Abstract

This paper brings out the Feminist Critique of Ali’s Novel The Stone Woman by applying Critical Discourse Analysis (henceforth CDA). The study employs a corpus-driven technique. Lazar's (2007) feminist CDA model has been used to study how women are kept out of the social circle, and the ideology of the superiority of men has been institutionalized and naturalized. This, in turn, gives power and hegemony to man as a social class. It has been concluded that the place and status of women in society have been gendered, and they are victims of social and economic discrimination. Men are supported by social institutions like family and marriage to make their discourse privileged, preferred and justified.

Key Words

CDA, Discrimination, Feminist

Ideology, Patriarchy, Social circle

Introduction

Feminism and gender studies have become part and parcel of modern research and are hot issues for the academia of the present day. It traces the implicit ways of gender discrimination and how women are kept outside the social circle. Also, some ideologies concerning gender discrimination are naturalized and institutionalized to provide them legitimacy and power. It is better to give a brief account of feminism and develop a relationship between feminism and CDA.

Feminism is the critique of unequal social order. It is further affected by the objectives of social emancipation and transformation. In this age when the issue of gender, power and ideology are the most discussed problems and have become complicated, it is more relevant to talk about these problems. The feminist theories have informed us since the late 1980s that discrimination between man and woman has become very problematic. Gender is another issue relevant to feminism, it is a social category that does not exist on its own, but it has a relationship with other categories like duality, class, sexuality, ethnicity, age, etc. Different communities have different gender issues and also the power relations between

the two divides of the gender are not balanced, and this relationship expresses itself in different degrees. Also, new issues have surfaced themselves in the domain of feminism. Political and intellectual movements of feminism have affected social research deeply in the last five years (Travers, 1991). 
Feminist researchers do not believe in the assumption that women are naturally inferior to men. They defy those scientific inquiries which do not take into account the blatant truth of male dominance. (Ramazangolu & Holland, 2002). Feminism takes a particular political position. The epistemology and ethics of feminism help the researchers to question the present truth, and he/she is capable of exploring the relationship between knowledge and power (Ramazangolu & Holland, 2002).
Feminism is a kind of research that inquires how much feminist research is showing through a certain formula process. (Patton, 2002). Feminism does not attach itself with any one method, as feminist researchers can take any perspective of the already existing method, or he/she can take a perspective that results in the development of new methods (Reinharz, 1992). How women's lives are moulded by the forces and the feelings is deeply analyzed and understood by the deep and diverse disciplines of feminism. (Stewart, 2009)
These are three main theoretically different forms of feminism:
1-Socialist feminism focuses on equal rights, equal opportunities and the collective good (Kennedy, 2008). It takes its strength from the Marxist theory, which keeps class at the center of the stage. It is the class that determines the economic and social status of the women.
2-Liberal feminism demands equality for women. It also emphasizes equality, whereas individualism, liberty, and justice are concerned (Stewart, 2005). Liberal feminism has faith in women’s qualities, provided they are facilitated by an equal playing ground.
3-Radical feminism believes that women are deprived human beings who are victims of the patriarchal system. This system has got so much strength that its exploitation does not seem abnormal, but it seems natural (Stewart, 2014). Men may not be directly involved in this exploitation, but they take advantage of this disadvantageous position of women.
Radical feminists have been very active, and they work for the emancipation of the rights of women. They stress the fact that women should be the owners of their own bodies, and they should educate others to do so.
The three main schools of thought in feminism have given birth to many kinds of feminism like lesbian feminism, black feminism, psychoanalytic feminism, etc. (Stewart, 2004). There are so many kinds of feminism, and their theoretical background help to define and explain different aspects of feminism. These definitions merge with others at some points but separate themselves at others (Reinharz, 1992).
Feminist activism has an ideology at its center. The ideology is that the lives of women are important (Ramazangolu & Holland, 2002; Reinharz, 1992). Feminism believes in the individuality of women. Due to this movement of feminism, women are more assertive about their lives as compared to the past. However, their freedom is still under the effect of certain forces of ideology. These forces of ideology suggest the appropriateness of their sex (Stewart, 2004). Politics and ethics, plus the experience of women, shape the feminist methodology. It is a kind of inquiry that is oriented towards social change, cooperation and emancipation (Patton, 2002). Feminist research not only documents different angles of reality but also take a challenging position on personal, political and ideological level (Kumar, 2011). It is an emancipatory inquiry with the purpose of studying the status of women in society (Grbich, 2007; Ramzangolu & Holland, 2002).
How feminist research differs from traditional research in the sense, firstly, it keeps gender and gender inequality at its center. Secondly, it pays attention to the daily life matters and experiences of women. Thirdly, for the use of reflexivity. Feminism research does not follow one method for investigation the methods, sometimes singly, sometimes in combination (Reinharz, 1992). After this brief overview of feminism, we need to look at the relationship between feminism and CDA.
Feminism and CDA have, besides others, one great commonality. Both work for emancipation and transformation and the discursive dimension of social justice. (Lazar, 2007) Through the amalgam of feminism and the CDA, we can better understand how ideology and power work in discourse to sustain gender social relations. These issues have become more prominent in our age, and it is problematic to speak about ‘men’ ‘women’ in universal totalizing terms. Also, there is so much subtlety in the relationship between gender ideology and unequal power relations. However, this subtlety varies in different societies of the modern age. So the aim of feminist CDA is not only to expose how patriarchal power relations are established, sustained at different levels but also its range and access go beyond to find the new meanings of texts and speeches for its own sake, and these issues have a wide range of importance to so many people.
Poststructuralist theories have presented discourse as an arena of challenge. The forces of reproduction work alongside the forces of contestation in this arena. The feminist point of view is found mostly in books other than language (Weedon, 1997; Wilkinson & Kitzinger, 1995). These ideas are found under the umbrella term of gender and language research. (Baxter, 2003; Hall & Bucholtz, 1995; Wodak 1997). Feminist CDA has flourished within a few years in the field of gender and language. As it has already been pointed out that the goals of feminism and CDA overlap where social emancipation is concerned, but there is no integral link between the interests of feminism and discourse analysis (Wilkinson & Kitzinger, 1995). CDA provides a wide range of theories as well as tools and strategies for the analysis of text and talks in contexts. 
Feminist CDA has the advantage that it can start its campaign against social injustice and discrimination from a political angle. It can reveal those discursive strategies by going into the particularities of systematic inequalities in society. This revelation, in turn, feeds back into feminist CDA, and the strategies for social change can be devised. It provides an action plan for the policymakers as well as for the political workers. Keeping in view all these commonalities between feminism and CDA, this study is focusing the feminist critique of Tariq Ali’s Stone Woman.

