Within the common LLM use case of text revision, we study LLMs' revision of gendered role nouns (e.g., outdoorsperson/woman/man) and their justifications of such revisions. We evaluate their alignment with feminist and trans-inclusive language reforms for English. Drawing on insight from sociolinguistics, we further assess if LLMs are sensitive to the same contextual effects in the application of such reforms as people are, finding broad evidence of such effects. We discuss implications for value alignment.

We study language ideologies in text produced by LLMs through a case study on English gendered language reform (related to role nouns like congressperson/-woman/-man, and singular they). First, we find political bias: when asked to use language that is "correct" or "natural", LLMs use language most similarly to when asked to align with conservative (vs. progressive) values. This shows how LLMs' metalinguistic preferences can implicitly communicate the language ideologies of a particular political group, even in seemingly non-political contexts. Second, we find LLMs exhibit internal inconsistency: LLMs use gender-neutral variants more often when more explicit metalinguistic context is provided. This shows how the language ideologies expressed in text produced by LLMs can vary, which may be unexpected to users. We discuss the broader implications of these findings for value alignment.