Gender in translation of job titles: A case study of English translation into Arabic

Gender in Translation of Job Titles: A Case Study of English Translation Into Arabic

Afaf Said

University of Birzeit, West Bank - Palestine

Email: afafisayed@gmail.com

Abstract: This paper looks at the translation of job titles from English, a gender-neutral language, into Arabic, a gender-marked language, to examine the ways in which women are referred to in the labor market.  The data was collected from two types of texts, namely United Nations Organization Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization texts and journalistic texts. The first category is composed of texts published in the UNESCO digital library. The second category comprises a collection of articles from various media. The choice of these categories stems from the aim of developing a comprehensive understanding of translation practices. The comparison of the different translations is made in the light of Mona Baker’s concept of “grammatical equivalence”, which focuses on “gender”. When analyzing the translation of this grammatical category, it is found that several translation attitudes coexist within each text category. The study concludes that not all translators are careful to explicitly indicate the gender of job titles in Arabic. Translators in the first category not only take into account the salient features of gender in the source text, but also take care to explicitly use the feminine markers when the job title refers to women. However, these translators are not as concerned as the translators in the category, who choose translations arbitrarily. This study recommends that translators should consider job titles and be aware of their use. Furthermore, the study recommends that further research be conducted in this area to overcome problems in translating gender-neutral job titles in Arabic.

Keywords: Job titles, gender-inclusive language, gender-marked language, gender, grammatical equivalence

Introduction:

Since the 1970s, there has been a great deal of research on the connection between language and gender. For instance, sexist and gender-equitable language, as well as gender-specific variations in language, are all covered by Feminist linguistic theory (Cameron, 1985). The study of language and gender is approached from many different angles. Nonetheless, the majority of research on gender in Arabic translation focuses on linguistic issues, like the use of the plural in the masculine form, possessive and demonstrative pronouns, adjectives, and verb conjugation. These studies do not include job titles. Translators frequently face difficulties when it comes to the concept of gender and gendered language, particularly when working between languages that have different conceptions of gender, like English and Arabic.

Based on personal observations, the researcher noticed that some gender-neutral terms, such as Director-General, Chairperson, Parliament member, Secretary-General, and President, to name a few, are translated into gender-marked languages in the masculine form regardless of whether they refer to a man or a woman. This tendency is particularly strong in Arabic, where the masculine form is still used to refer to all professional designations.

The initial observation of the following media headlines gave rise to the concept for this study :

Figure 1: Example 1

Figure 1: Example 2

The first example reads: “UNESCO Director-General (in the masculine form) visits Iraq”; the second example reads: “Her Highness meets UNESCO Director-General (in the masculine form)”. The phrase “Her Highness, Sheikha Moza Bint Naser, Chairperson of the Board of the “Education above all” institution and member of the Advocacy Group of global goals” ]…[ appears in the body of the second example, where the job titles “Chairperson” and “member” are both used in the masculine form. A few words later, we read : “meets with the Director-General of UNESCO, Mrs. Audrey Azoulay”, where “Director-General” is in the masculine form. Surprisingly, these headlines use the job titles in the masculine form while referring to a woman using the feminine forms of verbs (like “visits) and possessive adjectives (like “her”).

The need to know why media outlets choose to use this “grammatical disagreement” rather than paying attention to proper subject-verb or subject-adjective agreement emerged at this point. Thus, this study looks into the translation of gender-neutral titles from English into Arabic, a language that has gender markers.

One aspect of society that demonstrates the state of gender equality is language. Gender equality refers to “an equal visibility ]…[ of both sexes^[i]”. In its rules on gender-neutral language, the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) approved this meaning. In the same spirit, a number of UN agencies created rules for gender-inclusive writing and translation in their six official languages, including Arabic, in an effort to promote gender equality in multilingual settings. According to the UN guidelines, “using gender-inclusive language means speaking and writing in a way that does not perpetuate gender stereotypes or discriminate against a particular sex, social gender, or gender identity^[ii].” The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) specifies in its guidelines on gender-sensitive language that verbs, adjectives and pronouns in Arabic must agree with the subject.