Literature Review

As feminist CDA provides a perspective on gender that is politically motivated and it is concerned with revealing the relationship between gender, ideology and power, so it influences the approaches in linguistics that consider one mode favorable to another (Lazar, 2005). Lazar (1999, 2000) is also in favour of the multimodal view of discourse in order to study the discursive construction of gender.  There is consciousness in the approach of CDA about the strategies constructed in discourse (Fairclough, 1992). Feminist critique of discourse informs how a certain patriarchal order is formed in society, how a man as a social group is privileged and woman as a social group is discouraged and is put to a disadvantage. It reminds us that many social practices are gendered instead of being natural. According to Connell (1987) and Flax (1990), gender works on two levels. It works as a social category to make the participants organize their activities on the basis of gender, and secondly, it affects all the social relations through which an individual comes across. Consequently, every social practice and activity is organized on the difference of male and female, so all the further social practices are influenced. 

There is an emancipatory agenda of the feminist critique of discourse which ultimately aims at social transformation. The critique challenges the existing status quo of the social relation and targets a level of social change in which our relations are without any predetermined and preconceived notions of gendered biased, without any regard and sense of who we are or might become (Grant, 1993; Hill-Collins, 1990). There should be a dialectical relationship between theory and practise if we want to mobilize the agenda of emancipation. It needs the theory to mobilize the social change and for creating awareness, and further to develop strategies of resistance and change (Lazar, 2007). When ideology and power are involved in discourse, it is never explicit. It is always implicit such that the participants cannot detect the imbrications. (Fairclough, 1992; Fairclough &

Wodak, 1997; Kress, 1990).

Another aspect of feminist CDA is that it creates awareness and the stance of feminist CDA is not neutral in the sense that it makes its biases part of the theory. But as all research is socially constructed and historically biased to some extent, so the blame of the feminist CDA as biased does not exist. The charge of Widdowson (1995) that overtly political research is biased to some extent does include feminist CDA in its compass, but it was refuted by the scholars like Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999).

