist activists are entirely wrong when they constantly repeat that language is “stuffed” with masculinity and pushes the feminine gender aside. However, we should also recall that more than one researcher of our culture who has delved into the native language, a master of words with an extraordinary feel for language, has drawn attention to the exceptional place of feminine-gender nouns in the lexical semantics of Lithuanian. The poet Marcelijus Martinaitis observed: “Almost all the great Lithuanian concepts are feminine: earth, sun, life, truth, spirit, freedom, love...” (Martinaitis 2006: 155). Words with such semantics in their own way compensate for the quantitative dominance of masculine forms in formal grammar. (Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 42–43) Although the necessity and importance of feminist linguistic activism are debated throughout the world, both supporters and opponents of this movement recognize that even the most neutral forms will acquire a sexist tinge in the mouths of people who promote sexism (Ehrlich, King 1992: 152), and that language reform itself can succeed only if society deliberately and consciously, rather than superficially, chooses to use alternative forms (Pauwels 2003: 566). 2. EVALUATION OF THE VILNIUS UNIVERSITY GUIDELINES FOR GENDER-SENSITIVE LANGUAGE IN ONLINE MEDIA This article in no way seeks to provide a comprehensive and thorough evaluation of the VU GENDER guidelines (the article did not have such an aim); nevertheless, it seems appropriate, following the appearance of such an innovative document, to briefly review how this document, prepared in Lithuania for the first time and encouraging the use of gender-sensitive language, is evaluated in online media, especially since the guidelines’ authors themselves acknowledge that “in some languages and cultures, gender-sensitive language has become established,” ⁵ By the way, the ND includes the stylistically marked compound didbobė ‘iron. a woman famous for her deeds and exploits’. The neologism was formed as a counterpart to the word didvyris. 228 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą in others, attempts are under way.” The article presents, in chronological order, public figures’ reactions to such an “attempt”: There are many cases in language where, say, the principle of synecdoche applies: a part stands for the whole. Let us take Blaise Pascal’s famous aphorism (in abbreviated form): “Man is a thinking reed.” Everyone understands that although “man” is used here in the singular, it does not mean some one individual, but people as a whole (a part stands for the whole). It is equally clear that when one says “man,” one is not thinking of males but of all people. On the other hand, “human-being-feminine” here is a compensation: “reed” is feminine. Or perhaps one should start wondering why [...] quite a few important words are feminine—personality, power, society, victory, language, etc. [...]. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that, within reason, language is changing toward gender-neutral usage. Long before all the new winds, there was the traditional form of address: “ladies and gentlemen.” Now similar use of two grammatical genders has expanded—in job advertisements, official speeches, written texts, and so on. This is normal, moderate, and understandable to society. (15min.lt 2021–10–18, Laimantas Jonušys) Let us recall another Lithuanian word used when it is difficult to decide on a person’s sex, žmogysta—a person, an individual (without sex) (“You can’t even understand what kind of žmogysta it is”). Is this not the meaning the guideline authors are seeking? It was probably rejected because of its pejorative tinge. In traditional culture, a clear understanding of a person’s sexuality, womanhood and manhood, was considered a value. Indeed, Lithuanian also has a gender-neutral form of address—tamsta / tamstos. (lrt.lt 2021–10–19, Asta Katutė) “This is partly mockery of the Lithuanian language. It will remain incomprehensible to Lithuanians and Lithuanian-speaking people for a long time, perhaps forever,” says Audrys Antanaitis, chair of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language. (kauno.diena.lt 2021–10–31, Audrys Antanaitis) Although critics say that the masculine gender is perfectly suitable as neutral and carries no additional charge for shaping relations between the sexes, that it is merely grammar, nevertheless, if we think differently, we will understand what a powerful charge language itself contains: few critics, especially men, would apparently agree to be described in the feminine gender as “I am a physicist, a saleswoman,” and the like. This shows that language is not neutral. (15min.lt 2021–11–02, Jūratė Juškaitė) In it (in the guidelines—author’s note), the problem would be “solved” very simply—an offer was made to call a female being with a human designation “žmoga.” Why not “žmogienė,” if I am already married? Or “žmogaitė,” if I am still a young lady? And if I do not want to disclose my marital status, I can call myself “žmogė,” [...]