As scholars explore anti-carceral approaches to gender violence, they question how to structure interactive practices to transform, rather than reproduce, dynamics of inequality and harm. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork conducted with frontline workers in north India, this article argues that the concept of language ideologies can help analyze how interactive practices address gender violence. Language ideologies are shared representations of how interaction connects speaker, audience, and context. By tracking the language ideologies that inform anti-violence interventions, researchers can better analyze the extraordinarily complex semiotic labor required to address gender violence.
Abu-LughodL. (2013). Do Muslim women need saving?Harvard University Press.
2.
AdelmanM.HaldaneH.WiesJ. R. (2012). Mobilizing culture as an asset: A transdisciplinary effort to rethink gender violence. Violence Against Women, 18(6), 691–700. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801212454121
3.
AghaA. (2007). Language and social relations. Cambridge University Press.
4.
AhearnL. M. (2016). Living language: An introduction to linguistic anthropology. John Wiley & Sons.
5.
AvineriN.JohnsonE.Brice-HeathS.McCartyT.OchsE.Kremer-SadlikT.BlumS.ZentellaA. C.RosaJ.FloresN.AlimH. S.ParisD. (2015). Invited Forum: Bridging the “Language Gap”. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 25(1), 66–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/jola.12071
6.
BacchiC. (2012). Why study problematizations? Making politics visible. Open Journal of Political Science, 2(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2012.21001
7.
BakhtinM. M. (2010). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. University of Texas Press.
8.
BasuS. (1999). She comes to take her rights: Indian women, property, and propriety. State University of New York Press.
9.
BasuS. (2015). The trouble with marriage: Feminists confront law and violence in India. University of California Press.
BourdieuP. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice(R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
12.
BucholtzM.HallK. (2006). Language and identity. In DurantiA. (Ed.), A companion to linguistic anthropology (1st ed., pp. 369–394). John Wiley & Sons.
13.
BumillerK. (2008). In an abusive state: How neoliberalism appropriated the feminist movement against sexual violence. Duke University Press.
14.
BumillerK. (2010). The nexus of domestic violence reform and social science: From instrument of social change to institutionalized surveillance. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 6(1), 173–193. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102209-152813
15.
CarrE. S. (2010). Scripting addiction: The politics of therapeutic talk and American sobriety. Princeton University Press.
16.
Critical Resistance and Incite! (2003). Critical Resistance-Incite! Statement on gender violence and the prison-industrial complex. Social Justice, 30(3), 141–150. https://www.jstor.org/stable/29768215
17.
DasV. (2007). Life and words: Violence and the descent into the ordinary. University of California Press.
18.
EakinJ. M.GladstoneB. (2020). “Value-adding” analysis: Doing more with qualitative data. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920949333
19.
EnglundH. (2006). Prisoners of freedom: Human rights and the African poor. University of California Press.
20.
FernandezJ. W.HerzfeldM. (2015). In search of meaningful methods. In BernardH. R.GravleeC. C. (Eds.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (pp. 55–96). Rowman & Littlefield.
21.
GalS.IrvineJ. (1995). The boundaries of languages and disciplines: How ideologies construct difference. Social Research, 62(4), 967–1001. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40971131.
22.
GalS.KowalskiJ.MooreE. (2015). Rethinking translation in feminist NGOs: Rights and empowerment across borders. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 22(4), 610–635. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxv041
23.
GoldsteinD. (2003). Laughter out of place: Race, class, violence and sexuality in a Rio Shantytown. University of California Press.
24.
GoldsteinD. (2013). Whose vernacular? Translating human rights across local contexts. In GoodaleM. (Ed.), Human rights at the crossroads (pp. 111–121). Oxford University Press.
25.
GoodmarkL. (2004). Law is the answer? Do we know that for sure?: Questioning the efficacy of legal interventions for battered women. Saint Louis University Public Law Review, 23(1), 7–48.
26.
GoodmarkL. (2017). Should domestic violence be decriminalized? Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, 40(1), 53–114.
27.
GrewalI. (2005). Transnational America: Feminisms, diasporas, neoliberalisms. Duke University Press.
28.
GruberA. (2020). The feminist war on crime: The unexpected role of women’s liberation in mass incarceration. University of California Press.
29.
HakalaW. N. (2016). Negotiating languages: Urdu, Hindi, and the definition of modern South Asia. Columbia University Press.
30.
HautzingerS. J. (2007). Violence in the city of women: Police and batterers in Bahia, Brazil. University of California Press.
31.
HillJ. H. (2009). The everyday language of White racism. John Wiley & Sons.
32.
HirschS. F. (1998). Pronouncing and persevering: Gender and the discourses of disputing in an African Islamic Court. University of Chicago Press.
International Institute for Population Sciences & Macro International. (2008). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3), India, 2005-06: Rajasthan. IIPS.
JakobsonR. (1960). Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. In SebeokT. A. (Ed.), Style in language (pp. 350–377). MIT Press.
37.
KabaM.HassanS. (2019). Fumbling towards repair: A workbook for community accountability facilitators(Workbook edition). Project NIA.
38.
KalokheA.Del RioC.DunkleK.StephensonR.MethenyN.ParanjapeA.SahayS. (2017). Domestic violence against women in India: A systematic review of a decade of quantitative studies. Global Public Health, 12(4), 498–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2015.1119293
39.