Ideologies are formed from particular perspectives and represent practices. There has been a special interest in the maintenances of unequal power relations, and the dominance of one group on the other. This view of ideology was represented by Marx in terms of class relations, but it has been applied widely now, and it covers gender relations as well (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997). A feminist would conceive that division of people has been gendered to keep the concept of hierarchical relations of domination and subordination intact. This structure of gender imparts a different sense of labor and human behavior in men and women that varies according to time and space. Feminists are of the view that psychological sex has been mixed with social gender. Also, the naturalness of sex is a socially constructed idea. (Butler, 1993). This social construction applies to the sexed bodies. The idea of two sexes is applicable only because the gender structure requires it. The individual people may not follow this idea of masculinity and femininity, but it will be against the stereotype division of society that privileges men as having access to ‘patriarchal dividend’ (Cornell,1995). Men can get symbolic, political, social and economic capital (Lazar, 2007).

Ideologies always work secretly and are never visible or perceivable; these are never pop up and prominent, but apparently, everything looks normal. It is natural for an ideology to be hegemonic, but this hegemony or domination does not appear. Instead, it is based upon consensus; it is acceptable and persuasive. This unanimous consent is acquired through discursive means. For this purpose, tenents of an ideology are formulated and reformulated on a regular basis and discourse is used for the circulation of these tenents in such a way that they seem natural and are attractive for our common sense. (Lazar, 2007) When we take the ideologies for granted and natural, it obscures the observation of power difference and inequality of work.

Patriarchal gender ideology is a structure and is constantly renewed and enacted in the institutions and practices of a society. Institutions are structured on the basis of gender ideology. It might not be the most important aspect in some individual cases, but it is in the majority of the cases. It has been observed that women play an active role in the internalizations of such practices. Different researchers have studied the institutionalized discriminations in different fields such as media (Caldas & Coulthard, 1995; Lazar, 1993, 2004; Talbot, 1998), education (Remlinger, 2005; Swann,1988), government (Lazar, 1993, 2000), and different professions and organizations  (Ehrlich, 2001; Walsh, 2001; West, 1990; Wodak, 2005).

Although this gender inequality is pervasive and is practised in different activities of the society still it is contested and challenged and recontested permanently. Because of this constant contesting, there are breaks in its social practice, but it seems natural as an ideology (Chouliaraki and Fairclough, 1999). When we go against the gendered expectations in some social settings (Lazar, 2007), it may result in the reinforcement of discrimination on the basis of gender. For example, in some settings where women are managers, they leave the normal talk and tone attached with women and adapts very authoritative behavior like men in order to control the staff. Similarly, there is the concept of modern or new fathers who behave exactly like mothers in the sphere of the house. This masculinity of women and femininity of men can again be studied as it shows again the behaviors of the ‘other’.

For feminist CDA, there are two very significant insights; difference and diversity of every woman and man, which requires an analysis of gender and sexism; there is an ideology of modern power working in many social structures. The object of feminist CDA is the study of oppression of women keeping in mind that gender and sexism have assumed new shapes and forms over time and the environment, but the structure of gender and sexism is constantly the same over the ages and without any regard for the locale. 

The base of power relations is the struggle over interests. The women have been a victim of gender discrimination, sexism and they have been exploited, socially kept backwards and denigrated over the ages in all the societies. This has been a regular practice, even in those societies where there is overt legislation against the practice. Another type of discrimination is covert, and it is maintained and practiced in most modern societies. This form of power relations provides subjects; it can regulate itself and is practised (Foucault, 1977). The feminist analyst observes that gendered subjects are affected by power relations. CDA analyst also observes the dominance of these relations in Gramsci’s term of hegemony (Gramsci, 1971).

Modern power is subtle because it is cognitive, and in it, gendered norms are internalized and are added and spoken as a routine matter in daily life. All this subtleness makes this power ‘misrecognized’ and legitimate, and it is invisible and recognized as natural and normal (Bourdieu, 1991).

The discursive production of power and dominance, how it is resisted and the ways of its resistance come under the ambit of feminist CDA. It is resisted through text and talk (Lazar, 2007). The issue of studying the access of women to the form of discourse that encourages their participation in the empowerment of women is also the domain of feminist CDA. It would suggest a comparative rather than a universal structure that points out how oppression is carried out discursively and the division of women groups far and against it.

Research Methodology

This is a corpus-driven study of Ali’s novel The Stone Woman from a feminist CDA perspective.

The methodology of the present study moves forward in the following steps:

1-A corpus of Ali’s novel The Stone Woman has been prepared. The software Antconc has been applied to the nouns of the novel. This part of the speech has been selected keeping in view the topic of the present study.