. Straipsniai / Articles 229 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ And if I do not want to identify with either sex, I could call myself “žmogu,” analogously to the Russian “ono,” since Lithuanian has no neuter gender. (skrastas.lt 2021–11–05, Regina Musneckienė) “[...] Even the guidelines for gender-sensitive language published by the esteemed Vilnius University on October 15 of this year are, in my view, a completely unmotivated, even shameful destruction of the traditional, established norms of the Lithuanian language,” the professor stated. (etaplius.lt 2021–11–16, Juozas Pabrėža) Similar words can be “invented” as occasional (individual, stylistic) neologisms, joking or fooling around (thus, on the television show “Dviratis News,” pelės is said instead of people, žmogai), but to foist them on normal native-language usage...?! [...] Language is far more diverse, flexible, and adaptable than the creators of “sensitive language,” women and men alike, perceive it to be. One only needs to be able to use it creatively and not invent those negative, disparaging meanings and attitudes where they do not exist. For the brightest women of our nation—among them more than one prominent feminist and advocate of equal rights—Gabriele Petkevičaitė-Bitė, Meilė Lukšienė, Vanda Zaborskaitė, and now Viktorija Daujotytė—the masculine gender of words, used in certain cases with the generalizing meaning of both sexes, did not pose a problem. It does not pose a problem for thousands of Lithuanian women. It is a problem for those possessed by a fashionable ideology. (pozicija.org 2022–01–06, Kazimieras Župerka) At present, as the data from the sources cited show, the stronger attitude is negative; on the other hand, it is unclear what mental changes in society may be possible in the long term. According to the guidelines’ authors, “[...] In time, some forms will take root and others will disappear; some will spread and become institutionally customary, while others will remain only within the sphere of individual expression; moreover, entirely new forms will emerge.” For example, as early as 1970 feminists created the abbreviation Ms in English, which was intended to replace the abbreviations Miss (an unmarried woman) and Mrs (a married woman)⁶. The new abbreviation Ms (woman) was created analogously to the abbreviation Mr (man) and did not indicate a woman’s marital status (Ehrlich, King 1992: 154; Fuertes-Olivera 2007: 224; see also Pauwels 2001: 139–141). In truth, this abbreviation Ms was usually rejected or used incorrectly; for example, an abbreviation intended to be neutral and not indicate marital status began to be used to address divorced women, career women, prostitutes, and others (see Ehrlich, King 1992: 154; Ehrlich, King 1994: 62–63; Fuertes-Olivera 2007: 222 for more). ⁶ Santrumpos Miss and Mrs were criticized because they defined a woman according to whether or not she had a relationship with a man (Lakoff 1975: 30, cited in Pauwels 2001: 139). 230 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą Another attempt involved replacing gender-marked words (in English, chairman, spokesman) with neutral ones: chairperson, chairman, -woman (in English, chairperson) and delegate, -woman, representative, -woman (in English, spokesperson). Such a reform would not have succeeded because, as usage showed, these neutral words lost their neutrality: the English words chairperson, spokesperson began to be used exclusively to describe women’s activities (Ehrlich, King 1992: 155; 1994: 63). Such examples support the criticism of feminist linguistic activism that language cannot be artificially changed if society is not ready for change and does not understand its importance and necessity: artificially introduced language changes very often fail to take root, society generally does not understand artificial attempts to regulate gender equality in language, and forms intended to be neutral are even used ambiguously. 3. NEW NAMES ACCORDING TO SEX DIFFERENCE: INFLECTIONAL DERIVATION As mentioned, 55 new names according to sex difference were found in the database. As Grammar of the Modern Lithuanian Language (hereinafter DLKG) states, these “denote persons or living beings of the other (opposite) sex” (2006: 142). The vast majority are suffixless formations with inflectional endings (80%; 44; see Table 1)⁷, while the remainder are suffixal formations (20%; 11). ¹ TABLE 1. Inflectional endings for forming names according to sex difference in the ND No. | Ending | Number of formations (ND) | absolute no. 1. | –ė | 35 2. | –ius (unclassified) | 4 3. | –as (unclassified) | 2 4. | –is (unclassified) | 2 5. | –a (unclassified) | 1 Total: | 44 ⁷ As the latest study of macroneology shows, this is the only word-formation category in the database distinguished by the abundance of formations with inflectional endings (Aleksaitė 2022: 91). Straipsniai / Articles 231 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ The first table shows that the new names according to sex difference presented in the ND are formed with a greater variety of endings: not only with the sole word-formation means