In:Gender, Language and the Periphery: Grammatical and social gender from the margins
Edited by Julie Abbou and Fabienne H. Baider
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 264] 2016
► pp. 25–46
Trying to change a gender-marked language
Classical vs. Modern Hebrew
Published online: 16 December 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.264.02muc
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.264.02muc
Classical and Modern Hebrew are gender-marked in all morphological forms,
and the rules of Hebrew syntax require gender agreement. Consequently, it is
next to impossible to find a sentence without gender determination. Masculine
content words are unmarked, while feminine words are derived from them.
Masculine forms are also used generically, making them more visible than the
feminine. Feminine function words, mainly pronouns, were used in classical
periods for the masculine as well, leaving less specific features for the feminine.
We could expect that feminist speakers would try to change this practice in
Modern Hebrew despite the rigid linguistic structure. However, there have been
only a few gender changes, mostly in one direction: using masculine, but not
feminine forms, for both sexes. This article provides examples of this sociolinguistic
change and explains why it has taken this direction.
Keywords: gender markedness, Hebrew, linguistic changes, masculinization
References (39)
Bernstein, Deborah. 1987. The Struggle for Equality: Urban Women Workers in Prestate Israeli Society. New York: Praeger.
Boroditsky, Lera, Lauden A. Schmidt, and Webb Phillips. 2003. “Sex, Syntax, and Semantics.” In Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Cognition, ed. by Dedre Gentner, and Susan Goldin-Meadow, 61–80. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Cameron, Deborah. 1990. “Demythologizing Sociolinguistics: Why Language Does Not Reflect Society.” In Ideologies of Language, ed. by John E. Joseph, and Talbot J. Taylor, 79–96. London: Routledge.
Flaherty, Mary. 2001. “How a Language Gender System Creeps into Perception.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32(1): 18–31.
Gadish, Ronit. 1998. “The Academy and the Speakers of Hebrew.” Leshonenu La’am 49(2): 58–64. [Hebrew]
Guiora, Alexander, Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, Risto Fried, and Cecelia Yoder. 1982. “Language Environment and Gender Identity Attainment.” Language Learning 32: 289–304.
Hellinger, Marlis. 1988. “Revising the Patriarchal Paradigm: Language Change and Feminist Language Politics.” In Language, Power and Ideology, ed. by Ruth Wodak, 273–288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Horvits, Miri. 1999. “First Person in Second Person: Discursive Analysis of a Pseudo Second Person Pronoun.” In Hebrew – A Living Language vol. 2, ed. by Rina Ben-Shahar, and Gideon Toury, 75–90. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute. [Hebrew]
Izraeli, Dafna. 1981. “The Zionist Women’s Movement in Palestine, 1911–1927 – A Sociological Analysis.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 7: 87–114.
Jacobs, Andrea M. 2004. Language Reform as Language Ideology: An Examination of Israeli Feminist Language Practice. PhD dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
Kantor, Hadassah, and Malka Muchnik. 1999. “Marked and Unmarked Directives in Modern Hebrew.” In Contemporary Journalistic Language: Memorial Book to Mina Efron, ed. by Miri Horvits, 134–147. Tel-Aviv: Mofet. [Hebrew]
Khaznadar, Edwige. 2002. Le Féminin à la Française: Académisme et Langue Française. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Kulick, Don. 2010. “Humorless Lesbians”. In Femininity, Feminism and Gendered Discourse, ed. by Janet Holmes, and Meredith Marra, 59–83. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Livnat, Zohar. 2006. “Gender Online in Hebrew: New Technology, Old Language.” In Corpus Linguistics and Gender: A Multilingual Analysis of an Electronic Corpus, ed. by Eva-Maria Thüne, Simona Leonardi, and Carla Bazzanella, 169–181. London: Continuum.
Livnat, Zohar, and Illil Yatziv. 2012. “Functional Changes of Person, Tense and Mood in Spoken Discourse.” In Studies in Modern Hebrew and Jewish Languages – In Honor of Ora Schwarzwald, ed. by Malka Muchnik, and Tsvi Sadan, 461–472. Jerusalem: Carmel. [Hebrew]
Malchiel, Zehava, and Nira Fradkin. 1987. Equal Treatment for Boys and Girls in Textbooks. Jerusalem: The Ministry of Education. [Hebrew]
Meir, Irit. 2008. “The Role of Prosody in Morphological Change: The Case of Hebrew Bound Numerals.” Language Variation and Change 20: 41–65.