2- The data collected through the application of the software have been subjected to the Lazar model of Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (2007). The model suggests the following three steps for the analysis:

a) Feminist CDA actively engages itself in order to bring out the just social order through the critique of discourses. It observes the patriarchal social order where men are given privileges as a class and women are kept outside of the circle of advantage as a social group. It reminds us that many social practices are not natural but gendered. The present study analyzes the data collected from the corpus in light of the above claim of feminist CDA. It will focus its attention on one question in particular;

Is gender responsible for shaping the sense and structure of the social activities and social relations of men and women?

b) Gender works like a structure of ideology and causes the division of humanity into men and women where one class is dominant and the other subordinate but also offers most of the social dividend to the men. Like other ideologies, gender ideology is hegemonic since it seems natural and normal and perpetuates itself through consent and is accepted by the community. This ideology works through the structure and function of institutions. This study analyses how the ideology of gender functions in the narrative of Tariq Ali to give a privileged position to man and how different intuitions function to maintain the hegemony of man.

c) There is a complex relationship between gender ideology and power. It is the area of feminist CDA to mitigate the combined, historical and cultural analysis of gender and sexism (Lazar, 2007). In this paper, an effort has been made to analyze the narrative of Tariq Ali from two points of view; There is some explicitly open manifestation of an expression of gendered discourses in which power is being used in some social order; also there is the subtle use of power in the gendered relations, these relations are utilized to make one discourse privileged over the other, these relations of gender and power are mostly implicit and convert. These kinds of relations have also been disrupted and revealed.  

Data Analysis and Discussion

The ruling family of Iskandar Pasha has such a kind of conservative, traditional and bound setup and structure that no one, especially the women, can share their feelings with anyone. There was a statue near the house of the ruling family. It was visited by women to express their pent-up emotions. There were some men who were the visitors of the statue of The Stone Woman to express their feelings.




NOUNS

Nouns have been selected for the present study as these play a significant role in the narrative. The nouns mostly represent the characters. Informational discourse and statements of theory use generic nouns (Biber, 1988). A narrative of general kind uses specific nouns, and that of historical uses the proper nouns mostly. Tariq Ali’s fiction uses proper nouns for naming the people and places as it is a historical narrative.

Nouns are used to describe tangible things. Nouns may be weak, strong and specific. A weak noun is vague, and its role is very limited in the world of fiction. Neither it can help in setting a scene, nor it can evoke strong imagery. On the other hand, a strong noun is helpful in setting the scene, and it is easier for the reader to create some kind of mental image with its help. It may be the name of the character. With this additional detail, the reader can find it easy to set a scene, to form a strong image. The strong noun can set the tone of the plot.

We find the use of strong and specific nouns in the novel of Tariq Ali. These nouns are very helpful in the creation of the required atmosphere. Tariq Ali uses historical names in order to attract the readers and make them attentive. The readers feel involved in the action and are fully interested in the plot of the novel. They feel their participation in the action.

Nouns are used as subjects most of the time; however, they also work as subjects, sometimes as a subject complement, another time as direct object, object complement, and yet another time as indirect object etc.

Three criteria have been kept in mind for the selection of nouns in this study.

1- The relationship of the nouns with the title.

2-The relationship of the nouns with the theme 

3- The nouns generating such patterns that may help in the exploration of the ideology.

It has been noted by the study of these selected nouns that:

a) These nouns suggest the dominance of male characters.

b) These nouns suggest the destitution of female characters.  

c) The role of social institutions in the process of the naturalization of male superiority.

The nouns which suggest male chauvinism have been analyzed. These are woman, stone woman, Nilofer, Dmitri, Sultan, Iskander Pasha, grand father, Mehmet Pasha. The frequency of each noun has been indicated by the number within brackets against each noun, and H stands for a number of hit locations from the corpus. 




Woman (156) 

The frequency of women is 156, as the title of the narrative suggests that the noun “woman” has been qualified by “stone” 100 times. What is more interesting and notable is the use of qualifiers with the noun “woman” in the remaining 56 Hits.  For example, Serving woman(1), Old woman(4), Lost woman(1), Ugly woman(1), Peasant woman(1), Contradictory woman(1), crazy woman(1), an evil woman(1)                                 

There are 25 qualifiers for women; out of these, 11 are derogatory qualifiers, as is shown above. It means that women are shown as lesser human beings. Men have control over all kinds of indoor activities. The institution of the family acts to control the activities of women, and the same institution, with the help of some other institutions like marriage, is acting to naturalize this ideology, giving advantages to men to have access to the social benefits and their discourse is enjoying the privilege. The way the institution of family is constructed is also helping man to have control and authority (Lazar, 2007). We can easily guess that there is a clear effort to naturalize the superiority of man, and languages are proof of the fact (Wodak, 2010). Furthermore, the power rests in the hands of man, and he uses it according to his will.