indicated in grammars, -ė (Grammar of the Lithuanian Language (hereinafter LKG) 1965: 418; DLKG 2006: 143), but also with the endings -a, -as, -is, and -ius, which traditionally do not belong to this word-formation category. The LKG mentions that “[p]reviously, many professions were entirely inaccessible to women, and even now there are not very many women in some professions; therefore, it is self-evident that in reality there was no basis for the emergence of feminine-gender nouns denoting persons in such professions” (LKG 1965: 165). Cf. the following word pairs: Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language (hereinafter LKŽ) and Dictionary of Modern Lithuanian (hereinafter DŽ₈) record arkivyskupas, while the ND includes arkivyskupė ‘senior female bishop (a Christian cleric of the highest rank), presiding over several dioceses’ (: arkivyskupas), budelis–būdelė ‘female executioner’ (: budelis), kareivis–kareivė ‘a woman performing military service (also figuratively, for example, an ant)’ (: kareivis), maestro–maestrė ‘a respectful name for a distinguished female artist’ (: maestro), urėdas–urėdė ‘a woman holding the position of forest district manager’ (: urėdas), vikaras–vikarė ‘a priest’s female assistant’ (: vikaras), and others. In Lithuanian, “[s]uch pairs of masculine- and feminine-gender nouns are formed both from native and international words. [...] This formation is so regular that it accepts variation” (Paulauskienė 2007: 72), for example, aktorius–aktorė, daktaras–daktarė, direktorius–direktorė, rašytojas–rašytoja, studentas–studentė, and others (Paulauskienė 2007: 72; see also LKG 1965: 165). Therefore, both previously and now, when a new profession emerged and a feminine-gender noun naming a woman according to her “permanent (duties) or merely temporary work” (Paulauskienė 2007: 72) was needed, it was possible to form such nouns; “consequently, in Lithuania, with regard to work and career (at least in language—author’s note), women have long been equal to men”⁸ (Paulauskienė 2007: 72). Another incentive for creating such neologisms is the desire “to emphasize or, less frequently, level out the already named (real) entity’s belonging to a particular sex” (Murmulaitytė 2021: 51): autoritetė ‘a female authority’ (: autoritetas), gėnijė ‘a person of the female sex possessing the greatest abilities and talent’ (: genijus), individė ‘a female individual’ (: individas), išmintė ‘a woman who has accumulated wisdom’ (: išminčius), kūdikė ‘a female infant’ (: kūdikis), lavonė ‘the remains of a female human being’ (: lavonas), personažė ‘a female character in a work’ (: personažas), subjektė ‘a female protagonist experiencing the events of a literary ⁸ Cf. “In language, woman and man are equal. [...] Clear parallels: draugas and draugė, bičiulis–bičiulė, profesorius–profesorė. It is not so in all languages” (Daujotytė 1990: 5, cited in Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 45). 232 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą (most often a poetic) work (: subjektas) (for more on the usage of the bases of these literary terms, see Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 45), and others. The bases of the –ė formations for names according to sex difference presented in the ND are names for male subjects: ginklanešė ‘a knight’s weapons-bearer, a knight’s assistant; figuratively, an assistant to a contemporary (political) leader’ (: ginklanešys), robotė ‘the name of a mechanism imitating female existence’ (: robotas), šunytė ‘a female dog—a bitch’ (: šunytis), and others, except for the neologism elitė ‘joc. a female representative of the elite’, which is based on the collective noun elitas. It is evident that both formerly and today in standard Lithuanian, the ending –ė was and “is the most important means of forming names [...] for persons of the female sex” (Ambrazas 2000: 79). The ND names according to sex difference are characterized by a variety of word-formation means (endings). The database records formations with the endings –ius (4), –as (2), –is (2), and –a (1), which traditionally do not belong to the word-formation category of names according to sex difference: a) ãuklius ‘a man working as a nanny; a caretaker of young animals’ (: auklė), fyfìus ‘a male fìfa – a young man with a well-groomed appearance but little intellectual ability’ (: fyfa), mūzius ‘the masculine gender of the noun mūza (a goddess, an inspirer of poetic creativity)’ (: mūza), and pìcius ‘a pizza baker’ (: *picė), which is based on a derivational base not attested in written usage; b) mū́zas ‘joc. the masculine gender of the noun mūza (a goddess, an inspirer of poetic creativity)’ (: mūza), and slaugas ‘a male nurse’ (: slaugė); c) sesūtis ‘joc. a man working as a medical nurse’ (: sesutė), sesėlis ‘joc. a man working as a medical nurse’ (: seselė); d) žmoga ‘a feminist designation for a woman or, more generally, for a person considered independently of gender’ (: žmogus), created by sociologist and journalist Daiva Repečkaitė (Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 49; see also ND). The Guidelines