Faculty of Arts University of Helsinki GENERIC AND NONBINARY PRONOUNS USAGE, ACCEPTABILITY AND ATTITUDES Laura Hekanaho DOCTORAL DISSERTATION To be presented for public discussion with the permission of the Faculty of Arts of the University of Helsinki, in Hall 1, Metsätalo, on the 8th of December, 2020 at 15 o’clock. Helsinki 2020 ISBN 978-951-51-6831-3 (print) ISBN 978-951-51-6832-0 (PDF) Unigrafia Helsinki 2020 ABSTRACT This dissertation examines present-day generic and nonbinary uses of English 3rd person singular pronouns from a sociolinguistic perspective. Investigated are generic uses of singular they, he, she, he or she, and the neopronouns ze and xe. In addition, singular they, ze and xe are studied in nonbinary contexts, i.e. in reference to individuals who do not identify exclusively as female or male. What connects these pronouns is their relevance to gender-fair language use. Generic pronouns have been studied extensively, with the main finding showing a male bias in supposedly gender-inclusive uses of he. As a result, more inclusive alternative uses such as he or she were previously advocated. However, the growing awareness of nonbinary identities raises new questions and concerns about the inclusivity of such binary formulations. While there is a clear trend of moving towards gender-inclusive use with generic pronouns, a more recent linguistic change has been the emergence of nonbinary pronouns, most notably the adoption of singular they in reference to nonbinary individuals. Due to their novelty, nonbinary pronouns have not yet been studied extensively, but they have received considerable academic and public attention. Because nonbinary pronouns are associated with nonbinary individuals, a stigmatized minority, these pronouns have often been met with loud opposition, often polarizing language users. The aim of the present study is to investigate ongoing changes in generic and nonbinary pronouns. The thesis focuses on three related aspects: usage, acceptability, and attitudes. While usage and acceptability help investigate ongoing changes, attitudes may reveal reasons behind such changes. These aspects are examined using online survey data from 1128 participants, including 79 nonbinary individuals. To allow for cross-linguistic comparisons, the participants comprise both native speakers of English and fluent non- native speakers of English, whose native language is either Finnish or Swedish. In addition to other background variables (e.g. age, education level), the survey also measured attitudes towards sexist language use and transgender individuals. The survey produced both quantitative (usage, acceptability) and qualitative data (attitudes). The participants’ attitudes towards the pronouns are explored using thematic analysis, while logistic regression analysis is employed to investigate the effect of the background variables (e.g. age, gender) on usage and acceptability. The study confirms a trend shown in previous research: singular they has overwhelmingly become the most commonly used pronoun in generic contexts, while the use of gendered pronouns is uncommon. The data demonstrates that the reason behind this change is the perceived exclusive iii nature of gendered pronouns, and, in comparison, the inclusivity and ease of using singular they. They also seems to be the most used nonbinary pronoun, and considerably more participants accepted nonbinary they than the neopronouns. Nevertheless, many participants objected to nonbinary pronouns. One of the most common reasons was perceiving gender as a binary construct, hence viewing he and she as adequate personal pronouns. Other arguments included viewing nonbinary pronouns as grammatically incorrect or weird, but the results indicate that such arguments may simply function as an overt justification for a deeper discomfort towards nonbinary individuals. The results with singular they most clearly demonstrate this: while generic use was supported by nearly all participants, nonbinary use was heavily objected to, even by the same participants who accepted singular they in generic use. In contrast, supporters of nonbinary pronouns recognized the role of language in providing representation to individuals and groups, arguing that any pronoun a person chooses for themselves should be acceptable, a sentiment aligning with the right to self-identify. The study also explored nonbinary individuals’ relationship with pronouns. The analysis of open responses revealed a strong but complex relationship between pronouns and identity. The responses highlighted the importance of using a person’s chosen pronouns. The participants described feelings of validation and acknowledgment when others respected their pronouns, and feelings of invalidation and alienation when others misgendered them or refused to use their pronouns. One additional finding was the use of multiple pronouns, depending on the context. For example, some participants reported using binary pronouns as a safety mechanism in situations in which revealing their nonbinary identity might pose