There are some other interesting comments, such as ‘to feel sorry for the man with the woman voice.’ (H-106) shows how the women were being treated and what was their status in society. Man is required to have a heavy and authoritative voice. There is a visible effort to naturalize such kind of ideology (Wodak, 2010).

‘On my head the burden of being a woman.’ (H-48). This is a dialogue by a woman (Nelofer). It means to be a woman is burdensome, keeping in view the behavior and norms of that society. This is another explicit comment about the inferior status of women. Both of these remarks have been gendered and show how women are victims of discrimination in the social order. 




Stone Woman (100)

The stone woman symbolizes the total control of society, especially of men over women. The women of the Pasha family could not share their thoughts, wishes and dreams with anyone. The family, the traditions and the dominance of men are acting as tools to control the weak women.

1. We could never agree on her identity, so she became a stone woman. (H-2) 

Search for identity has been a permanent issue for women. Man has resisted giving them their independent identity; they are identified through men. It shows the fluid identity of the woman. The fluid identity has been a source of keeping women out of the social circle, and it has been internalized by the women. They take it natural and normal. It has worked as an ideology as man has kept the issue of identity in his own hands, so power and authority are tilted in his favor not only in day-to-day life but also in the structure and function of institutions. 

2. The stone woman became the repository of all our hidden pain. (H-3)

This shows the helplessness of women in the face of circumstances. Even they do not find someone to share their ideas and moments of joy and grief. The women of the Pasha family were forced to express their pent up emotions before the statue of a stone woman. Women are kept out of the social circle, and they are placed at a distance from the men of their own family that makes it impossible for them to express themselves. This ideology has been naturalized through the institution of traditions.

The sentences like:

3. I missed you, stone woman.   (H-7)

There is a continuous pattern in “the Stone Woman” that the stone woman is addressed like a living being. For example, out of 100, one-third (33 times), the stone woman is addressed like that. This pattern indicates that the women of the Pasha family were on intimate terms with the stone woman, and they regarded this statue-like their companion who can share their worries and tensions, their deprivations and complaints.

Another pattern that further testifies the high level of intimacy between the stone woman and the women of the Pasha family in their address to the stone woman in second person pronoun or you-attitude like “you stone woman”.

The third pattern that suggests this level of intimacy is the manner of asking questions from the stone woman. The manner of asking such questions indicates that the speaker wants to confirm or justify his/her point of view. We demand such kind of confirmation and justification from a person who is very near to us or who is very intimate to us.

All this shows that the gap that exists in the lives of Pasha women was wide and deep as they find no living person who could share their ideas. This increases their dependence upon the stone woman.

4. Do you understand why I am doing this, stone woman? (H-21)

The treatment of the stone woman as a living partner, the you-attitude and asking questions show the dependence of women on the stone woman for the expression of their emotions. The powerlessness of women is explicit as it is unimaginable to think of women sharing something with the men of their families.




Nilofer (98)

The character of Nilofer acts as a pivot in the narrative. The major portion of the narrative consists of the memories of Nilofer. The study of the character of Nilofer through corpus shows that out of 98 times that her name appears in the novel, she appears in the active voice 6 times and in the passive voice 4 times. The character of Nilofer is described by the others, or she appears indirect speech within inverted commas or is sometimes addressed by her name. If we look at the structure of the family of Pasha, we will come to realize that the soft sex is most of the time ignored and is discriminated against. The same happens with Nilofer, despite the fact that she is not that kind of conservative girl. She has married against the will of her family, and she has illicit relations with the son of the barber, who is believed to be the family barber. When Nilofer has been shown passive as the linguistic elements indicate, it means that there is a strong kind of discrimination against the women; they are ignored, their potential for self-growth is subdued, and the pendulum of social facilities and the idea of self-growth is heavily tilted against them. The linguistic elements generate such kind of semantic meaning (alongside the lexical level) that women like Nilofer are kept outside the social circle, and patriarchal society uses the institutions like family, marriage, traditions and customs for keeping their hegemony intact. The dominance of the patriarchal side of the society has been internalized and institutionalized, and nothing looks unnatural, but everything is natural and normal. There are examples of the resistance from the soft sex, but these are a few and far between and on an individual level. On the collective level, the women have accepted it as their lot.