state that the neologism žmoga ‘targets criticism of the category of human as having long coincided with male subjects’ (for a possible classification of this neologism as a designation of bearers of a nominal characteristic, see Murmulaitytė 2021: 58; for a more detailed discussion of criticism of the neologism žmoga, see Kvašytė, Maskuliūnienė, Župerka 2021: 49–50). The accumulated data show that most formations are designations of female subjects with the endings –ė (especially productive) and –a, while the less common endings –ius, –as, and –is are used for designations of male subjects. Straipsniai / Articles 233 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ 4. NEW DESIGNATIONS ACCORDING TO GENDER DIFFERENCE: SUFFIXATION During the period when the article was being written, the productivity of suffixes was rather limited (see Table 2). TABLE 2. Derivational suffixes of designations according to gender difference in ND Among the suffixal derivatives belonging to this derivational category, the Database contained mostly designations of male subjects formed with the suffix –inas, and somewhat fewer designations of female subjects formed with the suffix –ienė: a) auklinas ‘joc. a man working as a nanny’ (: auklė), barakūdinas ‘derog. a predatory man seeking to profit from a wealthy woman’ (: barakūda), beždžioninas ‘a male monkey’ (: beždžionė), žvaigždinas ‘iron. a male star – celebrity’ (: žvaigždė), and others; b) eksmerienė ‘the former mayor’s wife’ (: eksmeras), konservatorienė ‘joc. the wife of an influential Conservative politician’ (: konservatorius), and ‘the female of a centipede’ (: šimtakojis). The ND includes derivatives with the suffixes –ūnas and –(i)ukas, which traditionally do not belong to the derivational category of designations according to gender difference: a) kregždūnas ‘iron. a member of the Seimas belonging to the Homeland Union–Lithuanian Christian Democrats party, whose symbol is a swallow’ (: kregždė) and žvaigždūnas ‘iron. male celebrities, famous men (usually from the entertainment world)’ (: žvaigždė); b) aukliukas ‘a man working as a nanny’ (: auklė / auklius, auklis, auklys⁹). Suffixal derivation of designations according to gender difference is not productive. The rare suffixes –inas (somewhat more productive), –ūnas, and –(i)ukas are used to form designations of male subjects; thus, at present, inflectional derivation in Lithuanian is more suitable for forming designations of female subjects. ⁹ For more information about these masculine-gender nouns, see the Consultation Bank of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language (hereinafter VLKK KB), available online at: http://www.vlkk.lt/konsultacijos/12415-auklus-auklis-au klys. 234 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą 5. NEW DESIGNATIONS ACCORDING TO GENDER DIFFERENCE: THE STYLISTIC ASPECT It has already been mentioned that, during the period when the article was being written, the continuously updated Database contained 7,691 language units, among which 55 new designations according to gender difference were found; thus, such formations constitute a very small proportion of all the most recent lexis (both indigenous and borrowed) (0.7 percent). One of the objectives set in the article is to examine how many new designations according to gender difference are formed for designational reasons and how many for stylistic reasons; in addition, to determine the prevalence of these linguistic phenomena in Internet usage (see Table 3). TABLE 3. (Non-)stylistic designations according to gender difference Straipsniai / Articles 235 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ No. Neologism (Non-)stylistic aspect Prevalence on the Internet stylistically neutral stylistically marked stylistic connotation abs. no. 21. konservatorienė + jocular 2 22. krežďūnas + ironic 0 23. krivė + 195 24. kūd ikė + 271 25. lavonė + 128 26. maestrė + 32 27. modelė + 335 28. monstrė + 316 29. mūzas + jocular 99 30. mūzius + 8 31. narcizė + 136 32. orakulė + 304 33. pastorė + 227 34. personažė + 498 35. picius + 1 36. piratė + 305 37. pusvyrė + 4 38. robotė + 261 39. seselis + jocular 0 40. sesutis + jocular 4 41. slau­gas + 319 42. subjektė + 187 43. šimtakojienė + 1 44. šunytė + 236 45. šviesulė + ironic 1 46. talentė + 159 47. tevė + ironic 5 48. uredė + 57 49. vikarė + 34 50. vyskupė + 188 51. vunderkindė + 163 236 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą No. Neologism (Non-)stylistic aspect stylistically neutral stylistically marked stylistic connotation Prevalence on the Internet abs. no. 52. zombė + derogatory 27 53. žmoga + 32 54. žvaigždinas + ironic 3 55. žvaigždūnas + ironic 227 As can be seen from Table 3, the Database is dominated by stylistically neutral designations according to gender difference that perform a referential function (74.5 percent; 41). They are created for designational reasons—the need to name a new reality. The remaining formations (25.5 percent; 14) are stylistically marked. They perform an emotive-expressive function and are created for stylistic considerations (more formations with negative