This paper reacts to the article by Jana Valdrová, Žena a vědec? To mi nejde dohromady (Naše řeč 1/2008). This reaction is based on some doubtful aspects of the research presented: 1. Jana Valdrová uses the concept of markedness in a nontraditional sense compared to the one known, for example, from Roman Jakobson. The problem with which she is concerned is not a question of whether a generic masculine noun is or is not unmarked, but rather, a question of the frequency of one of the meanings of the unmarked member of the correlation pair. 2. The selected method of testing the associations evoked by the generic masculine does not prove the statement that “generic masculine is usually associated with the image of a man”, because it leaves out the role of the context and does not analyze the plural forms of the professions examined. In this paper, I propose another test to prove the assumptions in a slightly more effective manner.
The paper aims to integrate the results of several studies on the representation of masculine generics in German into a theoretical framework. Although the results are consistent in showing the male bias of masculine generics, they are based on different experimental procedures and stimulus variations, and that makes the cognitive processes involved hard to compare. Assuming that reading results in the construction of situation models and that gender ‑related memory content is activated through a fast, undirected resonance process it is possible to determine a common cognitive basis. Possible causes of gender ‑related resonance are identified and their influence on situation models is discussed. The theoretical base allows the formulation of general statements on how gender ‑related information influences language processing. Furthermore, it has practical implications for how to implement a gender ‑fair language.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.