男孩就是男孩:一个有偏见和排他性用法的例子

IF 0.3 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Steven M. Kaplan
{"title":"男孩就是男孩:一个有偏见和排他性用法的例子","authors":"Steven M. Kaplan","doi":"10.1515/lex-2020-0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Boys will be boys encapsulates most of what is wrong with patriarchy, hegemonic masculinity, gender roles, victimisation of females, and the gender binary, all of which play crucial roles in the continued subjugation and oppression of females in our society. Although most general English dictionaries provide a definition for this expression, this paper will demonstrate how they mischaracterise it, and therefore legitimise the repressive, destructive, and violent manifestations of this cultural mindset. After a brief review of the literature, the paraphrases of meaning that several popular dictionaries provide for this expression will be scrutinised. These will be contrasted with a bias-free and inclusive paraphrase of meaning, to be followed by a discussion and conclusions This paper is based on content from my doctoral dissertation, Kaplan (2020)..","PeriodicalId":29876,"journal":{"name":"LEXICOGRAPHICA","volume":"12 3","pages":"205 - 223"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/lex-2020-0011","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Boys will be boys: an example of biased and exclusive usage\",\"authors\":\"Steven M. Kaplan\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/lex-2020-0011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Boys will be boys encapsulates most of what is wrong with patriarchy, hegemonic masculinity, gender roles, victimisation of females, and the gender binary, all of which play crucial roles in the continued subjugation and oppression of females in our society. Although most general English dictionaries provide a definition for this expression, this paper will demonstrate how they mischaracterise it, and therefore legitimise the repressive, destructive, and violent manifestations of this cultural mindset. After a brief review of the literature, the paraphrases of meaning that several popular dictionaries provide for this expression will be scrutinised. These will be contrasted with a bias-free and inclusive paraphrase of meaning, to be followed by a discussion and conclusions This paper is based on content from my doctoral dissertation, Kaplan (2020)..\",\"PeriodicalId\":29876,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LEXICOGRAPHICA\",\"volume\":\"12 3\",\"pages\":\"205 - 223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/lex-2020-0011\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LEXICOGRAPHICA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/lex-2020-0011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LEXICOGRAPHICA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/lex-2020-0011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“男孩就是男孩”概括了父权制、男性霸权、性别角色、女性受害和性别二元的大部分问题,所有这些都在我们社会中对女性的持续征服和压迫中起着至关重要的作用。尽管大多数通用英语词典都提供了这个表达的定义,但本文将展示他们是如何错误地描述它的,从而使这种文化心态的压抑、破坏性和暴力表现合法化。在对文献进行简短的回顾之后,我们将仔细审查几本流行词典对这个短语的释义。这些将与无偏见和包容性的意义释义形成对比,然后是讨论和结论。本文基于我的博士论文Kaplan(2020)的内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Boys will be boys: an example of biased and exclusive usage
Abstract Boys will be boys encapsulates most of what is wrong with patriarchy, hegemonic masculinity, gender roles, victimisation of females, and the gender binary, all of which play crucial roles in the continued subjugation and oppression of females in our society. Although most general English dictionaries provide a definition for this expression, this paper will demonstrate how they mischaracterise it, and therefore legitimise the repressive, destructive, and violent manifestations of this cultural mindset. After a brief review of the literature, the paraphrases of meaning that several popular dictionaries provide for this expression will be scrutinised. These will be contrasted with a bias-free and inclusive paraphrase of meaning, to be followed by a discussion and conclusions This paper is based on content from my doctoral dissertation, Kaplan (2020)..
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
LEXICOGRAPHICA
LEXICOGRAPHICA Multiple-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信