Miller, Megan, and Lori James. 2009. “Is the Generic Pronoun He Still Comprehended as Excluding Women?” American Journal of Psychology 122(4): 483–496.
Mordechai, Anat. Forthcoming. Ambiguous Gender Identity and the Use of Language Variations. PhD dissertation, Bar-Ilan University.
Motschenbacher, Heiko. 2010. Language, Gender and Sexual Identity: Poststructuralist Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Muchnik, Malka. 2012. “Is It Possible to Avoid Sexism in Hebrew?” In Studies in Modern Hebrew and Jewish Languages – In Honor of Ora Schwarzwald, ed. by Malka Muchnik, and Tsvi Sadan, 487–505. Jerusalem: Carmel. [Hebrew]
. 2013a. “Language and Gender.” In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics vol. 2, ed. by Geoffrey Khan, 17–20. Leiden: Brill.
. 2013b. “Gender Variations in Hebrew.” In Gender-Linked Variation across Languages, ed. by Yousif Elhindi, and Theresa McGarry, 36–49. Champaign, IL: Common Ground.
Ordan, Noam, and Shuly Wintner. 2005. “Representing Natural Gender in Multilingual Databases.” International Journal of Lexicography 18(3): 357–370.
. 2003. “Linguistic Sexism and Feminist Linguistic Activism.” In The Handbook of Language and Gender, ed. by Janet Holmes, and Miriam Meyerhoff, 550–570. Oxford: Blackwell.
Pavlidou, Theodossia. 2003. “Women, Gender and Modern Greek.” In Gender across Languages: The Linguistic Representation of Women and Men vol. 3, ed. by Marlis Hellinger, and Hadumod Bussmann, 175–199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ravid, Dorit. 1995. “Neutralization of Gender Distinction in Modern Hebrew Numerals.” Language Variation and Change 7: 79–100.
Romaine, Suzanne. 1997. “Gender, Grammar, and the Space in between.” In Communicating Gender in Context, ed. by Helga Kotthoff, and Ruth Wodak, 51–76. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sa’ar, Amalia. 2007. “Masculine Talk: On the Subconscious Use of Masculine Linguistic Forms among Hebrew- and Arabic-Speaking Women in Israel.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 32(2): 405–429.
Schwarzwald, Ora. 2002. Studies in Hebrew Morphology. Tel Aviv: The Open University of Israel. [Hebrew]
Shilo, Margalit. 2005. Princess or Prisoner? Jewish Women in Jerusalem 1840–1914. Waltham: Brandeis University Press.
Tobin, Yishai, and Alison Stern-Perez. 2009. “Linguistic Sign Systems Indicating Proximity and Remoteness in the ‘Troubled Talk’ of Israeli Bus Drivers who Experienced Terror Attacks.” Israel Studies in Language and Society 2(2): 144–168.
Tobin, Yishai. 2001. “Gender Switch in Modern Hebrew.” In Gender across Languages: The Linguistic Representation of Women and Men vol. 1, ed. by Marlis Hellinger, and Hadumod Bussmann, 177–198. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Cited by (9)
Cited by nine other publications
Balf, Noa
Goldengreen, Chani & Hadar Netz
Cohen-Achdut, Miri & Leon Shor
O'Neill, Brittney
Guellouz, Mariem
2016. Gender marking and the feminine imaginary in Arabic. In Gender, Language and the Periphery [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 264], ► pp. 47 ff.
Hadjidemetriou, Chryso
2016. When She and He become It. In Gender, Language and the Periphery [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 264], ► pp. 227 ff.
Kumar Kashyap, Abhishek
2016. The representation of gender in Bajjika grammar and discourse. In Gender, Language and the Periphery [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 264], ► pp. 165 ff.
Nelson, Jessica Fae
2016. Lakota men’s and women’s speech. In Gender, Language and the Periphery [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 264], ► pp. 257 ff.
Weirich, Anna Christine
2016. “Moldovan” and feminist language politics. In Gender, Language and the Periphery [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 264], ► pp. 285 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