Every noun in Arabic has grammatical gender, meaning it is either masculine or feminine. This fact renders any tentative to produce truly gender-neutral titles difficult because “it becomes cumbersome for the reader if the feminine is put next to the masculine in every instance^[iii]”. According to that perspective, it is customary and well-established for both sexes to use the masculine form of occupational titles, as the following example illustrates:

The Arabic translation of this example demonstrates the preference for using the generic masculine for the job title, that is the “linguistic form that ]is[ used gender-specifically in relation to men and generically in relation to mixed groups” (Kaufmann & Bohner, 2014, p. 8). In addition to making women in the workplace invisible, the generic masculine can lead to grammatical errors.

For instance, the study reveals that certain media headlines state that “Mrs. Audrey Azoulay, the director general (masculine), went (feminine conjugation) to Egypt”. The title's first word — male director-general—is masculine, yet the context uses the feminine form with the other dependent parts — she went. Therefore, feminizing the job titles not only promotes gender equality but also ensures that the phrases are grammatically acceptable and adhere to the Arabic language's conformance norms.

According to Dawood and Mohammed (2008, p. 17), Gender-neutral job titles in English don’t present any issues. However, because Arabic includes what is known as grammatical gender, translating such terms from English into Arabic can be confusing and challenging. To put it another way, nouns are either masculine or feminine and such a gender-neutrality must be eliminated in Arabic. For example, the Arabic words for director, Al-moudir (m), Al-moudirah (f), Al-moudirin (pl. m), and Al-moudirat (pl. f), all have distinct forms that indicate their gender. Every noun’s gender must also match that of the pronouns, adjectives, articles, and verbs that relate to it.

Throughout history, this debate has prompted several thought-provoking observations. For instance, Ibn Al-Anbari (1981) notes in his book Masculine and Feminine that terms used in Arabic that frequently allude to traditionally male-dominated occupations are seen as masculine, even when they are occupied by women. Al-Laqani (1990, pp. 39-43) and Al-Nawasra (2022) have embraced this theory, contending that Arabic communicates certain positions in the masculine form since the corresponding jobs were historically exclusively held by men. These days, there is no position in which a woman is not welcome, and men and women are equally represented in practically every aspect of society. As a result, many women now undertake the same duties, which were formerly exclusively performed by men.

Ezzati (2016, p. 103) give the example of the job title, secretary, that used to be employed in the masculine form in the 19th century, but since women have increasingly become employed in such a position, the social gender of this title includes the feminine form as well. As a result, translators should be notified about the changes in the society of the source language and subsequently in the target language.

Gender translation has always been a contentious issue among Arabic translators (Flotow, 1997), who believe that using femininity in Arabic is a response to a developing necessity (Al-Nawasra, 2022, p. 2009). According to Thawabteh (2018, p. 36), ministerial positions including women in several Arab nations, such as Jordan and Palestine, have undergone linguistic alterations by adopting the most prevalent feminine marker: “the suffix -at, which is usually appended to the male form to derive the feminine. This is known as [tā' at-ta'nīth] 'the t of feminine' when referring to its grammatical function, or [tā' marbūṭā] 'bound t' when referring to its orthographic form (Versteegh, 2006, p.156). The rationale is to enjoy the fruits of widespread respect for women in the West and to distinguish the post as exclusively for a woman, rather than for a man, for example wazīr ('ministerʼ +masc.) versus wazīrah ('ministerʼ +fem.), muḥami ('lawyerʼ +masc.) versus muḥamiyah ('lawyerʼ +fem.).

Accordingly, the Academy of the Arabic Language in Cairo issued in 1978 a decision declaring that it is not permissible to describe a woman without a feminine sign in titles, positions, and jobs: “It is not acceptable in titles of positions and jobs - whether a noun or an adjective - to describe the feminine as masculine”. The Academy backed its decision by the discussion of one of the first thinkers who addressed this subject with complete clarity. Al-Farra (1989) in Masculine and Feminine: A Study, who points out that the Arabic language plaids for conformity and subject-adjective agreement.

Al-Nawasra (2023, p. 2016) argues that “]n[eglecting the phenomenon of masculinity and femininity makes speech disorder, as it is one of the means that helps to clarify the intended meaning”. Also, he confirms that “it is a manifestation of conformity and homogeneity in Arabic”. For him, “]t[he higher the levels of masculine and feminine in a language, the more accurately it expresses the specific meaning”.

To enhance comprehension of this case study, this paper will begin by elucidating the characteristics of English and Arabic as languages that are gender-neutral and gender-marked, respectively. After that, it will briefly discuss how these two languages handle job titles in general and in relation to female referents. This explanation will clarify the prevalent methods used in occupational title translation and make an effort to identify optimal procedures.