connotations are formed: ironic, derogatory, and contemptuous ones). However, the examples collected show that there are stylistically marked neologisms that lose their emotive-expressive function and are more often used as stylistically neutral designations of persons according to gender difference: Sometimes a child manages to doze off in the feeding chair—look, the little nose is already nodding toward the plate! And an even more amusing sight can be seen on returning from a late supermothers’ meeting, when you find a nanny-dad with a child, having discovered a “newfangled” sleeping position and place... I wonder which of them put the other to sleep first? (supermama.lt 2005–06–01)10 The march gave hundreds of people, especially traditional men, the opportunity to see Vilnius for the first time. The park where the elite run, while elitės walk their pampered little dogs. (delfi.lt 2021-05-16, Rimvydas Valatka) A teenage girl who had chosen the image of a zombie first selected a costume and only later found online the specific makeup with which she would like to surprise her classmates during a school event. (panele.lt 2017-10-19) 10 The language of the usage examples in the article has not been edited. Straipsniai / Articles 237 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ After examining the prevalence of new designations according to gender difference on the Internet¹¹, it was established that the linguistic phenomena recorded in the ND can be divided into rare (0–50), widespread (50–150), frequent (150–250), and very frequent (250–500). Naturally, “[t]he Internet is an extremely heterogeneous and constantly changing space” (Aleksandravičiūtė 2008: 267), so Table 3 presents approximate numerical frequency figures. The table data show that the most productive gender-marking neologisms are personažė¹² (498), kareivė (369), monstrė (316), kūdikė (271), modelė ‘a female model (one who displays clothes created by designers)’ (335), slaugas ‘a nurse’ (319), pirātė ‘a female sea pirate’ (305), orākulė ‘a female animal that “predicts” the outcome of a competition or the course of events in human-created situations through its unpredictable behavior’ (304), robotė (261), pastorė ‘a Protestant female cleric’ (227), žvaigždūnas (227), šunytė ‘a female dog—a bitch’ (236), arkivyskupė ‘a chief bishop (the highest-ranking Christian cleric), heading several dioceses’ (216), krivė ‘a female cleric or priestess of the Baltic religion’ (195), vyskupė ‘a Christian cleric of the highest rank, female’ (188), subjektė (187), kavalierė ‘a woman decorated with an order’ (165), vunderkindė ‘a girl with exceptional abilities’ (163), t al entė (159), and ginklanešė (156). In addition to the underlined words included in the BŽ currently being compiled, the dictionary also contains the neologisms genijė (39) and zombė ¹¹ Inflected forms of the neologism were entered into the Google search bar in quotation marks (the system treats text in quotation marks as an exact quotation); all inflected forms of the neologism (singular and plural) were joined with the logical connector OR (English or), for example, “mūzas” OR “mūzo” OR “mūzui” OR “mūzą” etc. The search engine filter “search for pages only in Lithuanian” was also selected (for more information about the main principles for constructing the search query applied in this study, see Aleksandravičiūtė 2008: 267–274). In addition, the results provided by the system were checked manually to obtain as representative a picture as possible. If the search results had not been processed manually, the article would have presented distorted and inaccurate data for the following reasons: 1) the Google Internet search engine naturally does not distinguish homonyms and homographs, for example, budelių (plural masculine gender; plural feminine gender (person) and plural feminine gender (place); mūzas (singular masculine gender and plural feminine gender); slaugo (singular masculine gender genitive and present-tense verb); žvaigždinas (person and mushroom), etc.; 2) the search engine does not distinguish spelling variants: elitė (neologism) and Elitė (a name); žvaigždinas (neologism) and Žvaigždinas (a surname); 3) in the case of žmogus, what is usually provided are not actual usage examples in which this word is intentionally used, but data from different sources quoting passages from the same document—the VU LJKG—in which this neologism is discussed; 4) systematic, recurring spelling errors, for example, the masculine plural nominative is written incorrectly; the system provides such results when searching for the feminine singular nominative: Mediniai gangsteriai, pripučiam i autoritetei:) (klaipeda.diena.lt [electronic communication] 2018–09–22); Liudna kai Lietuva valdo tokie budel ei!!! (facebook.com [electronic communication] 2019 or later); and 5) the Internet contains many automatic-translation websites whose authenticity and reliability of usage are doubtful; therefore, such websites were not included when calculating numerical frequency figures. ¹² Definitions of neologisms recurring in the article are not provided. 