Gender-biased frames in the discourse of Building Construction: a study of undergraduates’ perceptions


  • Joaquín Santiago Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
  • Ana Mª Roldán Riejos Universidad Politécnica de Madrid



gender, socio-cognitive frame, building construction, discourse


This article is part of a larger scale, multi-faceted project, aimed at analysing the presence of socio-cognitive frames in the discourse of architecture and construction. The main objective of this research is to assess the prevalence of gender-motivated models as experienced by a target group of students of Building Construction. Secondly, it aims to identify and establish the extent to which gender stereotypes may influence a population of young students (aged 20-26), and hence contribute to orienting their professional decisions. A sample population of 40 participants (20 female, 20 male) was asked to read a collection of texts describing authentic job-history profiles of architecture-related professionals. All gender references had been previously omitted in the texts so that, after examining them in detail, each informant should assign a feminine or masculine identity to the profiles, and also write a commentary justifying their choice in each case. Analysis of results suggests the presence of gender stereotypical patterns both in profile attribution and in the selection of professional abilities.


Download data is not yet available.


Baxter, J. (ed) (2006). Speaking Out. The Female Voice in Public Contexts. Nueva York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Benesch, S. (2001). Critical English for Academic Purposes. Theory, Politics, and Practice. Londres: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cameron, D. (1985). Feminism and Linguistic Theory. Londres: Macmillan.

Cameron, D. (2005). “Gender and language ideologies”. En Holmes y Meyerhoff (eds), The Handbook of Language and Gender: 447-467.

Cameron, D. (2006). On Language and Sexual Politics. Londres y Nueva York: Routledge.

Coates, J. (2003). Men Talk. Oxford: Blackwell.

Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley, LA: Univ. of California Press.

Eckert, P. y S. McConnell-Ginet (2003). Language and Gender. Cambridge: CUP.

Fauconnier, G. y M. Turner (2002). The Way We Think. Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. Nueva York: Basic Books.

Hearn, J. (1992). Men in the Public Eye. Londres: Routledge.

Holmes, J. y M. Meyerhoff (eds) (2005). The Handbook of Gender and Language. Malden MA.: Blackwell.

Kendall, S. y D. Tannen (1997). “Gender and language in the workplace”. Wodak (ed), Gender and Discourse: 81-105.

Kimmel, M. S. et al. (eds) (2005). The Handbook of Studies on Men and Masculinites. Londres: Sage Publications.

Lakoff, R. T. (2005). “Language, gender, and politics: putting women and power in the same sentence”. Holmes y Meyerhoff (eds), The Handbook of Language and Gender: 161-178.

McConnell-Ginet, S. (2005). “What´s in a name? Social labelling and gender practices”. Holmes y Meyerhoff (eds), Language and Gender: 69-97.

Preisler, B (1986). Linguistic Sex Roles in Conversation. Nueva York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Roldán Riejos, A. Mª y P. Úbeda-Mansilla (2006). “Metaphor use in a specific genre of engineering discourse”, The European Journal of Engineering Education, 31-5: 531-541.

Rubin, G. (1975). “The traffic in women: notes on the political economy of sex”, Reiter (ed), Toward an Anthropology of Women: 157-210.

Santiago López, J. (2003). “Some considerations about patriarchies and education quality: Toward a new mentality”, Van Noppen, Den Tandt y Tudor (eds), New Series I. BELL (Belgian Journal of English Language and Literatures): 197-203.

Sunderland, J. (2004). Gendered Discourses. Nueva York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sunderland, J. (2006). Language and Gender. An Advanced Resource Book. Londres y Nueva York: Routledge.

Talbot, M. (2005). “Gender stereotypes: Reproduction and challenge”, Holmes y Meyerhoff (eds), The Handbook of Language and Gender: 468-486.

Velasco Sacristán, M. y P. A. Fuertes Olivera (2006). “Towards a critical-cognitive-pragmatic approach to gender metaphors in advertising English”, Journal of Pragmatics 38: 1982-2002.

Weatherall , A. y C. Gallois (2005). “Gender and identity: Representation and social action”, Holmes y Meyerhoff (eds), The Handbook of Language and Gender: 487-508.

Weiner, G. y M. Arnot (eds) (1987). Gender Under Scrutiny: New Inquiries in Education. London: Hutchison in Association with the Open University.

White, M. y H. Herrera (2003). “Metaphor and ideology in the press coverage of corporate telecom consolidations”, Dirven et al. (eds), Cognitive Models in Language and Thought: Ideology, Metaphors and Meanings: 277-323.

Wodak, R. (ed) (1997). Gender and Discourse. Londres: Sage.

Wodak, R. (2005). “Critical discourse analysis and social cognition: Evidence from the business media discourse”, Discourse and Society, 16-2: 199-224.