Literature Review

Numerous studies have been conducted to explore the gender shift in English to Arabic translation, aiming to identify the factors that influence the conversion of meaning between languages, considering historical, cultural, environmental, and translators' tendencies. In a study conducted by Al-Nakhalah (2013), the difficulties and challenges faced by English language students at Al-Quds Open University in translating legal terms and documents from Arabic to English and vice versa were investigated. The study's findings revealed that the participants encountered various obstacles when translating legal documents and terms between English and Arabic. Thawabteh (2018) has also investigated such obstacles and found three strategies for gender translation shift from English into Arabic.

Thawabteh (2018, p. 34) states that one of the fundamental assumptions of the cultural differences that underpin the two languages is the intimate relationship between gender and language in both. Gender is culturally specific. “The gender of a noun, pronoun, or adjective refers to whether it is masculine, feminine, or neuter. A word's gender can influence its form and behaviour” (Collins Cobuild, 2002; emphasis in original). In other words, “gender is a built-in lexical property of the word,” according to Najjar and Shahin (2015, p. 256). Grammatical gender refers to the rules that govern the agreement between nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and so on.

The Arabic language has long been distinguished by its treatment of gender, having masculine and feminine forms in nouns, adjectives, and verbs. Among the established rules in Arabic, the name is separated into two sections based on gender: masculine and feminine, a distinction known to man from a young age and confirmed by all religions.

However, like many other languages that distinguish between masculine and feminine, Arabic follows the rule of giving primacy to masculine over feminine (Al-Nawasrah, 2023). When referring to the sun and moon, we say “the two moons” in Arabic. This illustration shows that the male moon dominates the feminine sun. We also use “the fathers” to refer to both the father and the mother, emphasizing the father’s side over the mother’s (Al-Azhari, 1976, p. 325).

Furthermore, if a word refers to a group that includes both men and women, the masculine takes precedence over the feminine. Furthermore, if a speech is addressed to a group of men and women, it is delivered in the masculine form, even if the audience consists of women and one male (Sibawayh, 3/563). This is a deeply ingrained quality in Arabic. Al-Nawasra (2023) concludes that the most widely used gendered language is masculine, with the feminine language implicitly included. However, if the discourse uses a feminine form, the masculine connotation is omitted.

This issue is not solely linguistic; it is also culturally anchored (Thawabteh, 2018, p. 34). In the same spirit, Vermeer (1986) defines translation as a "cross-cultural transfer" and Nissen (2002, p. 1) as a type of transfer that includes “ideological imprints” if ideology is defined broadly as a system comprising the set of values, ideas, and beliefs that govern a community. Gender is an ideological reflection that influences the interaction between language and culture.

 Thus, grammatical rules may be viewed as a representation of this culture. Ibn Al-Tastari (1983) argued that the issue of masculine and feminine in Arabic is complicated since it does not follow certain standards. Al-Anbari also emphasized this point, stating that “]m[asculine and feminine are among the most closed doors of grammar, and their issues are numerous and problematic.”

In languages with gendered nouns, such as French (El-Foul, 2000), job titles and professions are feminized in three ways. First, when referring to a woman, the masculine noun and article are used (le directeur); second, the word retains its masculine ending but adopts a feminine article (*la directeur); and third, a feminine form is used (la directrice). An exception is made when the noun is fixed and only the article has to be changed (la journaliste). Between these phases, the adjective “femme” (woman) is added to the masculine or feminine noun as well as the feminine article (*la femme journaliste).

Other languages, including English, are not gendered. According to López-Medel (2022, p.230), the English language has neutralized gendered person nouns since the 1980s, particularly those ending in man (policeman > police officer, postman > postal worker) and -ess (waitress > waiter, air hostess > cabin crew, actress > actor). In certain cases, the masculine noun has replaced the feminine and is neutral (actor, waiter), and in others, a genderless choice is used for both sexes (crew, worker). Some bodies, such as the European Union, advocate the use of gender-neutral nouns that make no assumptions about whether it is a man or a woman who does a particular job or plays a particular position, for example, 'official', 'chair' and 'spokesperson'. They would use the title “spokesperson” as a replacement for spokesman and spokeswoman.