Examples of the above discussion are given below:

1. ………………..Nilofer writes a farewell letter to her Greek husband. (H-4)

2. Nilofer is overcome by a longing for Selim…………………………….. (H-1

3. “You ‘re beautiful, Nilofer.” (H-11)




Dmitri (38)

The noun ‘Dmitri’ takes a very interesting kind of adjectives with it.

1. “That ugly, shinny Dmitri, Greek school inspector from Konya.” (H-1)

In this example, it is clear that the Pasha family has been suffering from the superiority complex, and they are used to degrade others for that end. The qualifiers with Dmitri indicate that everything attached to him has been degraded. It is his family, job, physique, identity and place of living. Everything comes under the severe attack of degradation. They think that:

1. Superiority has been reserved for the Turks only.

2. The superiority of the Pasha family cannot be challenged. 

3. As they are the rulers, they can deride every other profession.      

The context indicates that this ugly, skinny, Greek schoolmaster was with whom one of the girls of the Pasha Family elopes and marries. This false sense of superiority has been naturalized in society. It seems quite natural that the rulers are physically, mentally, ethnically and professionally superior, and they have this superiority by birth. The narrative does not show that it is something strange and odd (Wodak, 2011). 

Dmitri is an unusual character in the narrative as well as in our analysis for many reasons. Firstly, he is a male member of society but showing ‘feminine’ qualities. This femininity of male members of society has also been the subject of modern feminists. They label these characters as ‘good husbands’ and ‘good fathers’. This feminity of male characters (Dmitri) and masculinity of female characters (Nilofer) show that sometimes women dominate the men in the social sphere. But when we observe the discourse, we come to realize that even this dominance of Nilofer over her husband Dmitri has been recommended apparently. Actually, this masculinity in Nilofer has been a matter of criticism and an element of degradation on the part of women. It has been shown through this discourse that women are unfaithful and ungracious. Nilofer marries Dmitri by her own free will, breaking the traditions of family and challenging the will of her parents. However, she is fed up with her own choice very soon. Not only she leaves her husband, but also she develops illicit sexual relations with the son of a family barber. This bespeaks the weakness of her character, her morality and her infidelity. The discourse of the narrative does not recommend masculinity in women but presents it as their weakness. Secondly, the unusual character of Dmitri has been used apparently to disrupt the ideology of the superiority of men over women, but when we read between the lines, we come to know that implicitly the discourse disapproves the masculinity of women and indirectly privileges the discourse of the dominance of men.




Sultan (114)

The Turkish Muslim leaders used ‘Sultan’ as their title. The noun ‘Sultan’ is being used as an agent. It gives the impression of the controller of the things when used as a subject. For example;

1. As was his wont, the Sultan sent for Yusuf Pasha in the evening. (H-4)

It gives the impression of the agent when used in passive voice. For example,

2. …..Yusuf Pasha had been disgraced and sent into exile by the Sultan in Istanbul. (H-1)

The use of the Apostrophe with the Sultan shows that everything is in possession of the Sultan.

3. …… But the sight of the Sultan’s face interrupted his flow. (H-12)

‘Sultan’ has been used as an object in passive voice 3 times, as a subject in active voice 23 times, and apostrophe has been used with this noun 9 times.

In toto, The analysis makes the point that Sultan was a powerful ruler, an absolute authority, and its authority had been naturalized. The ideologies are naturalized by language. The character of the Sultan is in contrast with the female characters that have been discussed above. He is not a submissive kind of character, but authoritative as men should be, that is according to the ideology that has been naturalized. He is at the center of the social circle, unlike the women who are set on the periphery. 




Iskander Pasha (177)

Iskander has a very large frequency of occurrence that indicates that his character is the focal point of the narrative. It also suggests that he is a man in authority, a very active character, and the language supports this argument to prove the truth of the estimate of this character. Iskandar has been used as an active agent as it appears as a subject most of the time, and at the same time, the verbs with this noun are the action verbs

1. Iskander Pasha doubted his younger son’s motives. (H-3) 

Let us look at the clusters of Iskander Pasha: these kinds of clusters show a man of authority and power. The frequency of the apostrophe with Iskander Pasha is 20.