an emotional or physical threat. Overall, the study demonstrates that the current changes in pronouns are ideologically motivated, which seems to have supported the relatively rapid adoption of new uses and practices with pronouns. iv PREFACE Throughout the years, my interest in pronouns has perplexed many people, especially some native Finnish speakers. It has not always been easy to explain why pronouns matter, let alone why anyone should study them. While this thesis will hopefully provide some answers, my interest in pronouns was sparked long before I knew I wanted to pursue a PhD. As a native speaker of a language that does not have gendered pronouns, from an early age I was intrigued by the question why so many other languages do have them. The first non-native language I learned at school was Swedish, and I still remember the day we were taught that in Swedish, you have to choose which 3rd person singular pronoun to use based on gender. This thought was hilarious to the group of 9-year-old Finnish-speaking children; why would you have to specify gender in pronouns? To the despair of our teacher, we giggled uncontrollably for the rest of the class. Later on, when I was also learning English and German at school, I remember being somewhat baffled and suspicious about the supposedly gender-inclusive uses of he and man, which were still commonly taught to simply mean ‘humankind’. It was only after being introduced to language and gender research at the university that I learned my suspicion was justified. My journey as a researcher began with questioning the status of so-called masculine generics. My master’s thesis focused on such constructions, but the survey study I conducted also included a question about adding a new pronoun to English. I was surprised at how strongly some of the participants objected to this proposition, and of course, became more fascinated by the topic. This fascination only increased when the Swedish hen (a recently adopted neopronoun) started gaining more attention, demonstrating that a new pronoun could be introduced in a purposeful effort to make a language more gender-fair. These paths ultimately led me to pursue a PhD, and to explore in more depth why people feel so strongly about pronouns. While the PhD process has in many ways been personal and the work has often been solitary, I am very grateful for having been able to share parts of my academic journey with many peers and colleagues. Most of all, I want to warmly thank both of my wonderful supervisors, Dr. Elizabeth Peterson and Professor Liisa Tainio. I am extremely grateful for all the support, advice and invaluable feedback that I have received from them. While both my supervisors helped me grow as a researcher, I owe a special thank you to Liz for also helping me develop as a teacher. She has been an excellent role model, and I thoroughly enjoyed co-teaching my favorite course, Language and Gender, with her. I would also like to thank everyone at the English unit for providing a supportive atmosphere for a PhD candidate to finish her thesis. I am particularly grateful for Dr. Anna Solin, Professor Minna Palander-Collin, Dr. v Turo Hiltunen and Dr. Turo Vartiainen for providing me opportunities to grow as a teacher and a researcher. I am also grateful for the inspiring talks and encouragement that I have received from many fellow PhD candidates, including Satu Siltaloppi, Pia Brückner, Wilma Andersson, Heidi Niva, Gaïdig Dubois, and Dr. Olli Silvennoinen. A warm thank you also to my wonderful office-mates Hanna-Mari Pienimäki, Tuula Kolehmainen and Ylva Biri for all their support, and for all the laughs that probably echoed through the hallway! I am also grateful to all the other friends I have made during my PhD. Thank you, Dr. Hanna Limatius, for your friendship and for demonstrating how fabulously a remote defense can be arranged. Thank you, Tuuli Holttinen, for sharing the final steps of our PhD journeys; it was particularly comforting to be on the same schedule in the midst of a pandemic. I have also valued all the feedback and other advice or comments that I have received during my PhD. I would like to thank everyone who has given me feedback during research seminars organized by the doctoral school HELSLANG as well as our own seminars at the English unit. A special thank you belongs to Cassian Lodge who kindly commented on an early version of the survey and helped me improve the measurements relating to transgender people and nonbinary pronouns. I would also like to thank Assistant Professor Tuomo Hiippala and Aku-Ville Lehtimäki for their comments and advice on my statistical analyses. Most importantly, I am very grateful for the insightful feedback provided by the two reviewers of my thesis: Professor Eline Zenner and Professor Scott Kiesling, who also kindly agreed to be my opponent. I am grateful for the financial support provided by the University of Helsinki, the Jutikkala Fund, and the Suomalainen Konkordia-Liitto. Having full-time funding for most of my PhD made the completion of the thesis possible.