Some languages do not display grammatical gender and instead indicate gender primarily pronominally. This is especially true for English (Al-Ramahi, 2014, p.27). English, as a non-gendered language, avoids gender boundaries between persons (Farghal and Shunnaq, 1999, p. 56). Stahlberg et al. (2007) define this category as follows: “In natural gender language, there is no grammatical making of gender.” Most personal nouns (for example, English student, neighbor, doctor) and their dependent forms can be used to refer to both men and women." Thus, the referential gender is expressed primarily through personal pronouns (that is, he or she). Femaleness is also explicitly stated in the situation. For example, we would call a female doctor “woman doctor” or “lady doctor.”

Such practices explain the male bias that dominates our thoughts and languages. According to Stahlberg et al. (2007), because “the prototypical human being is male, persons mentioned in discourse are assumed to be male unless there is explicit evidence of the contrary”. Thus, these markings indicate that femaleness is treated as something not really on a par with maleness.

These gender gaps do not exist in Arabic, which is considered a grammatical gender language. According to Al-Ramahi (2014, p. 27), “grammatical gender ]…[ determines the expected biological gender of the audience be it male or female and so assign the social gender for each”. Every noun in Arabic, whether animate or inanimate, is assigned a feminine or masculine gender. Additionally, it lacks neutral pronouns. Thus, gender is crucial in Arabic sentence construction since the verbs, adjectives, and pronouns that occur before or after a noun share the same gender (Al-Qinai, 2000).

While gender is conceptualized in English pronominally, it is rendered in Arabic both pronominally and grammatically. In Arabic, the feminine gender of a noun is generally overtly marked by a feminine suffix.  For Arabic grammatical gender, there are three signs to distinguish the feminine from the masculine: the bound ta’ (ta’ Marbouta), such as: [Khadija], the shortened alif (Alif Maksoura), such as: [Salma], and the extended alif (Alif Mamdouda) such as: [Hasna].

Such traits do not cause problems within Arabic borders alone. According to Thawabteh (2018, p. 33), translation is problematic because languages, such as Arabic and English, cut linguistic reality in very different ways. These differences raise serious issues when translating from a source language that has less detailed gender distinctions in its pronominal system than the target language, as well as the difficulties that translators may face when translating pronominal gender from English to Arabic (Al-Qinai, 2000). Al-Qinai (2000) finds that the translator chooses between masculine and feminine pronouns, as well as the gender agreements that come with them. However, Al-Qinai (2000, p. 514) observes that Arab translators prefer the masculine form, supposing that it does not rule out the possibility of feminine reference.

It is also true that “grammatical gender can be invested with symbolic meaning and may even affect the reception of a given message whenever gender specification is used in communication” (Sherry 1996, pp. 17-18). In this regard, the United Nations imply in their guidelines on the use of gender-inclusive language in Arabic that the word “sex” refers to the biological division between female and male, whereas “gender” refers to the concept of social gender or the socially determined roles and behaviors for both women and men and has nothing to do with biological differences, that is, the image in which society views women and men and the characteristics related to women and men, which are socially and culturally shaped.

According to Baker (2011, p. 99), gender is “a grammatical distinction according to which a noun or pronoun is classified as either masculine or feminine in some languages”. When gender differences arise, translators can overcome them by employing a variety of techniques recommended by the United Nations Guidelines for Gender-inclusive Language, such as using non-discriminatory language by making gender visible when it is relevant to communication or using gender-inclusive alternatives when gender is not relevant.

According to the guidelines, one way to make gender apparent is to feminize job titles. These recommendations suggest that women’s jobs should be referred to in the feminine form, especially when it comes to communication.

Table of some examples suggested in the guidelines^[vi]:

At the same time, the recommendations encourage using gender neutralization where it is not required to reflect the gender of those holding occupations if it does not influence the meaning. Thus, it is preferable to use comprehensive nouns or their gerund forms to express the job or position rather than the individual who has it.

Table of some examples suggested in the guidelines^[vii]:

One of the essential criteria for a successful translation is equivalence. The concepts of equivalent explored in successful translation are: 1) Lexical equivalent, 2) Grammatical Equivalence, and 3) Cultural Equivalence. Translation, defined as the transfer of meaning from one language to another, must be done accurately while taking into account both the grammar of the source language and the grammar of the second language (Larson, 1998, p. 4685).

