Band 2019, Heft 256 - Special Issue: Transgender and language Issue Editors: Emilia Di Martino and Luise von Flotow

Can the transsexual subject speak in their own terms? This is the question this article addresses. Grounded on a Foucauldian genealogical approach to discourse analysis and on Goffmanian-inspired interactional analysis, it investigates how knowledge systems that pathologise transsexuality as a mental disorder get gradually embodied (and spoken) in consultations at a Brazilian gender identity clinic. The analysis follows the interactional history a trans woman had with the clinic’s psychologist and traces the intertextual links that connect various consultations in time. This series of encounters constitutes a socialisation trajectory during which the trans client is led to speak a language that is not hers in order to frame an identity performance within the diagnostic criteria for the identification of “true transsexuals”. The article, thus, contributes to three areas for the study of transgender and language: (1) it investigates how transsexual people are led to speak a language that is not their own (the problems of agency and trans-autonomy); (2) it points to the centrality of studying how others speak to transsexual people – a gap identified by Don Kulick but which remains under-investigated; and (3) it highlights the importance of language use for the design of trans-positive and trans-affirmative healthcare practices.

This article focuses on the linguistic aspects of the construction of masculine identities by the burrneshat (also known as “sworn virgins”) of northern Albania: biological females who have become “social men”. Unlike other “third genders” (Kulick, Don. 1999. Transgender and language: A review of the literature and suggestions for the future. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 5(4). 605622.), the burrneshat are motivated not by personal identity or sexual desire, but by the need to fulfill patriarchal roles within a traditional social code. Burrneshat do not marry or engage in sexual relationships, and are thus seen as honorable and self-sacrificing (Young, Antonia. 2000. Women who become men: Albanian sworn virgins . Oxford & New York: Berg.). How do burrneshat construct and express their identity linguistically, and how do others engage with this identity? I examine the effects of social and linguistic factors on variation in the use of grammatical gender in the speech of burrneshat and others in their communities. I find that choices in grammatical gender are linked to the speaker’s relationship to burrneshat , the grammatical context of the token, and whether the token is in oral or written language. An analysis of other gendered practices confirms language’s role in building masculine identities. Situated within a culture that embraces women becoming men, this study sheds light onto the linguistic practices used by speakers in the co-construction of gender.

This article investigates the construction of two transgender vlogger personas, providing insight into the prevalence of normative discourses which may be drawn on when constructing transgender identities. Many transgender people around the world rely on the internet as a source of information and guidance, with online video diaries (“vlogs”), in which young people record and chart their experiences of transition, playing a particularly important role. In this article, discourse from two popular transgender vloggers is critically analysed. It is found that the vloggers index identities which are broadly in line with what Lal Zimman terms the archetypal “true transsexual”, an ideological model of what it means to be “authentically” transgender. This corresponds with heteronormative, essentialist expectations of binary gender. The vloggers are shown to authenticate their own experiences by stating what is “typical” and positioning themselves as “experts”. Ultimately, it is argued that the version of transgender identity and experience that they put forward reproduces prevalent discourses of normative gender and sexuality.

“Misgendering” is a term used broadly to mean referring to someone using the wrong gender. In the transgender context, it usually refers to cases where a transgender person is referred to using the gender assigned at birth, rather than according to gender presentation. Misgendering is sometimes a form of anti-trans aggression, but can also be accidental or otherwise unintended. “Self-misgendering”, where transgender speakers unintentionally misgender themselves, is apparently previously unstudied, seems mainly to occur in a foreign-language context, and may bear some similarity to language-interference effects observed in the study of multilinguals, a “first-gender effect” analogous to first-language effects. One may also hypothesise social gender bias, variable gender-identity, or similar factors. This article quantitatively surveys self-reported self-misgendering among multilingual transgender speakers to identify factors of correlation or causation. Using data and respondents’ comments from an online survey, it shows strong correlation between self-misgendering by full-time transgender speakers and (lack of) fluency in the language spoken, with no significant correlation to other linguistic or social gender-related factors. This suggests the self-misgendering phenomenon is primarily a fluency effect, independent of social or identity factors such as attitude to gender in language, attitude to being misgendered, or “default” masculine gender.

This article analyses identity constructions and representations of self-identifying transgender individuals on a web-based forum. Although the forum is aimed towards all transgender users, the primary user-group are transfeminine users (intending on) undergoing medico-surgical interventions to align their physiology and identity. The data for this analysis are initial text posts from the forum board used for introductions (i.e. new users of the forum introducing themselves). The article assumes that introductions are the context in which one asserts key identity features; hence, this board is the most pertinent for analysing identity construction. In this article, I use a combination of corpus linguistics and Critical Discourse Studies tools to analyse the use of pronouns and gender-indexical nouns in identity constructions and the representation of social categorisations . This article is an attempt to demonstrate that transgender is not a collective homogeneous identity, and that gender-sex incongruence may not be a salient identity feature for some forum-users. I also examine the ideologies (re)produced in the local forum-communication discourse, and the evaluation of hegemonic practices within transgender discourse and wider gender discourse to further demonstrate the heterogeneity of transgender identity.

Sociocultural linguists share with transgender communities a strong interest in the power of individuals to assert agency over linguistic patterns. For trans people, a key principle of activism is gender self-determination , which treats each individual as the ultimate authority on their own gender identity. This article explores some of the ways gender self-determination and self-identification surface in transgender people’s linguistic practices. Three particular manifestations are highlighted: gendered identity labels, third person pronouns, and body part terminology. The observations offered on these subjects are based on a series of ethnographic projects carried out from 2006–2016 in transgender communities across several metropolitan areas in the United States and in online spaces frequented by trans people. However, the analysis goes beyond mere description by treating this kind of individualized linguistic agency as the product of cultural practice rather than an asocial given. Such a perspective introduces questions concerning why this form of agency arose in the time and place that it has. This article frames gender self-identification as an enactment of neoliberal personhood, in which individuals are framed as the driver of their destiny. What the ideology of neoliberal agency obscures, however, is that agency is not an equally distributed resource.