Language and Gender

what is a marked form

a form which deviates the norm

what is the marked form of actor

actress

common ways to create marked forms

suffix -ess or a premodifier ‘female’ or ‘male’

when was the sex disrimination act

1975

what was the sex discrimination act of 1975

made it illegal to write a job advertisment in a way that implied people of only one sex can apply

dale spender

• male as norm

• e.g using male pronoun to refer to everyone

  • e.g mankind/human

what gender neutral pronoun has sweden successfully introduced

hen

whats wrong with the titles we use

3 main titles for women and all refer to marital status

whats wrong with terms of endearment

• male terms hav connatations of authority (guv, boss)

• or connatations of friendliness (pal, mate)

• female terms have connatations of fragility (flower petal)

what does the existence of terms of endearment sterotypes possibly suggest

• we have differnt gender stereotypes

• some argue that our language perpetuates these stereotypes

semantic derogation

soem terms reserved for the use of only describing women that have strong negative connactations

e.g spinster instead of bachelor

other examples: master/mistress god/godess

seamntic deterioration

meanings of female words have become more negative overtime while male terms remain postive

e.g lord/lady

lord still means power

lady has connatations of misbehavoir or used for non powerful occupatiosn like dinner lady

peter trudgill

• phonological features

• pronounciation of the suffix -ing

• men tended to use more non standard pronounciation like ‘playin’

peter trudgills self evaulation

• asked if particepnts thought they used more non standard pronounciation

• men said they used it more than they did (seeking covert prestige)

• women said they used it less than they did (seeking overt prestige)

what is folklinguistics

making assumptions about langauge that have no scientific basis

what is overt prestige

prestige for standard language

what is covert prestige

prestige for non standard langauge

jenny cheshire

• speech of teens in reading

• non standard grammatical form e.g non standard use of the verb ‘to come’ (i come down the park yesterday)

• nearly all cases boys used nonstandard form more

robin lakoff

published a set of basic assumptions about the language of women

• empty adjectives

• uptalk

• special lexicon for things like colours

• speak less frequently

• overuse of qualifiers (phrase that shows something is an opinion not a fact ‘ believe ‘

• apologises more

• avoid demotic terms

• use indirect commands

• more intensifiers like so and very

conclusions of lakoff

show women to be less authorities less assertive and more insecure (deficit approach)

criticisms to lakoff

lays the blame on women and expects them to change their language t make it less inferior

critisisms to lakoffs research

her finding are based on observations not actual precise research

too general to suggest all women use language in one way - heavily reliant on stereotypes

dosnt acknowledge peoples conscious choice over langauge - code switching

janet holmes

tag questions

not a sign of uncertainty but a way to maintain a disscussion or be polite

suggest sthat many other feature of womens language can be used for a variety of things (fillers or hedges)

dubois and crouch

men use tag equestions more than women

however not suggested as a consquence that men are more uncertain than women

o’barr and atkins

language in the courtroom

yes feature lakoff stated are seen in women but also in lower class males

suggests uncertain speech is dependant on power relations not gender

what is the dominance approach

men are seen as controlling and dominating in mixed sex conversations

zimmerman and west

96% of all interuptions were by men

sign tha men sought to impose their dominant status through applying explicit constraints in conversation

PARENTS DO THE SAME TO ASSUME POWER ON CHILDREN

fishmen

women engage more actively in conversations and ask more questions

indicates a shift from traditional views of women as less dominant in conversations

other exapmles: backchanneling, positive politeness strategies

critisisms of a dominance approach

blames men for thier language choices

suggests all me behave in a similar way

what is the difference approach

the ways male and female langauge differs can be explained because of the differnces between men and women - they belonf to different ‘cultures’

coates

all female talk is co operative and supportive (using more positive politeness strategies)

these feature not as prevelent in mixed or male talk

pilkington

women is same sex talk were more collaborative

women use more postive politeness strategies

men are more tolerant of scilence and reagrded politeness as a feminine trait

deborah tannen

wrote ‘you just dont understand’

suggested thst men and women struggle t communicate becayse of differnt converational goals m

male conversational goals (tannen)

status independence advice/solutions orders conflict

female conversational goals

support intamicy understadning proposals compromise

wha is rapport talk (tannen)

women and their conversational goal of maintaining and developing relesionships

what is report talk (tannen)

men and conversational goal of telling soemone something

kuiper

studied rugby team

all male talk - men paid less attention to to saving face and instead used insults to express solidarity (face threatening acts)

pros to difference approach

avoid blaming either women or men for thier language choices

ackowleges cultural differnces and does not sugges differnces are down to biology

cons to difference approach

polarises men and women (creates division)

fails to acknowledge gender variation

ignores power imbalances

what is the social constructionist approach

langauge is seen as constructing gender

istead of ‘im male/female so i speak this way’ its ‘ i speak this way because i wish to appear more masc/fem)

argues theres no factor that completely determines langauge use

janet holmes (social constructionist)

workplaces in new zealand

men draw on different conversational styles to accomplish different types of masculinity e.g father hero good bloke

deborah cameron

group of young men that gossiped

they didnt adopt a feminine conversational style

used language to construct a red blooded hetero identity

e.g labelling other men gay when they deviate from the groups norms of masculinity

deborah cameron book

the myth of mars and venus

belives that the differneces between mens and womens language are overstated and that the research used to determine the differnces is flawed

critisisms of the social constructionist approach

focuses too much on specific contexts

too focused on language choices (does soemone really have that much control over thier language)

doesnt take socialingusitic features into account

doesnt focus on issues of power and gender inequality.