For example, Iskander Pasha’s children, Iskander Pasha’s hair, etc. The relatives & near & dear ones of Iskander Pasha have been described through him. For example 

2. Iskander Pasha’s children have left the house together……….. (H-1)

Iskander Pasha is known for his antisocial habits, but he is not socially boycotted, and society and family do not react as they react when Nilofer marries Dmitri against the will of her family. It shows the ideology of male superiority is justified and naturalized. In spite of their evil actions, they do not lose their social position and enjoy all social commodities. It shows the double standard of society.

3. Iskander Pasha was known throughout his family for his antisocial habits and bad temper. (H-6)




Grandfather (53)

Most of the time, the noun ‘Grandfather’ has been qualified by personal pronouns like “my”, “his”. The first person narration is all omniscient and authoritative, and the narrator’s point of view is pervasive. From the concordance hits, we find that the narrator does not have a good opinion about his/her grandfather.

1. My grandfather Mahmut was a vain and conceited peacock …..  (H-3)

The conservative, close and traditional family setup provides a chance for the male 1st person narrator to dominate, to be authoritative and self-imposing.    







Mahmut Pasha (28)

The lexis used with Mehmut is proof enough to show him a vain, authoritative and morally weak member of the Pasha Family. Mehmet Pasha is habitually a liar, he is morally corrupt and weak, but his corruption is justified as he belongs to the ruling family. The ruling family and the men in authority have every right to misuse their authority; they have control over the fate and future of the ruled.  

1. Mahmut Pasha manufactured untruths because he intended to marry a niece of Sultan ……. (H-3)

On the cluster level, we can note that Mehmet Pasha has the same set of habits as the other male members of the family have. Additionally, he has the habit of telling lies. Still, his corruption is justified as he belongs to the ruling family. It is clear from many examples from the text.

2. They say she made Mahmut Pasha laugh a great deal and, most important … (H-10)

The authority of the male members of the ruling family is not only misused by them, but also they use their status to naturalize what is totally unnatural and wicked. The ideology that they are the chosen one and because of this “natural” superiority, they enjoy the right to play with the fate and future of the lower classes, especially over the fate and future of the women of the ruled to do whatever they wish has been naturalized (Wodak, 2011). No one objects to it in that society against this inhuman treatment of the ruling class. All the moral corruption of the men in authority and the male members of the family has been justified and is presented as something natural. These characters stand in contrast with the female characters of the narrative who were not allowed to express themselves, and they have to relieve themselves by expressing their pent up emotions before the stone woman. 

Conclusion

It is now time to summarize the result of the analysis. The study of the noun suggests that the women have been kept out of the social circle. They are treated as lesser human beings. They have no active, productive and useful role to play in society. Different institutions like marriage, family, tradition have been playing a significant role in naturalizing the ideology of the dominance of man. Thus, these institutions internalize the ideology of the superiority of man, providing him access to social benefits, and his discourse is enjoying the privilege. Even the structure of institutions like the family is helpful to man to assert his authority. The narrative shows a tilt in favor of man. The power and authority lie in the hands of man. The place and status of a woman have been gendered, and she is a victim of social discrimination and social as well as economic injustice.

The search for identity, independent as well as permanent, has been a constant struggle for a woman. The gendered and fluid identity has been accepted by women as something natural. The women are not only kept out of the social circle, but also they have to keep a distance from the men of their own family. It leaves them high and dry even to share their grief and pent up emotions with anybody. This leads them to the stone woman, a statue near the palace of the Pasha family and they are used to express themselves before that statue. The central character of Nilofer is a case in point. Although she marries against the will of her family and has an illicit relationship with the son of the family barber yet she is not an active member of her family. Her family is not ready to accept her liberty and the members of the family are not ready to forgive her. Even on the semantic and syntactic level, she has been described and addressed by others.

Dmitri is an interesting character in the narrative in the sense that he is the only male character who is degraded and derided. Other male characters are oppressive and authoritative. Even if they are morally weak and commit some of the audacious social crimes, they are still acceptable, and this acceptance works like an ideology. This ideology is naturalized and internalized; it looks according to the norms of society. This shows the power of the male class of society. All of this discrimination, i.e. powerlessness of women and oppression of men, have been gendered. Nilofer is not allowed to marry according to her choice. If she does so, it is thought to be a ‘revolt’ against the norms of society. She is not accorded concession as it is granted to the male members of the society. Dmitri is an exception in the sense that he is a male character but seems to be weak. The logic is that the girl of the ruling family (Nilofer) has eloped with him. That makes him the butt of ridicule and derogation. Even the girl becomes disillusioned after some time from this relation, and she uses derogatory remarks about her husband.