Baker (1992, p. 83) defines grammar as “the set of rules that determine the way in which units such as words and sentences can be combined in a language, and the kind of information that must regularly be made explicit in the utterance”. Grammatical structures vary from language to language. For this reason, the translator has difficulty finding the direct equivalent in the target language. The lack of certain grammatical categories leads to the information in the target language being changed; information is added or omitted.

Baker’s theory of grammatical equivalence in translation comprises five elements, namely: the category of person, the category of number, the category of gender, the category of tense and aspect, and the category of voice. Since Arabic and English languages conceptualize gender differently, this study focuses on analyzing grammatical equivalence in terms of the category of gender.

Amid the calls for gender equality and creating a more inclusive language that better reflects women's presence and contributions, gender-fair language was introduced as “part of a broader attempt to reduce stereotyping and discrimination in language” (Sczesny, Formanowicz, and Moser, 2016, p. 2). According to Sczesny et al. (2016), a gender-fair language could be constructed through two approaches, namely neutralization and feminization. On the one hand, neutralization involves substituting gender-biased titles (for example, Chairman; Spokesman) for gender-unmarked alternatives (Chairperson; Spokesperson). On the other hand, feminization calls for the use of feminine forms, or both masculine and feminine forms, aiming at increasing visibility of female referents (Sczesny, Formanowicz and Moser, 2016, pp. 2-3). We are concerned with feminization in our case since Arabic language is already gender-flexible, where feminization is not limited to a change in pronunciation, but rather to the feminine suffixes that can be added to the end of feminine position titles.

Research Questions and objectives

It is vital to note that achieving grammatical equivalency is a critical part of translation. As a result, it is critical to understand and analyze how translators capture and interpret gender similarities and differences between English and Arabic. Based on this assumption, the current study tackles grammatical gender and the strategies employed by translators.

This main objective of this study triggers the following question :

1- How are gender-neutral job titles translated into Arabic as a gender-marked language?

Corpus

Our data are extracted from 3 different textual corpora. The first two categories are composed of texts published on the digital library of UNESCO (UNESDOC), a freely accessible open source of documents, which is therefore a good source for this study. The third category includes a collection of articles from different media outlets to develop a comprehensive understanding of the dominant translation practices.

The texts extracted from the UNESCO digital library include the official resolutions of UNESCO, the official statements and messages of the director-general over the years, and the Basic texts of the organization. These texts are published in the period from the 1920s to the 2000s in which we investigated the gender-neutral occupational titles and their gender-marked translation in Arabic to examine the frequency of usage over time. The media corpus is collected from different media outlets published over the same period.

Methodology and Criterion

The status and treatment of gender in language were first investigated by researchers in the 1970s. Researchers chose to investigate the relationship between gender and language from two distinct approaches. Some people, for example, prefer the language used by men over that of women. Others decide to look into how language is used to refer to men and women. For the sake of this study, we will examine our corpus using the second perspective.

This study applies a qualitative descriptive approach, which aims at describing a factual or an accurate situation. This approach was chosen because the research data of this study is mainly about grammatical categories and their notions, namely: gender.

As for data collection, Arikunto (2002, p.126) suggests four methods in collecting data, namely: interviews, observation, questionnaires, and documents. In this study, observation and document methods are used. The document method is employed because this research is based on two text categories featuring gender-neutral job titles in English and their translations in Arabic.

Then, the observation method is adopted to read the documents and to find out whether there are sufficient data for the study. The observation reveals sufficient data with many job titles showing different strategies in grammatical level equivalence as mentioned by Baker (1992). The research identified the strategies used in translating the English job titles into Arabic.

This was done by matching every title in the English text with its translation in the target text in Arabic. The researcher analyzed each gender-neutral word in the light of the gender assigned to the job titles as concluded in the process of translation. More particularly, the researcher compared the use of female, male and neutral forms of job titles, based on the hypothesis that the masculine prevails. Then, the researcher described and classified the different translation procedures.

The analysis is based on the translation strategies in Mona Baker’s grammatical level equivalence. All identified strategies were evaluated to see whether they help obtaining equivalence in translation or not. It is also backed by the United Nations Guidelines for gender-inclusive languages^[viii] on translating from a source language manifesting less detailed gender distinctions in its pronominal system, compared to the target language.