238 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą ‘derog. in a figurative sense—a powerless dead living female being’ (27); the latter neologism has no stylistic connotation in the BŽ. Naturally, such data are preliminary, since information about many gender-marking neologisms, for example, arkivyskupas, pastorius, and others, is being collected in the BŽ; therefore, it is likely that more productive designations according to gender difference will be included in the dictionary in the future. The study of the usage of these new linguistic phenomena showed that approximately 43.6 percent of new designations according to gender difference, formed spontaneously for the occasion, tend not to be used: gūrė ‘a spiritual leader’, kregždūnas, šimtakojienė, šviesulė¹³ ‘iron. a famous woman (usually from the entertainment world)’, and others. Trends in the usage of derivational synonyms also became apparent (see also Vaskelienė 2000: 5): preference is given to the neologism ȧuklius (142) (cf. the competing variants ȧuklinas (51) and aukliukas (27)), fyfinas (110) (cf. the derivational synonym fyfius (22)), mūzas (99) (cf. mūzius (8)), and žvaigždūnas (227) (cf. žvaigždinas (3)). Such a study of the usage of gender-marking neologisms shows that, when needed, society has created and continues to create new designations according to gender difference (regardless of language fashions). Referential neologisms are more likely to enter active usage because they designate persons who are an important part of everyday life (kareivė, slaugas, and others). CONCLUSIONS 1. In the Lithuanian Neologism Database (ND), 55 new designations according to gender difference were recorded during the period when the article was written (according to data from 5 May 2022, the ND recorded 7,691 language units). Such formations constitute a very small proportion of all new lexis (both indigenous and borrowed) (0.7 percent). 2. Most of these formations are ending derivatives (80 percent; 44), while the remainder are suffixal derivatives (20 percent; 11): 2.1. Gender-marking neologisms are formed with a wider variety of endings: not only with the usual derivational device –ė, but also with the endings –a, –as, –is, and –ius, which traditionally do not belong to this derivational category. 2.2. During the period under study, the productivity of suffixes was rather limited. Designations according to gender difference are formed not only with the traditional suffixes –inas and –ienė, but also with the derivational devices –ūnas and –(i)ukas, which are not characteristic of this derivational category. ¹³ Neologisms are marked for stress or left unmarked (if their stress pattern is not yet clear) according to their presentation in the ND. Straipsniai / Articles 239 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ 2.3. A synchronic working analysis of such neologisms showed that the ND records a wider variety of derivational devices used to form designations of male subjects (-as, -is, -ius, -inas, -ūnas, and -(i)ukas), but they are not productive. In the Database, designations of female subjects predominate among gender-marking neologisms (71 percent; 39), the most productive derivational device being the ending -ė. 3. Gender-marking neologisms are created for the following main reasons: a) the need to name a new female profession or activity that previously did not exist or, because of prevailing circumstances, had been exclusively reserved for men (pirātė, urėdė, vyškūpė, and others); b) the need to eliminate the association of a certain concept exclusively with the male world (genijė, kūdikė, personažė, and others); and c) stylistic effect (kregždūnas, šviesulė, and others). 4. The Database is dominated by stylistically neutral designations according to gender difference that perform a referential function (74.5 percent; 41). They are created for designational reasons—the need to name a new reality. The remaining formations (25.5 percent; 14) are stylistically marked (the ND is dominated by formations with negative connotations: ironic, derogatory, and contemptuous ones). In addition, a study of Internet usage revealed that some neologisms lose their emotive-expressive function and are more often used as stylistically neutral designations of persons (áuklinas, žõmbė, and others). 5. Such a study of the usage of gender-marking neologisms shows that, when needed, society has created and continues to create new designations according to gender difference (regardless of language fashions). Referential neologisms are more likely to enter active usage because they designate persons who are an important part of everyday life (kareivė, slaugas, and others). It is precisely such new designations according to gender difference that are being included in the Dictionary of Standard Lithuanian currently being compiled. ŠALTINIAI Apie „jautrią“ gramatiką, aut. L. Jonušys. Prieiga internete: https://www.15min.lt/naujiena/aktualu/komentarai/laimantas-jonusys-apie-jautria-gramatika-500-1583066?copied [žiūrėta 2021-10-18]. „Ar Jūs durną mane matot?