The characters of the male in the narrative suggest the dominance of the male. Their antisocial habits are not criticized but are treated as something normal. They occupy the central position, keeping the women at the periphery or out of the social circle. The male characters are possessive, which shows their power as a class. This dominance of the male members of the society has been naturalized, it does not look abnormal, but the society allows the male members to assert themselves openly and justifies their violations as something natural. The social, economic and moral relations are all gendered and are shaped and molded in such a way as it gives privilege to the discourse of the male members of the society.  

References

• Ali, T. (2000). The Stone Woman. London: Verso.
• Baxter, J. (2003). Positioning gender in discourse. London: Palgrave.
• Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: CUP.
• Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of 'sex'. New York: Routledge.
• Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. (1995). Man in the news: The misrepresentation of women speaking in news-as narrative discourse. In S. Mills (Ed.), Language and gender: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 226- 239). New York: Longman
• Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
• Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person and sexual politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Ehrlich, S. (2001). Representing rape: Language and sexual consent. New York: Routledge.
• Fairclough, N (1992). 'Discourse, Social theory and social research: The discourse of welfare reform ' in Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4: (2): 163-195.
• Fairclough, N. (1995). Media discourse. London: Arnold.
• Fairclough, N. (1999). 'Democracy and the public sphere in critical research on discourse' in Wodak, R. & Ludwig, C. (Eds.) Challenges in a changing world: issues in Critical Discourse Analysis. Vienna: Passagen Verlag 63-85.
• Flax, J. (1990). Postmodernism and gender relations in feminist theory. In L. J. Nicholson (Ed.), Feminism/postmodernism (pp. 39-62). New York: Routledge.
• Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. London: Allen Lane.
• Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
• Grant, J. (1993). Fundamental feminism: Contesting the core concepts of feminist theory. New York: Routledge
• Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Introduction. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
• Hall, K., & Bucholtz, M. (Eds.). (1995). Gender articulated: Language and the socially constructed self. New York: Routledge.
• Hill-Collins, P. (1990). Black feminist thought. New York: Routledge.
• Kennedy, E. L. (2008). Socialist Feminism: What Difference Did It Make to the History of Women's Studies? Feminist Studies, 34(3), 497-525,621-622.
• Kress, G. (1990). Critical discourse analysis. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 11, 84-99.
• Kumar, R. (2011). Research Methodology: a step-by-step guide for beginners (Third edition ed.). London: Sage Publications Inc
• Lazar, M. M. (2007). Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Articulating a Feminist Discourse Praxis. Critical Discourse Studies, 4(2), 141-164. DOI: 10.1080/17405900701464816
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (Third Edition ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
• Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc
• Remlinger, K. (2005). Negotiating the classroom floor: Negotiating ideologies of gender and sexuality. In M. M. Lazar (Ed.), Feminist critical discourse analysis: Gender, power and ideology in discourse (pp. 114-138). London: Palgrave
• Stewart, M. (Ed.). (2004). Pregnancy, Birth and Maternity Care. Edinburgh: Elsevier Science Limited
• Swann, J. (1988). Gender inequalities in classroom talk. English in Education, 22, 48-65.
• Talbot, M. M. (1998). Language and gender: An introduction. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
• Travers, M. (1991). Qualitative Research Through Case Studies. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
• Walsh, C. (2001). Gender and discourse: Language and power in politics, the church and organizations. London: Pearson Education.
• Weedon, C. (1997). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell
• West, C. (1990). Not just doctor's orders: Directive-response sequences in patients' visits to women and men physicians. Discourse and Society, 1, 85-112.
• Widdowson, H.G. (1995). 'On the limitations of linguistics applied' in Applied Linguistics, 21: (1): 3 25.
• Wilkinson, S., & Kitzinger, C. (1995). Introduction. In S. Wilkinson & C. Kitzinger (Eds.), Feminism and discourse: Psychological perspectives (pp. 1-9). London: Sage
• Wodak, R. (1997).'The semiotics of racism: A Critical Discourse-Historical Analysis' in Renkema, J.(Ed.) Discourse, of course: an overview of research in discourse studies. Amsterdam;Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co. 311-326.
• Wodak, R. and Meyer, M. (2005). 'Critical Discourse Analysis: history, agenda, theory and methodology' in Wodak, R. & Meyer, M. (Eds.) Methods of critical discourse analysis. 2nd ed. London: SAGE 1-33.
• Wodak, R., de Cillia, R., Reisigh, M., et al. (2010). The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.