Abstract:

The passing of the Constitution Amendment Bill on 18 December 1894 by the South Australian Parliament gave women in that province both the right to vote for, and the right to stand for, parliament, and in this latter respect South Australia was first in the world. It may plausibly be argued that those members of parliament who voted for such reforming legislation would differ from those who opposed it on a number of grounds including their construction of women as likely to be as autonomous and as effective as agents in managing their affairs as men. A close relationship between cognitive beliefs and chosen language forms is held by a number of theorists, and it was felt that the language of the debates might provide a test for this relationship, especially as the parliamentarians of the time could not be aware of such theorizing. It was hypothesized therefore that proponents would differ from opponents in their greater use of subject agent constructions involving women, and in their lesser use of women in other grammatical and semantic roles. The results are highly significant. Hypotheses relating to the use of the subjunctive mood and passive voice are not, however, supported.

Author: Lynda Penny, Sanchia Fitzhardinge, Helge Materne