“. Apie „lyčiai jautrios kalbos“ pradmenis, aut. K. Župerka. Prieiga internete: https://www.pozicija.org/prof-kazimieras-zuperka-ar-jus-durna-mane-matot-apie-lyciai-jautrios-kalbos-pradmenis/ [žiūrėta 2022-01-06]. Ar Lietuvai reikalinga „negyva“ bendrinė kalba?, aut. B. Alijošienė. Prieiga internete: https://www.etaplius.lt/ar-lietuvai-reikalinga-negyva-bendrine-kalba [žiūrėta 2021-11-16]. 240 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą Aš nenoriu būti „žmoga“, aut. R. Musneckienė. Prieiga internete: https://www.skrastas.lt/komentarai/nenoriu-buti-zmoga [žiūrėta 2021-11-05]. BŽ – Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, red. kolegija D. Liutkevičienė, D. Murmulaitytė, V. Sakalauskienė, A. Gritėnienė, A. Gaidienė, D. Daugirdienė, L. Jonušys, vyr. red. D. Liutkevičienė. Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/bendrinės-lietuvių-kalbos-zodynas/. DLKG 2006 – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika, 4-oji pataisyta laida, red. V. Ambrazas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. DLKŽ₈ – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, vyr. red. St. Keinys, 8-asis pataisytas ir papildytas leidimas, e. variantas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2021. Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/dabartines-lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/. Lyčiai jautrios kalbos gairės vadina pasityčiojimu: prasidės draudimai sakyti tėvas ir motina. Prieiga internete: https://m.kauno.diena.lt/naujienos/lietuva/salies-pulsas/universiteto-parengtas-lyčiai-jautrios-kalbos-gaires-vadina-pasityčiojimu-1049615 [žiūrėta 2021-10-31]. LKG – Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 2, vyr. red. K. Ulvydas, Vilnius: Mintis, 1965. LKŽₑ – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 1–20 (1941–2002), red. kolegija G. Naktinienė, J. Paulauskas, R. Petrokienė, V. Vitkauskas, J. Zabarskaitė, vyr. red. G. Naktinienė, e. variantas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2008 (atnaujinta versija, 2018). Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/. ND – Miliūnaitė R., Aleksaitė A. Lietuvių kalbos naujažodžių duomenynas [Tęstinis internetinis žinynas nuo 2011 m.], sud. R. Miliūnaitė, e. variantas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/naujažodžiai. Vilniaus universitetas: ideologiniai sprendimai mainais į Europos Sąjungos lėšas?, aut. A. Katutė. Prieiga internete: https://www.lrt.lt/naujienos/pozicija/679/1523555/asta-katute-vilniaus-universitetas-ideologiniai-sprendimai-mainais-i-europos-sajungos-lesas [žiūrėta 2021-10-19]. VLE – Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija. Prieiga internete: https://www.vle.lt/. VLKK KB – Valstybinės lietuvių kalbos komisijos Konsultacijų bankas. Prieiga internete: http://www.vlkk.lt/konsultacijos. VU lyčiai jautrios kalbos gairės: pažangos ženklas ar radikalus eksperimentas?, aut. E. Zicarí. Prieiga internete: https://www.15min.lt/naujiena/aktualu/lietuva/lyciai-jautri-kalba-tarp-pagarbos-visiems-ir-tradicines-gramatikos-56-1586510?copied [žiūrėta 2021-11-02]. Straipsniai / Articles 241 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ VU LJKG – Vilniaus universiteto lyčiai jautrios kalbos gairės, parengė N. Arlauskaitė, L. Vaicekauskienė, J. Pakerys, V. Vukotić, A. Giniotaitė. Prieiga internete: https://www.kf.vu.lt/dokumentai/VU_ly%C4%8Di%C5%BEi%C5%B3_jautrios_kalbos_gair%C4%97s.pdf. LITERATŪRA Aleksaitė Agnė 2022: Lietuvių kalbos naujažodžių daryba (2011–2019 m. Naujažodžių duomenyno pagrindu): daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Aleksandravičiūtė Skaistė 2008: Paieškos sistemos Google naudojimo galimybės tiriant kalbos reiškinius. – Bendrinė kalba 81, 266–282. Prieiga internete: https://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba/article/view/354/419. Ambrazas Saulius 2000: Daiktavardžių darybos raida 2: Lietuvių kalbos vardazodiniai vediniai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. Braun Friederike, Sczesny Sabine, Stahlberg Dagmar 2005: Cognitive Effects of Masculine Generics in German: An Overview of Empirical Findings. – Communications 30, 1–21. Prieiga internete: https://doi.org/10.1515/comm.2005.30.1.1. Cameron Deborah 1995: Verbal Hygiene. – The Politics of Language, London and New York: Routledge. Cameron Deborah 2003: Gender and Language Ideologies. – The Handbook of Language and Gender, eds. by J. Holmes, M. Meyerhoff, USA: Blackwell Publishing, 447–467. Ehrlich Susan, King Ruth 1992: Gender-based Language Reform and the Social Construction of Meaning. – Discourse & Society 3(2), 151–166. Ehrlich Susan, King Ruth 1994: Feminist Meanings and the (De)politicization of the Lexicon. – Language in Society 23(1), 59–76. Prieiga internete: https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001767X. Formato Federica 2016: Linguistic Markers of Sexism in the Italian Media: A Case Study of Ministra and Ministro. – Corpora 11(3), 371–399. Prieiga internete: https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2016.0100. Fuertes-Olivera Pedro A. 2007: A Corpus-based View of Lexical Gender in Written Business English. – English for Specific Purposes 26, 219–234. Prieiga internete: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.07.001. Holvoet Axel, Semėnienė Loreta 2006: Giminės kategorija. – Daiktavardinio junginio tyrimai [= Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos darbai 4], red. A. Holvoet, R. Mikulskas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 101–120. 