KapurR. (2012). Hecklers to power? The waning of liberal rights and challenges to feminism in India. In LoombaA.LukoseR. A. (Eds.), South Asian feminisms (pp. 333–355). Duke University Press.
40.
KeckM. E.SikkinkK. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Cornell University Press.
41.
KimM. E. (2020b). Anti-carceral feminism: The contradictions of progress and the possibilities of counter-hegemonic struggle. Affilia, 35(3), 309–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109919878276
42.
KimM. E. (2020a). Shifting the lens: An implementation study of a community-based and social network intervention to gender-based violence. Violence Against Women, 27(2), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801219889176
43.
KowalskiJ. (2016). Ordering dependence: Care, disorder, and kinship ideology in North Indian antiviolencecounseling. American Ethnologist, 43(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.12263
44.
KowalskiJ. (2018). Bureaucratizing sensitivity: Documents and expertise in North Indian antiviolence counseling. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 41(1), 108–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12243
45.
KowalskiJ. (2022). Counseling Women: Kinship Against Violence in India. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
46.
KowalskiJ. (2021a). Between gender and kinship: Mediating rights and relations in North Indian NGOs. American Anthropologist, 123(2), 330–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.13557
47.
KowalskiJ. (2021b). Rebalancing himmat: Affect and vernacular approaches to inequality in North India. Feminist Anthropology, 2(2), 284–297. https://doi.org/10.1002/fea2.12055
48.
KroskrityP. (2000). Regimenting languages: Language ideological perspectives. In KroskrityP. (Ed.), Regimes of language: Ideologies, polities, and identities (pp. 1–34). School for Advanced Research Press.
49.
KulickD. (2010). Anger, gender, language shift and the politics of revelation in a Papua New Guinean village. Pragmatics, 2(3), 281–296. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.2.3.10kul
50.
KunreutherLaura. (2009). Between love and property: Voice, sentiment, and subjectivity in the reform of daughter’s inheritance in Nepal. American Ethnologist, 36(3), 545–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1425.2009.01178.x
51.
Lazarus-BlackM. (2007). Everyday harm: Domestic violence, court rites, and cultures of reconciliation. University of Illinois Press.
52.
LemonsK. (2016). The politics of livability: Tutoring kinwork in a New Delhi Women’s Arbitration Center. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 39(2), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12192
McGlynnC.WestmarlandN. (2019). Kaleidoscopic justice: Sexual violence and victim-survivors’ perceptions of justice. Social & Legal Studies, 28(2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663918761200
57.
MenonN. (2004). Recovering subversion: Feminist politics beyond the law. University of Illinois Press.
58.
MerryS. E. (2006). Human rights and gender violence: Translating international law into local justice. University of Chicago Press.
MerryS. E. (2009). Gender violence: A cultural perspective. Wiley-Blackwell.
61.
MooreD.SinghR. (2018). Seeing crime, feeling crime: Visual evidence, emotions, and the prosecution of domestic violence. Theoretical Criminology, 22(1), 116–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480616684194
62.
MukhopadhyayA. (2019). Found and lost in translation: Exploring the legal protection of women from the Domestic Violence Act 2005 through the social public space of Kolkata. Social & Legal Studies, 28(3), 349–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663918769473
63.
MullaS. (2014). The violence of care: Rape victims, forensic nurses, and sexual assault intervention. New York University Press.
64.
Sangatin Writers Collective, & NagarR. (2006). Playing with fire: Feminist thought and activism through seven lives in India. University of Minnesota Press.
65.
OchsE. (1992). Indexing gender. In GoodwinC.DurantiA. (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 335–358). Cambridge University Press.
66.
OrtnerS. B. (2006). Anthropology and social theory: Culture, power and the acting subject. Duke University Press.
67.
ParmentierR. J. (1994). Signs in society: Studies in semiotic anthropology. Indiana University Press.
68.
RosaJ.DíazV. (2020). Raciontologies: Rethinking anthropological accounts of institutional racism and enactments of white supremacy in the United States. American Anthropologist, 122(1), 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.13353
69.
RoychowdhuryP. (2015). Victims to saviors: Governmentality and the regendering of citizenship in India. Gender & Society, 29(6), 792–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243215602105
SinhaM. (2012). A global perspective on gender: What’s South Asia got to do with it? In LoombaA.LukoseR. A. (Eds.), South Asian feminisms (pp. 356–373). Duke University Press.
72.
StallerK. M. (2013). Epistemological boot camp: The politics of science and what every qualitative researcher needs to know to survive in the academy. Qualitative Social Work, 12(4), 395–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325012450483
73.
Sunder RajanR. (2003). The scandal of the state: Women, law, citizenship in postcolonial India. Permanent Black.
SweetP. L. (2019). The paradox of legibility: Domestic violence and institutional survivorhood. Social Problems, 66(3), 411–427. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spy012
76.
VatukS. (2013). The women’s court in India: An alternative dispute resolution body for women in distress. The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 45(1), 76–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2013.774836
77.
WiesJ. R.HaldaneH. J. (2011). Ethnographic notes from the front lines of gender-based violence. In WiesJ. R.HaldaneH. J. (Eds.), Anthropology at the front lines of gender-based violence (pp. 1–18). Vanderbilt University Press.
78.
WoolardK. (2021). Language Ideology. In StanlawJ., The international encyclopedia of linguistic anthropology (pp. 1–21). Wiley.