Discussion of results

The analyses of Grammatical Aspect of Gender translated from English into Arabic

Thus far, in our analysis, the theoretical framework established requires that we examine some representative examples in order to make the much-needed argument. Following a descriptive analysis approach to understand the different strategies used to translate gender-based job titles, it has been found that two major strategies are employed in the course of translation, namely: the feminization of job titles in Arabic and the use of the generic masculine.

• The feminization of job titles in Arabic:

According to this study, some translators choose to feminize job titles in specific settings. In this first category, translators of texts that refer directly to actions taken by the person holding the position of Director-General use feminized forms of job titles when the text refers to a woman, and masculine forms when the text refers to a man.

• The use of the generic masculine

The study reveals that masculine pronouns and job titles, both in English and Arabic, are used in UNESCO Basic texts that describe the general responsibilities or requirements of the Director-General's position, regardless of the gender of the person holding the position at the time the text is published. Translators in this category choose to utilize the masculine form of Arabic and change the rest of the text accordingly.

Masculine forms are also utilized in journalistic writing. The majority of the texts examined have male renderings of jobs held by women. The study also finds that the other dependent components of the sentence are employed in feminine forms. This method is primarily employed for occupations held by non-Arabs. Thus, such choices may be the result of translators failing to check up the name of the person in a specific position in order to determine his or her gender. It is worth noting that the findings show that some media outlets occasionally use feminized work titles when referring to women, but this is the exception rather than the norm.

Conclusion

This study reported on how grammatical equivalence is used and translated from English to Arabic in two types of writings: UNESCO working documents and journalistic texts. The goal of this study was to find out how Arabic translators handle the notion of gender according to Mona Baker’s theory of grammatical equivalence.

In translating an English text into Arabic, translators deal with two languages that conceptualize gender differently. Analyzing the translation of job titles in the two different text categories chosen for this study, different strategies are identified.

The first translation strategy matches the United Nations’ preferences for using both feminine and masculine forms where appropriate and suitable. Translators utilize the feminine form to refer to a woman, as recommended by the United Nations Gender-inclusive Language Guidelines. At the same time, they continue to employ the masculine form when the referent’s gender is unclear and could be male or female. An examination of job titles in the media demonstrates the continuance of the use of generic masculine.

Based on the results of this study, it could be stated that the masculine form is still dominating the translation of job titles in Arabic even though this language has the ability to overtly signal the gender of the person occupying a given position and provides all the necessary linguistic means for that end.

Based on the above, it could be concluded that grammatical equivalence is not always successfully achieved in Arabic when transferring the meaning of gender. The use of masculine job titles could be interpreted as a symbol of oppression against women and render their achievements invisible, as what was already stated by Kaufmann and Bohner (2014, p. 9).

In order to ensure translations of good quality, (1) translators should pay due attention to this area of difference between Arabic and English grammatical gender so that translation problems can be reduced to a minimum; (2) translators should be aware of how to deal with gender-loaded utterances; (3) translators should be trained to employ the right strategies.

To ensure gender-inclusive Arabic in practice, as well as gender equality and grammatical accuracy, translators are strongly advised to follow the United Nations Gender-inclusive language principles, notably the use of non-discriminatory language. Translators should also avoid using the masculine generic form in a statement referring to women, and instead conjugate verbs, adjectives, and pronouns in the feminine form. If the referent's gender is unclear, they can use the masculine form with the full phrase conjugated appropriately, or they can utilize gender-neutral expressions as described earlier in this work.

More work is needed to make the Arabic language more inclusive, to dispel gender preconceptions, and to close the gender gap. However, the widespread use of the generic masculine form is unlikely to help achieve this goal. On the contrary, the usage of feminine forms, where available, must be used consistently to ensure women's right to exist in a world that no longer rejects sexual equality.

[i] https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000377299

[ii] https://www.un.org/en/gender-inclusive-language/index.shtml (consulted on October 26, 2023)

[iii] https://www.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/services/doc/guidelines_gender-sensitive_language_e-a.pdf

[iv] Source: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000226924?posInSet=2&queryId=5b96384a-bac1-449d-af96-b541de91cbb6

[v] Source : https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000226924_ara

[vi] https://www.un.org/ar/gender-inclusive-language/guidelines.shtml (Consulted on February 17, 2024).

[vii] https://www.un.org/ar/gender-inclusive-language/guidelines.shtml (Consulted on February 17, 2024).

[viii] https://www.un.org/en/gender-inclusive-language/guidelines.shtml