Representation of Gendered Language in English Textbook for Indonesian Junior High School

As gender constructs could be disseminated through language, English textbooks could be a fertile arena to maintain or deconstruct traditional gender constructs. Since seventh grade students are in their stage to assert their sexual identity, their exposure to English textbook could affect their perception of gendered positions in the society. The present study purposefully aimed to analyzed the language used in English textbook for Grade 7, because the book was published by the Indonesian Ministry of National Education and recommended to be used nationally in public schools in Indonesia. Designed as a descriptive qualitative study, the dialogues and monologues in the textbook were examined to reveal the stereotyped concepts of gender and the deconstruction of the stereotyped concepts of gender. The data were observed under categories on deficit, dominance, and difference approach by Lakoff, supported by critical perspective of language and gender from Coates. The result of the study revealed that the textbook represents gendered language stereotypes in the use of lexical hedges and fillers, empty adjectives, intensifier along with male domination in the conversation. ‘Male firstness’ pattern of mentioning names, choice of topics, and focus of the conversation. However, the book has also included efforts to deconstruct the stereotypes through the deconstruction of conflict versus compromise and tag question usage. The results implies that future textbooks should include more deconstructions of gender stereotypes through language use, while teachers should use the present book with more critical approach to raise awareness about gender equity, especially through language use.


Language and gender
The terms gender and sex have been distinguished in the early 70's seen from how they are acquired by individuals (Pilcher & Whelehan, 2004). Sex is acquired naturally once individual was born based on sexual characteristics. It is assigned at birth and generally identified as male and female. However, gender is acquired as the result of social construction influenced by culture, norms and society, categorized as feminine and masculine (Butler, 2006;Probosiwi, 2015). This results on different linguistic features and gender roles. The differences in linguistic and sociological factors of men and women caused the stereotypes on their communication ways and behavior (Lakoff, 1973). Lakoff argues that the concept of gender can be represented by language. He proposed nine classifications which are said to be "women's language" (Lakoff, 1973). First, the use of words connected with women's cultures such as color terms and sewing terms which are not in men's vocabulary. The second is the use of empty adjectives. The third is the use of tag questions and rising intonation with grammatically declarative utterances. The fourth is the use of hedges to avoid being too assertive or direct. The fifth is the use of intensifier. The sixth is the use of hypercorrect forms in pronunciation and grammar. The seventh is being super polite. And the last is speaking in italics, which presumably refers to women's stress patterns. These categories imply the position of women as inferior than man. Women are associated with domestic roles seen from sewing and spending their time on color-related activities such as choosing clothes than men do. Thus, they have certain vocabularies that do not exist in men's language. Besides, the use of hedges and question tag reflect the uncertainty and lack of confidence of women during speaking. Due to their marginalized status, women's language tend to avoid giving offence and become super politeness. In line with Lakoff, Deborah Cameron argued that women's role in society remains inferior. In deficit theory, Cameron stated that women are lack in some characteristics of men. It implies that women are powerless and men dominated in all areas. The dominance theory shows that speech style of men reproduces their dominance and higher social status. She also argued that the language differences between males and females are merely a result of their belonging in different cultures (Cameron, 2003) which regarded gender differences as the consequence of diverse socialization of boys and girls.

Gender representation
Representation is a signifying practice where the meaning is communicated through signs (Merrell, 2005). Thus, language and representation produce meaning. The representation of meaning is also influenced by culture where a group of people in a society represent things with words, stories, images, emotions, values, and so forth. Gender representation is how images of women or men that depict their lives are represented in public sphere (Pilcher & Whelehan, 2004). It means that gender that are represented in the textbooks reflect what is acceptable for women or men in their life. Gender representation gives each description for women and men. The representation of gender can be divided into two; to confirm the stereotype or to deconstruct the stereotype.

Gender stereotype
Stereotype is defined as the belief of individual generally based on a group of people which he/she can be categorized (Jonauskaite et al., 2019;Lestariyana et al., 2020;Syela, 2018). It refers to perception about individuals in a group generally have particular behaviors. The positive stereotype subjectively benefits a social community however, the negative stereotype result on disadvantages for certain group of people such as limiting their chance in career and social roles (Siy & Cheryan, 2016). The term gender stereotype refers to the roles assigned to the genders based on their perceived or expected by the society (Alters & Schiff, 2009;Basow, 1992;Gochman, 2013). It is constructed based on the characteristics of women and men as a group, rather than characteristics that are seen to apply to the self (Guimond, Chatard, Martinot, Crisp, & Redersdorff, 2006). In addition, the disparities in gender between male and female may not have to do with their biological factors. Stereotypes maintain both sexes in typical professions and become incoherent with the different kinds of chance available (Mills & Mills, 1996). This following the hierarchical position of men associated with masculinity as the higher place than femininity (de Beauvoir, 1956) known as the system of patriarchy. Patriarchy positioned to play the central in public sphere such as leader and fathers exert control over his families, children, and properties (Whitehead, 2006). Women are stereotyped to have responsibility in the domestic roles such as doing household chores and childcare while men in contrast are stereotyped as the leader who active in outdoor activities (Blangsinga et al., 2021;Lewandowski, Mattingly, & Pedreiro, 2014;Mihira et al., 2021;Pilcher & Whelehan, 2004). Norris (1987) defines deconstruction as the movement to break down the hierarchical system and binary opposition in philosophy. This system cause one member of the pair is assumed to have more power and fundamental while the other is powerless and derivative. The examples of binary opposition are speech/writing, men/women and the white race/the black race. Deconstruction attempts to analyze and criticize the binary opposition used in philosophy by highlighting the discursive power (Derrida, 1976;Güney & Güney, 2008;Kates, 2005). Deconstruction works by highlighting what is excluded in the text. In other words, deconstruction does not necessarily aim to fight against binary opposition but give impulse to find anything that has not gained attention. Gasché (2000)through his book entitled The Train of the Mirror: Derrida and the Philosophy of Reflection added two more steps as a continuation of the steps proposed in Position. The first step is identifying the opposition of hierarchy in the text, the second is determining which terminology is privileged, the third is changing or reversing the hierarchy in the text, and the last is introduce a new term or idea which apparently cannot be included in the page of the old hierarchy category. To deconstruct the text is to identify to the sections of text which have been ignored and deal with the binary oppositions that are included in texts (Derrida, 1981)."After identifying the opposition of hierarchy in the text, the second step is to determine which terminology is privileged." It can be done by considering how one binary is central and privileged while the other is ignored, repressed and marginalized. "Thirdly, the structure is temporarily subverted, so that the text is the reverse of what initially seemed to say. "It creates neutral position which gives both sides of the opposition right to represent themselves." Finally, the neglected part then is questioned in order to bring different perspectives and create alternative meanings."

Research design
This study was a qualitative research design based on Miles, Huberman, and Saldana (2014). In this design, the process of data categorization, data display, and conclusion drawing were conducted simultaneously. Meanwhile, the conclusion drawn was continuously compared with the data collection to ensure trustworthy process and result. In these processes, the researchers became the main instrument of data collection and analysis, supported with observation checklist and notes.  Miles, Huberman, and Saldana (2014) with the perspectives of Language and Gender from Lakoff (1973) and Coates (1986) The subject of the study The subject of the present study was an ELT textbook entitled "When English Rings A Bell" for seventh-grade junior high school. The Indonesian Ministry of National Education publishes the book for schools that applied curriculum 2013. The seventh-grade book was chosen as the present study's research subject because the book is used by 12-13 year-old students, who are socioemotionally in their adolescence (Santrock, 2015) and their cognitive development is at the early stage of the formal operational stage (Piaget, 1964). Socioemotionally, adolescence children are in the stage of sexual maturity, where gender difference affect the perceptions of their identities and places in the society (Santrock, 2011). Cognitively, Piaget maps the early teenagers' cognitive development has started to explore more abstract, idealistic, and logical concepts. However, as 12-13 year-old, seventh grade students have just passed their concrete operational stage, which means they still rely much on their perception of concrete examples while using their stage of logical reasoning has allowed classifications and conservations of systematic categories (Santrock, 2016). In this socioemotional and cognitive stage, examples of how language is used in English textbooks are essential in shaping the seventh grade students' perception of how language is used by boys/men and girls/women, which in turn, could affect their perception of what is proper or improper for the two respective genders in their behaviour and thinking (Coates, 2004;Lakoff, 1973).

The object of the study
The data in the form of monologues and dialogues were observed under five categories, namely (1) women's tentative language; (2) masculine's dominance construction; (3) masculine generic construction; (4) different styles in communication; (5) the choice of topics as seen in appendix 1. The categories on women's language features were adapted from (Lakoff, 1973); the categories under the pattern of communication such as male dominance theory and report vs. rapport were adapted from (Coates, 2004), and the different styles of communication were adopted from Tannen (1990).

Data analysis
The data in the form of dialogue were collected by using document analysis technique, following four steps, namely reading, note-taking, classifying, and documenting. The data were analyzed simultaneously with data collection, data reduction, data display, conclusion drawing, and verification. The researcher as the main instrument was helped by the table of identification to make data collection more systematic and easier (Arikunto, 2000). The related information was then classified into sub-categories based on the criteria in the blueprint. Documentation was done by selecting pictures or text that represent the concept of gender in the textbook to support the analysis. The data were described and elaborated through comparing with the previous research and literature. Finally, triangulation by data sources following Miles et al. (2014)was carried out by using different data related to the research to support the validity of the data and the conclusion drawn.

Findings and discussion
The analysis results revealed that the concept of gender was presented through the dialogues and monologues shown by the characters in the textbook. The many dialogues confirmed the stereotyped gender concepts, although the attempts to deconstruct the stereotypes have also been identified.
The representation of gendered language stereotypes in the Indonesian EFL textbook Seven categories were said to be stereotyped to certain gender based on deficit, dominance, and difference approach. Each of the findings can be explained as follow.

The use of lexical fillers and hedges
The first identification is the use of lexical hedges and fillers. Hedges are produced to express an inability to completely commit to the value of a statement (Hyland, 1998), such as 'you know,' 'sort of,' 'kind of,' 'I think' and 'perhaps.' It was found that the female characters in the textbook frequently uttered these features where the functions of each type aimed to present the tentativeness of women in a subordinate position, as seen in table 1. Ah, as a filler in the conversation 1 151 3 Oh ya, to give the speakers sequence time to think what they will say next 1 160 Table 1 describes the use of lexical hedges and fillers uttered by female characters in the textbook. Three types of lexical hedges and fillers were identified, namely 'I think,' 'ah,' and 'oh ya.' The hedge 'I think' that appeared twice in their speech is to soften the orders and mark hesitation. The female characters also produce fillers 'ah' as a filler in the conversation which appeared once. Another filler, 'oh ya,' were also appeared to give the speakers sequence time to think what they will say next, which appeared once.
The use of lexical hedges was stereotyped as women's language that signals tentativeness and uncertainty (see Engström, 2018, Kaatari, 2018. Hedges and fillers were also meaningless particles in the speech that functioned to fill the breath gap and show a lack of self-confidence, uncertainty, doubt, and confusion (Oktapiani, Natsir, & Setyowati, 2017). One of its functions is to soften the orders as expressed by a mom to her daughter in example (1): (1) Mom : How are you, Siti? Siti : I'm not feeling well, mom. I have a headache Mom : I think you need to take a rest.
Example (1) happened in a conversation between mom and her daughter, Siti. In this conversation, Siti said that she was not feeling well due to the headache. Her mom then suggested that she take a rest. This single-sex conversation revealed that women tend to use tentative language when speaking to others. Moreover, this is highly stereotyped because they talked with the same gender as an oppressed group who are not too assertive (Leaper & Robnett, 2011). It was shown in this conversation, where even with the same gender and has higher status as a mom, she tends to speak politely to her daughter. This finding supports the assumption that women are expected to speak politely and tentatively due to their subordinate position in the social hierarchy (Lakoff, 1973). The present study shows that hedges belong to pragmatics that lower the intensity of something being said by a speaker (Dabbagh, 2016;Emilia, Moecharam, & Syifa, 2017;Sommerlund, 2017). When women were unsure about something, they produced hedges to show hesitancy. It revealed that women are less confident in conversation and stating their idea due to their powerless and inferior position in society.
Another finding is the use of filler 'ah' which was identified appears in page 151, as seen in example (2).
(2) Dayu : … I don't know where she is now. She's in batik and black pants Lina : But all the ladies here are wearing batik and black pants Dayu : You are right. Ah, there she is. She is big lady with glasses.
In example (2), Dayu described about Mrs. Herlina to Lina. When Dayu finally saw Mrs. Herlina, she produced an empty article 'ah' followed by the main utterance. This filler functions as an empty particle in conversation. It shows that fillers are sounds or phrases that could appear anywhere in the sentences that disrupt speech flow (Navratilova, 2015). As categorized by Rose (2008),, this filler was as unlexicalized fillers, containing empty lexical. Examples of this type are 'ee, erm,' err,' ehm,' and 'eh.' The use of filler was also found in the medial position. It was used to stale the time span as speakers search for the next upcoming words to utter and elaboration signals, as shown in this textbook. The use of these fillers can be seen in example (3) as follow.
(3) I love my mum very much. She is an Elementary School teacher. She is very patient.
She is never angry…Oh ya, she can sing! She has a beautiful voice.
Example (3) shows a monologue of a female student who described her mom as her favorite person. She produced filler in the middle of the speaking. This filler was to give the speakers a sequence time to think what they would say next. She said, "I can talk to her about anything. Oh ya, she can sing," to pause and allow her to prepare for the other things she could describe as in (3).
This finding shows that women lack status in society; thus, the expression of uncertainty is favored during speaking. It was caused by the cultures where women's culture is indirect, elaborate, and person-focused while men's culture is direct, status-oriented, and object-focused (Blangsinga et al., 2021;Curaming & Curaming, 2020;Dabbagh, 2016;Emilia et al., 2017;Mihira et al., 2021;Mulac, Bradac, & Gibbons, 2006). This confirmed the stereotyped that gender deals with the process of how should men and women play a role and act in accordance with the values, social norms, and culture where they live (Eckert, 2003). It corroborates that society maintains the power where men's language is privileged due to the patriarchal system and positioned men to have the leading roles in the public sphere (Blangsinga et al., 2021;Mihira et al., 2021;Whitehead, 2006). It is also associated with the deficit approach where women lack some characteristics of men. The deficit approach implies that men dominated in all areas thus leads women into subordinate positions (Cameron, 2003). Men's language is considered more favorable than women's, known as Androcentrism (Bem, 1996;Dabbagh, 2016;Emilia et al., 2017). It tends to view men and men's experiences and behaviors as central, normative, and valued. Coates explained that women tend to use hedges in their speech to avoid "the appearance of playing the expert." Women believe themselves as having lower social status. Thus, they have to use softer language as the politeness marker, highlighting men as having a greater extent than women (Holmes, 1987).
The element of doubt in female speech implies that women cannot think clearly and be involved in a serious discussion. This inferior trait associated with women caused career and social roles limitation (Parker, Larkin, & Cockburn, 2017;Sadeghi & Maleki, 2016;Siy & Cheryan, 2016;Yonata, Riau, Mujiyanto, & Semarang, 2017) (Siy & Cheryan, 2016). The previous researchers also proved that hedges and fillers were produced mainly by women (Engström, 2018;Mulac, 2001). Engström (2018) provided examples of two tokens produced mainly by women: 'I think' and 'I'm sure.' The use of hedges 'I think' as the weak assertive predicates reduce the statement (Kaatari, 2018). Therefore, the analysis revealed that the textbook remains confirmed the stereotyped concept of gender identified from the linguistics aspects.

The use of empty adjectives
The second identification is the use of empty adjectives produced by both male and female characters in the textbook. The present study identified that the use of empty adjectives was produced mainly by female characters. The identification can be seen in table 2.  Table 2 presents the use of empty adjectives produced by female and male characters in the textbook. It was found that female characters frequently used empty adjectives, which appeared seven times in chapters V and VI. Compared to male characters, it was found that male characters only used this feature one time in chapter VI.
Empty adjectives express only an emotional response instead of precise information. Lakoff (1973) defines it as a category that represents the appreciation or praise of the speaker for something. He listed 'women only' adjectives like 'adorable', 'charming', 'sweet', 'lovely', and 'divine'. It conveys only an emotional reaction instead of specific information since women are stereotyped as affectionate, emotional, and sensitive (Busby, 1974;Crawford, 1995;Streicher, 1974). The analysis found that the female characters in the textbook frequently produced empty adjectives such as 'wonderful,' 'adorable,' and 'shiny' to describe things.
The use of empty adjectives in the textbook was identified when the characters tried to exaggerate physical appearance, such as a conversation between Lisa and Mira in example (4) as follows.
(4) Lina : Mira, you cut your beautiful hair. Why did you do that? You had beautiful shiny long hair. Mira : Because it's more practical. I don't have to spend much time for hair care.
In example (4), Lisa and Mira had a conversation about hairstyle. Mira cut her hair which made Lisa complained about it because Mira has healthy long hair. Lisa exaggerated her speech by saying that Mira has beautiful shiny long hair. It means that since her hair is healthy, it seemed to shine.
Regarding example (4), the study revealed that females are more likely to be characterized as affectionate, emotionally expressive, and passive (Davis, Evans, & Lorber, 2006). It is in accordance with Porreca (1984), who described that women produce empty adjectives when describing emotionality, physical appearance, environment, and physical state or condition. Eagly (1987) argued that gender acquired through social mediation to regulate behavior cause different expectation towards men and women. Women are expected to use non-assertive language indicated as socially warm, sensitive, friendly, and sincere as the association of femininity instead of assertive language that is more masculine (Quina, Wingard, & Bates, 1987). Lakoff (1973) argued that if a man uses the women's adjectives, it will damage his reputation. However, a woman may freely use neutral words. Eckert & McConnell-Ginet (2003)assert that we think emotion and desire as natural, but both are highly structured and learned. It is generally said. Thus, the present study confirms the stereotype that women tend to use empty adjectives in their speaking than men.

The use of an intensifier
The third identification is the use of an intensifier produced in the textbook. Intensifiers indicate that the speaker seeks to dampen a statement as a way of not sounding too assertive (Pertejo & Martínez, 2014). The production of intensifiers by women aimed to emphasize certain effects and boost the utterance's effect. The use of intensifiers is also thought to be associated with a positively polite style, which is said to be characteristic of the language of women (Holmes, 1987). The identification of the use of intensifiers can be seen in table 3.  Table 3 shows that female characters were found to use intensifiers frequently. The intensifier produced by female characters was found in five out of eight chapters in the textbook. Female characters produce 21 intensifiers. Meanwhile, there are 13 intensifiers produced by male characters. It shows that the use of intensifiers was produced mainly by female characters.
The use of intensifiers produced by female characters can be seen in example (5)  Example (5) shows a conversation between Beni and Siti. Beni asked Siti to describe how Rani Maharani looked. In describing the personality of Rani Maharani, Siti produced intensifiers twice in 'very kind and polite' and 'very impressive.' From this finding, intensifiers can be defined as a linguistic term for adverbs that modify the degree of another word, such as very and so (Liebrecht, Hustinx, & van Mulken, 2019;Sardabi & Afghari, 2015;Suryaningsih & Hardjanto, 2021). Hornby (1974)defines intensifiers as strengthening the meanings of the utterance, such as 'so,' 'very,' 'totally,' and 'awful.' It is in line with the use of the intensifier 'very' in (5). It does not contribute to the propositional meaning of a clause but serves to enhance and give additional emotional context to the word it modifies (Liebrecht et al., 2019;Sardabi & Afghari, 2015;Suryaningsih & Hardjanto, 2021). Intensifiers increase the effect of a verb by using an adverb that strengthens the emotional content of the word. In (5), Siti produced intensifiers to suggest to Beni how he should feel delicately.
Women generally have lower status than men; thus, getting the attention of their listeners through using intensifiers might be a linguistic strategy for women to help establish and maintain personal relationships. Also, since women are more emotionally oriented in their behavior and speech, using intensifiers might be an attempt to express their strong feelings and attitudes toward different topics. Many researchers have noted that, in general, women tend to exhibit a relational orientation in interactions with others, whereas men tend to exhibit a more independent and unemotional orientation (Merchant, 2012;Zbigniew et al., 2019). It implies that in mixed-sex groups, women would be given fewer opportunities to make task contributions, receive less support for their contributions, and be less influential than men (Carli, 2008). It was believed that women who speak tentatively are considered less intelligent than men who speak tentatively, so the use of tentative speech would appear to interfere with a woman's ability to influence others more than a man's. For example, women may be ignored to be a leader of a project affected by the notions of emotional women's language (Itmeizeh, 2017). In addition, men and women's high status or high dominance display a greater amount of verbal and nonverbal power.
Previous studies also found that adjective intensification is the most common form of intensification produced by women. It also enriches the finding regarding male and female differences in vocabulary, which appealed that women highly produced intensifiers than men (Fuchs, 2017;Liebrecht et al., 2019;Sardabi & Afghari, 2015;Suryaningsih & Hardjanto, 2021).

The male domination in conversation
The fourth identification is the male domination in conversation. Dominance refers to aggressive behavior in which a person uses assertive, restraining, or forceful means of authority (Carli, 2008). It is the result of patriarchy where masculine is placed as the center of one's worldview. Male domination marginalized women in terms of the chance to hold a conversation (Liddell et al., 1968). The identification can be seen in table 4.  Table 4 shows male domination during the conversation, which appeared six times. Two situations were identified where they dominate the conversation through stirring and keep changing the topic of conversation. It was found that in the mixed-sex conversation, male maintained their power and saw the conversation as a contest.
Male dominance can be attributed to the fact that men are more likely to interrupt in mixedsex conversations than women. As seen below, it was shown through the dialogue (6) between six students in a zoo.
Example (6) shows a mixed-sex conversation between Siti, Lina, Beni, Udin, Edo, and Dayu in a zoo. They were looking around the animals such as giraffes, zebras, and tigers. They described the physical appearance of the animals and were involved in a conversation. In this conversation, Lina was being supportive by responding to Siti's talk about giraffes. However, Beni changed the topic of the conversation into talking about zebra, followed by Udin, who changed the topic into a tiger. It shows that female students tend to be supportive by responding to the topic being talked about in a conversation. In contrast, male students tend to be competitive by steering the conversation into different topics to dominate the conversation. It implies that the textbook shows an imbalance representation of gender towards gender dominance in communication.
Example (6) is in line with Coates (2004), who defined this communication pattern as 'cooperative-competitive' ways of talking where men pursue a style of interaction based on power, while women pursue a style based on solidarity and support. Fishman (1980) found that men interrupt their partners, delay or omit back-channel support, reject topics offered by women, and hold the floor for far more extended periods than women. Example (6) represents male characters who being dominant during mixed-sex conversation toward female characters. Men hierarchically see the world as Tannen (1992) proposed that one person must be in a superior position and another in an inferior position during a conversation. It was also due to the egocentric possessed by men (Ariyanto, 2018;Boudersa, 2018;Yadav, 2015). Male dominance in conversation corroborates their status in society as more powerful than women. Women make an effort to be supportive where the conversation intends to maintain a good relationship among the speakers. Tannen (1990) identified male approach conversation as a 'contest' where they steer into a different direction to lead the conversation. Meanwhile, women tend to be more cooperative or collaborative within a conversation. It means that women's speech styles try to achieve solidarity instead of competing for the floor. Meanwhile, men's speech contains high characteristics of competitiveness to maintain their hierarchies within the group.
This finding was in line with the previous works towards the gendered aspect in the textbooks, who found that males are more represented in the textbooks (see Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Curaming & Curaming, 2020;Lee, 2014;Lee & Mahmoudi-Gahrouei, 2020). Asriyama et al.
(2019) and Yadav (2015) agreed that men are the dominant speakers concerning gender conversational roles and women are the deferential speakers. Yonata & Mujianto (2017) also added that male characters controlled the conversation and mostly became initiators while women only gave feedback in conversation. Moreover, male speakers had more turns in conversation than their female counterparts. Thus, the male dominance in conversation remained to maintain the stereotype concept of gender in this textbook.

The 'male firstness' pattern of mentioning names
The fifth identification is the 'male firstness' pattern of mentioning names in the textbook. It is language variances where men were mentioned first as the result of male dominance within society. Male firstness can be said as one of the manifestations of a patriarchal social order (Talbot, 1998). The findings revealed that the textbook presented the use of male firstness produced by the characters, as seen in table 5.  Table 5 shows the number of male and female characters mentioned first in the textbook. It was found that the male names were mentioned first, followed by female names as seen in the table, which appeared nine times. Meanwhile, the pattern of mentioning female names in the initial position appeared only twice.
The following example (7) highlights some of the recurring patterns of firstness of male names in the textbooks: Example (7) shows a monologue of a male student who described his family. He described that his family consists of five members. Seen from the pattern of mentioning the name, this example shows that males automatically appeared in the first order. Firstness has to do with male and female pairings of words. Generally, when two nouns are mentioned, the male will be placed first. The present study found that male names were mentioned first, such as Mr. and Mrs. Ahmad, Father and Mother, Beni and Dayu. The names that appeared in the initial position or mentioned first can be interpreted as having a higher status (Stockdale, 2006). It places men as the priority over women in society. Pillay & Maistry (2018) explained that men are more important than women in almost every society, suggesting that it is necessary to place them first everywhere. This automatic ordering is likely to reinforce the second-place status of women. Previous studies also found that some textbooks have the likely effect of endorsing the principle of the 'firstness' and masculine superiority (see Ahmad & Shah, 2019; Lestariyana et al., 2020;Setyono, 2018;Yang, 2016).

The choice of topic
The sixth identification is the choice of topic in a conversation between male and female characters in the textbook. It is the result of different styles in communication due to different ways of socializes between the genders (Coates, 1986(Coates, , 2004Tannen, 1990). This approach is also defined as two cultures theory, as it represents differences that could also be applied to different cultures (Cameron, 2003;Tannen, 1990). The identification can be seen in table 6 as follow.  Table 6 shows different kinds of the topic being discussed during conversation both in single and mixed-sex conversation. Twelve different topics appeared to be discussed between male and female characters. Female characters frequently discussed seven topics, and male characters frequently discussed five topics. Women tend to choose topics involving their personal relationship and feminine topics such as hairstyle, Kartini Day, shopping at the market, talking about pets and gifts. However, men tend to choose topics involving public places, sport, music, wild animal, and technology.
This finding shows that men and women have different selection topics (Bischoping, 1993;Dasopang, 2019;Irawan & Triandjojo, 2017;Plug et al., 2021). It was in line with the experts who found that sport, politics, business, and leisure time are major topics selected by a male character. On the other hand, clothes, interior decoration, education, and family are the major topics selected by women. In other words, cultures and society have shaped men to be masculine and women to be feminine. Hence, girls play with dolls, and boys play with cars. These gendered social practices strongly associate men with public life and women with domestic life (Bischoping, 1993;Blangsinga et al., 2021;Dasopang, 2019;Mihira et al., 2021). Men should be masculine through their actions and speech. Thus, they were taught to be brave, strong, colder, and more hostile. It indicates that society has transferred the traditional stereotype concepts of gender where men are supposed to deal with something fierce while women deal with something beautiful.

The focus of conversation
The seventh identification is the focus of the conversation. Tannen (1990) argued that men and women speak differently, and they just do not understand each other. Women engaged in a communication style to maintain social affiliation and emotional connection known as 'rapport talk.' In contrast, men engage in a style that is more focused on exchanging information with little emotional involvement, known as 'report-talk.' It was found that this textbook remained to show the different focus of the conversation between men and women. The identification can be seen in table 7.  Table 7 shows that the present study found seven different conversation focuses between male and female characters in the textbook. Female characters tend to maintain the relationship with their interlocutor meanwhile male characters tend to report factual information.
To provide a clearer explanation, the followings are the comparison between the focus of male and female characters in conversations: Example (8) shows a conversation between Beni and Siti in the classroom. Beni greeted Siti, who arrived early this morning. Siti said that she always came to school early because she did not want to be late. Example (9) shows a conversation between Edo and Lisa. They planned to jog tomorrow morning. Edo told Lisa that they would jog at 6 a.m. tomorrow morning. From this comparison, example (8) shows that women maintain their relationship with the interlocutor through elaborating their conversation. When Siti was asked about her habitual activity, she provided more than what was being asked, such as telling that she left at six because she did not want to be late. Compared to the (9) where Lisa asked Edo about the time they will jog tomorrow, it shows how men just provide the required information without elaborating or being involved in an emotional relationship with the interlocutor. Edo just stated the time they would start jogging and how often he jogged in a week.
This finding corroborates the assumption that men tend to object and impersonal topics while women involve in psychological and social processes (Newman, Groom, Handelman, & Pennebaker, 2008). Biber & Burges (2000)also found that men and women have different focuses of conversation. Women focus on personal and interactional aspects of conversation, whereas men focus more on transferring information. Furthermore, Tannen (1990) stated that men tend to be self-centered by telling stories about themselves to maintain their status. On the other hand, women are less concerned with their power. They prefer self-disclosure to offer sympathy by sharing their problems and experiences. They place themselves on the same level as the people around them. Thus, the social relations between the speakers can be sustained. This finding emphasized that men and women are essentially different and by socialization (Coates, 1986). Cameron argued that the language differences between males and females are merely a result of their belonging in different cultures (Cameron, 2003), which regarded gender differences as the consequence of the diverse socialization of boys and girls. Therefore, it was found that the textbook confirmed the stereotyped concepts of gender seen from the different focus of communication.

The deconstruction of gendered language stereotypes in in the Indonesian EFL textbook
The attempt to provide a new perspective towards the stereotyped concept of gender was identified in the textbook. By stressing what is excluded in the textbooks, deconstruction tried to provide a new viewpoint on what is already perceived as a negative stereotype in society toward the binary position of men toward women (Derrida, 1976;Kates, 2005). Deconstruction does not explicitly attempt to counter binary opposition but rather generates new ideas that mark the differences (Güney & Güney, 2008). It was found that this textbook tried to deconstruct the stereotypes as follows.

Deconstruction of conflict vs. compromise dichotomy
The first identification of attempt to deconstruct gender stereotyped in the EFL textbook was found on the difference in how men and women face a conflict defined as conflict vs. compromise. According to Tannen (1998), men tend to use language to confront disagreement, while women tend to avoid conflicts and use language to attempt resolving disagreement without direct confrontation. The EFL textbooks investigated in this study, however, represents male characters avoid conflicts more often than women. The identification can be seen in table 8 as follow.  Table 8 shows that male characters tend to avoid conflict while female characters start the conflict in conversation. The book included three conversations that show male characters avoiding starting the conflict both in mixed-and single-sex conversations. On the contrary, the book includes a mixed-sex that shows the female characters started conflict instead of avoiding it.
The first situation where male characters avoid starting a conflict was shown by Udin when Beni forgot to bring the shirt that had he borrowed from Udin, as seen in example below.
(10) Beni : I'm sorry. I forgot to bring your sport shirt. Udin : That's okay, Beni. You can bring it tomorrow. I have another one.
Example (10) shows a conversation between two male students, Udin and Beni. In this conversation, Beni apologized to Udin because he forgot to bring his sport shirt. Udin apologized Beni and asked him to bring the sport shirt the next day. In this conversation, Udin did not raise conflicts about the forgotten shirt. Instead, Udin offered a solution and a comforting comment that ended the conversation without any conflict.
The second event involved Siti, a female student, and Mr. Gunawan, a male teacher in a conversation. The conversation is displayed in example (11). Example (11) shows that Mr. Gunawan compromised when Siti asked for permission for being late. In this conversation, Mr. Gunawan as a male teacher instantly resolved the conversation without raising any conflict about Siti's tardiness.
Example (12)  In Example (12) has symmetrical oppositions with Example (11) where the sex of the teachers and the students are crossed-over. However, the response of the female teacher toward the late male students further highlights the contrast: while Example (11) shows compromise was offered by a male teacher, Example (12) shows that the female teacher confronted Edo by asking his reason of being late.
The contrast between the situations in Example (11) and (12) deconstruct the belief that women tend to hold their positive connection with their interlocutor by avoiding language conflict at all costs considering their status as the oppressed group, as argued by Tannen (1998). In other words, Tannen views men as oppressors are not afraid of confrontation and women build solidarity among the oppressed. Yet, in this book, male characters are depicted to be more flexible, while the female character tend to be more confrontative. This argument becomes stronger when example (10) is brought into the equation, where male characters are shown very flexible in their male-tomale conversation. It is not in line with the conversational style approach, where men are said to vocally protest what they dislike (Boudersa, 2018;Dabbagh, 2016;Emilia et al., 2017). Mrs. Vina in (12) openly opposed her interlocutor by asking the reason for Edo's tardiness instead of being negotiable.
The comparison between (10), (11), and (12) can be interpreted in three possible points of view. The first point of view is from the potential of using conversational texts to disrupt gendered conflict vs compromise dichotomy. Comparison between (11) and (12) symmetrically crossed the opposition and place female teacher as more demanding than the male teachers. This opposition contrasts the traditional dichotomy where the female teacher should be more negotiating and flexible compared to the male teacher.
The second interpretation results from the comparison between (10) and (12), where the presence of sexual difference and power relation become determining factors. In (10), the conversation happened between 2 male interlocutors. In this conversation, the situation presents Beni as the guilty party who initiated the apology, while Udin readily forgave and offered comforting comment. In contrast, (12) present a male student being tardy when a female teacher was in charge. The straightforward negotiation between Udin and Budi can be read as a settlement between two people of the privileged sex, thus there was no need to assert dominance between Beni and Udin. Moreover, the conversation implies that Beni and Udin are play mates, as reflected from the casual content of their conversation: borrowing sport shirt. Because sport shirt is used in sweaty activity, it is very personal to borrow one from another, unless they are close enough to be friends.
On the other hand, (12) presents the teacher and the student in juxtaposed power relations. The first one is the opposing sexes of the interlocutors, with which the history of women's oppression is implied. At the same time, there was a power relation between teacher and student that place the female and male character hierarchically: the female character was the teacher, while the male character is the student. Thus, the actions of both interlocutors are laden with power relations. First of all, a student's tardiness represents a challenge to the teacher's authority. However, the juxtaposition of Edo's sex as a male student and the teacher as a female character complicates the conversation furthers. Edo's tardiness to Mrs. Vina's class is not only a matter of tardiness of a student in a random class. It is a challenge from a male student to a female authority. In this case, Edo's tardiness can be read as a denial of the female's authority as a teacher, simply because the teacher was female. This interpretation could explain Mrs. Vina confronted Edo assertively in (12).
The third point of view compares the teachers' responses in (11) and (12), where two students were late in two respective classes. In (11), the teacher was male, and the student was female; while in (12), the teacher was female, and the student was male. In the two similar situations, the male teacher leaned to compromise as he did not confront the female students, while the female teacher confronted the male students instead of compromising. This comparison may raise a question why should the two teachers reacted differently? One possible interpretation about the two different responses could be the different power relations that existed in the two conversations. In (11), the teacher was a male person whose interest had been the priority of patriarchal society. Thus, her position as the teacher in that conversation only strengthen the hegemony. The male teacher's authority in that classroom was strongly established, that a late student who readily apologized would not be perceived as a challenge. It does not matter the sex of the student; the power relations had doubly placed the teacher in the benefited position. On the other hand, the female teacher's authority was only granted by the hierarchy of the teacher/student relationship, without affirmation from the male/female power relations. Thus, a tardiness from a male student can be perceived as a challenge toward the fragile gender relations. As a teacher, Mrs. Wina was on a higher position yet as a person she was the inferior sex. This interpretation could explain why Mrs. Vina felt it important to confront the late male student for his tardiness.
Meanwhile, women see conflict as a threat to a relationship. Thus, they avoid conflict and prefer to compromise. Men are more likely to voice their opposition to a suggestion in the workplace or home, while women are less likely to object and assert themselves. They might delay their opposition to the suggestions and complain later. Tobalase & Ogbonna (2019) define the compromising mode as moderate assertiveness and moderate cooperation, which means that it can be seen as a giving up or win-win solution depending on the situation closely related to the roles of gender. For example, because they are men, men were taught to always stand up to something; however, women were taught to be obedient; thus, they are more likely to use persuasive mode than men. This finding was in line with Urlikayanti (2012), who found that although women tend to avoid conflict, they can confront it. However, they prefer to compromise with the concerns which cannot be separated from the patriarchal system in society. Because of this trait, women have been excluded from political life and decision-making processes.
Through this finding, the textbook attempted to reconstruct men's acts in a certain manner because they occupy the dominant position in the social hierarchy. It is in line with first-wave feminists' effort to seek financial and political equality between men and women, emphasizing that women also have the right to speak, and thus they should be allowed to vote (Beasley, 2005). It is also in line with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that everyone has the right to take part in the government of their country. Through this reconstruction, women may have a new perception towards their right to express their thought. The compromise shown in (10) and (11) also deconstruct the assumption of status and power in language, which states that communication style is the matter of either men or women are in a subordinate position (LaFrance & Vial, 2015). It means that men and women can perform this style both for them in superior and subordinate positions. Therefore, this textbook attempted to reconstruct the 'men-centered mindset in society and elevate the binary position of women.

The deconstruction towards the use of tag question
The second identification is the deconstruction of the use of tag questions. The present study identified the deconstruction towards this feature as seen in table 9 as follows  Table 9 shows that both male and female speakers produced tag questions as one of the tentative languages proposed by Lakoff (1973). The present study identified that both male and female characters in the textbook produced the use of tag questions, resulting in ambivalence toward the concept of gender.
The use of tag questions is associated with women's language (Lakoff, 1973). In contrast, this textbook shows that this feature was performed by both male and female characters. Siti used the question tag 'can we?' when speaking to Lina (13)  Example (13) happened in a single-sex conversation between Siti and Lina. In this conversation, Lina described that her house has a handicraft from Tana Toraja hanging on the front door. It is a triangle with beautiful carvings. With hesitation, Siti commented that they could not see the handicraft from the street when the door was open. Lina then confirmed her by saying, "you are right." The single-sex conversation also shows the use of tag questions between the male characters (14) as in the dialogue: In (14), Edo was asking for information about Simon to Beni. Beni described his characteristics as fat and chubby, with a black hat. When Edo saw someone who matched with the characteristics mentioned by Beni, but he was still unsure about it, he emphasized his statement by saying, "he's carrying a backpack, isn't he?" Examples (13) and (14) show the balanced use of tag questions between male and female characters. The use of tag questions in those conversations is a type of tentative language since adding a tag to the declarative means that the speakers intend their argument validated (Lakoff, 1973). It is used to lessen the statement when the speaker has less than total confidence in its validity. Concerning 'dominance' ideology, women must adjust their interactive behaviors to reach parity with men (Coates, 1986). However, this textbook attempted to deconstruct the stereotype by presenting male characters that produced these features. It implies that the use of powerless language is not gender-related but with two other factors: first, with the speaker's social status, and secondly, with the speaker's previous experience (Barr & Atkins, 1980). Example (14) deconstructs the belief towards the use of tag question that is functioned to show politeness since these two male students are stranger to each other. The use of tag questions reduces the threat to the hearer's positive face by stressing agreement (Talbot, 1995). It is a way of respecting the speakers and avoiding offending them. Politeness creates positive concerns of speakers that deliberately not imposing the distance between speakers and interlocutors (Cameron, 2003). Through showing the balanced use of tag questions in the dialogue between men and women, the textbook allows readers to have a new perspective towards how men and women perceived their style in communication. Some experts agreed that women's language features are not always associated with a sign of uncertainty and their social insecurity (Cameron, 2003;Coates, 2013). These deconstructions bring insight that both men and women should access the broadest possible variety of styles. Coates highlighted that the ideal androgynous speaker might shift from affirmative to tentative. It implies that the different ways of speaking between men and women are merely a matter of style. The discrepancies in the communication style between all women and men represent subcultural differences to acquire recognition that women's conversation merits the sociolinguistic aspects as men's speakers (Coates, 1986). In line with this, the language features and patterns of communication associated with certain gender need to be critically examined (Barr & Atkins, 1980). Furthermore, Aries (1996) argued that the differences in communication toward men and women are inconsistent and small. Therefore, this textbook attempted to deconstruct the stereotype towards using and interpreting the tag question formation, which depended on the context, not gender.

Conclusion
The present study was aimed at describing the concepts of gender represented in the EFL textbook. Following interactive qualitative research design by Miles, Huberman, and Saldana, the data in the form of dialogue were observed under categories on language features and power by Lakoff supported with Coates. The result of the study revealed that seven findings were said to be stereotyped, namely (1) the use of lexical hedges and fillers, (2) the use of empty adjectives, (3) the use of intensifier, (4) the male domination in the conversation, (5) the 'male firstness' pattern of mentioning names, (6) the choice of topic, (7) the focus of the conversation. However, the textbook attempted to deconstruct the stereotypes. The deconstructions towards the stereotyped concept of gender were represented through (1) the deconstruction of conflict vs. compromise; (2) the deconstruction towards the use of tag question. In conclusion, the textbook still maintained the confirmed stereotypes, although there were attempts to deconstruct the concept of gender. It was expected that educators should pay attention to gender equality while delivering the instructional content.