242 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII Naujieji pavadinimai pagal lyties skirtumą Hong Yiuqin 2018: Sexist Language Reform in English Vocabulary. – Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research 233. 3rd International Conference on Contemporary Education, Social Sciences and Humanities (ICCESSH 2018), 699–702. Kvašytė Regina, Maskuliūnienė Džuljeta, Župerka Kazimieras 2021: Apie žodžio korektiškumą: sava ir importuota, Vilnius: „Žuvėdra“. Lakoff Robin 2003: Language, Gender, and Politics: Putting “Women” and “Power” in the Same Sentence. – The Handbook of Language and Gender“, eds. by J. Holmes, M. Meyerhoff, USA: Blackwell Publishing, 161–178. Laugesen Amanda 2019: Changing ‘Man Made Language’: Sexist Language and Feminist Linguistic Activism in Australia. – Everyday Revolutions: Remaking Gender, Sexuality and Culture in 1970s Australia, eds. by M. Arrow, A. Woollacott, Acton ACT, Australia: ANU Press, 241–260. Lee Jackie F. K. 2007: Acceptability of Sexist Language among Young People in Hong Kong. – Sex Roles 56, 285–295. Prieiga internete: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9170-4. Maldonado Garcia M. I. 2015: Spanish “Politically Correct” Movement: Reasons for Failure. – Journal of Political Studies 22(1), 237–252. Murmulaitytė Daiva 2021: Lietuvių kalbos naujažodžiai lyties išraiškos aspektu. – Lietuvių kalba 16, 51–69. Prieiga internete: https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/lietuviu-kalba/article/view/24927/24771. Parks Janet B., Robertson Mary A. 1998: Influence of Age, Gender, and Context on Attitudes toward Sexist/Nonsexist Language: Is Sport a Special Case? – Sex Roles 38, 477–494. Prieiga internete: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018766023667. Parks Janet B., Robertson Mary A. 1998a: Contemporary Arguments against Nonsexist Language: Blaubergs (1980) Revisited. – Sex Roles 39(5/6), 445–461. Prieiga internete: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018827227128. Paulauskienė Aldona 2007: Lietuvių kalbos morfologijos pagrindai, Kaunas: „Technologija“. Pauwels Anne 2001: Spreading the Feminist Word: The Case of the New Courtesy Title Ms in Australian English. – Gender across Languages. The Linguistic Representation of Women and Men, eds. by M. Hellinger, H. Bussmann, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 137–151. Pauwels Anne 2003: Linguistic Sexism and Feminist Linguistic Activism. – The Handbook of Language and Gender, eds. by J. Holmes, M. Meyerhoff, USA: Blackwell Publishing, 550–570. Straipsniai / Articles 243 AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ Vaskelienė Jolanta 2000: Darbiniai sinonimai, Šiauliai: Šiaulių universitetas. Vartosenos pavyzdžių ieškota interneto paieškos sistema Google. New Names Based on Gender Attribution SUMMARY During the period of writing this article, 55 new entries of names based on gender attribution were made in the Database of Lithuanian Neologisms (DLN) (as of 5 May 2022, the DLN featured 7,691 language units). Such formations account for a fraction (0.7%) of all new lexis (both indigenous and borrowed). Most of the formations are inflective derivatives (80%; 44); the rest are suffixal derivatives (20%; 11). New coinages are made both with the traditional tools of formation, such as the ending -ė and the suffixes -inas and -ienė, and the endings -a, -as, -is, and -ius and the suffixes -ūnas and -(i)ukas, which are not characteristic of this formational category. Even though the DLN was found to feature a broader range of formational tools used in the making of the names of masculine subjects, these are not productive. The Database’s gender-denominating new coinages are dominated by the names of feminine subjects (71%; 39), with the ending -ė as a tool of formation demonstrating the highest output. The names based on gender attribution that are featured in the Database are predominantly stylistically neutral and referential (74.5%; 41); formations that have a stylistic charge are much less common (25.5%; 14). This study of the usage of gender-denominating new coinages reveals that the public has been and is still making new names based on gender attribution as necessary (regardless of what is fashionable in language). The main reasons behind the appearance of such coinages are: (a) the need to denominate a new feminine profession, activity that was not there before or has been circumstantially in the province of men; (b) the need to demolish the exclusive bond between a particular term and the domain of men; and (c) a stylistic effect. Įteikta 2022 m. birželio 9 d. AGNĖ ALEKSAITĖ Lietuvių kalbos institutas Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius, Lietuva [email protected] 244 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVII