Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER

play fullscreen
1 / 17
Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER
Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER

  2. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Assumptions behind this question: There may be a difference between men and women’s speech Do men and women speak the same? There is an expected (binary) difference between men and women in general as distinct social groups There is linguistic variation

  3. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER aggressive Rational powerful strong confident stubborn Direct/assertive Bad listeners Not emotional - detached Sports freaks Bread winner Problem solver Math doer Bug killers Good driver Hard worker masculine Passive / aggressive feminine Irrational delicate Hysterical Moody Nurturing Care-taker / care-giver Intuitive Spiritual Talkative / gossipy Nagging MEN WOMEN What are some stereotypes about the way men and women behave?

  4. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER Do interrupt baby-talk expressive Tangential (going off topic) 3rd person exp Superficial more standard Mumble/speak softly class? Chatty Cathy bigger vocab Gossip elegant Exaggerate manipulative (indirect) Laugh/smile self-effacing Cooperative/diplomatic 2-faced/catty High rising intonation hedging loud Brief/blunt/to the point Mumble/no enunciate manipulative (direct) Non-emotional content/Fact-based content 1st person experiences swearing Grunt lower classes talk less correct Lower voices/deeper argumentative Literal meaning men don’t talk Confidence in statement exaggerate Boastful dominating conversation MEN WOMEN What are some stereotypes about the way men and women talk?

  5. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Robin Lakoff, 1975, “women’s language” (p. 318-19 inWardhaugh) • Tag questions • Rising intonation for declarative statements • “Empty” adjectives (divine, lovely) • Specialized women’s vocabulary (color terms) • Frequent use of emphasis (“speaking in italics” - What a beautiful hat) • Intensive so (You are so fired) • Politeness devices and hypercorrect grammar (women use more standard language; more indirect requests) • Hedges (well, like, sort of) • Women don’t tell jokes

  6. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Discourse Studies • Many studies have looked at the idea that women talk more than men • James & Drakich, 1993 - review of all these studies found that in only 2 of 56 studies that women talked more than men. Other factors more important than gender of speaker - content, situation, etc. • Many studies have looked at interruption • James & Clarke, 1992 - review of these studies shows that men interrupt others more than women and that specifically, men interrupt women more than women interrupt men - these trends were not statistically significant - also shows that there are very differing opinions of what an interruption is • Both areas or study have some methodological issues involved so not all studies use the same definitions of amount of talk and interruption Some empirical evidence

  7. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Dominance (1970s and 1980s) • Interprets the differences between women’s and men’s linguistic usage as reflexes of the dominant-subordinate relationship holding between men and women. • Zimmerman & West, 1975 - shows that men interrupt women (even if women are doctors) and directly link this interruption to dominance based on sex of the interrupter and the interrupted • Interprets women’s language as usage tied to lack of dominance (leads to a deficit approach) Different perspectives (lenses) of data analysis

  8. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Difference (Celebrate the difference!) (1980s and 90s) • The differences between women’s and men’s linguistic usage as arising from the different subcultures in which women and men are socialized • Arose after dominance model became a deficit model (using men’s language as a standard to which women’s was compared) • Maltz & Borker, 1982 - Linguistic behavior of men and women based on different subcultures and what is appropriate for those subcultures - like intercultural communication when men and women are talking together • Tannen utilizes this approach • With respect to aggressive verbal behavior like interruption, the difference approach suggests that women tend to take overt aggressive behavior as a personal attack, while men view it as a conventional organizing structure for conversational flow Different perspectives (lenses) of data analysis

  9. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Power • O’Barr & Atkins, 1980 - show that the features outlined by Lakoff as “women’s language” were used by witnesses not by gender, but by degree of power (expert versus non-expert witnesses) • West, 1984 - shows that female doctors were interrupted by their patients more than male doctors • Problems with “power” analysis is that women’s language features intrinsically defined as powerless - could have other meanings • When female doctors are interrupted by male patients, is this performing power or is it simply performing gender-based behavior? Different perspectives (lenses) of data analysis

  10. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • All approaches have problems • Difference approach does not talk about issues of power or dominance • Dominance approach can devalue women’s language and essentially define women’s language as powerless • The deficit model (stemmed from Lakoff’s list) comes from Dominance or Power model which compares women’s language to men’s in terms of men’s language being the norm (NOT the difference model!! - Wardhaugh is mistaken on p. 347) Different perspectives (lenses) of data analysis

  11. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Janet Holmes came up with some questions about ling universals of women and men’s talk (Wardhaugh, p. 342) • Women and men develop different patterns of language use. • Function: the purpose of the talk - Women tend to focus on the affective functions of an interaction more often than men do • Solidarity: how the participants relate to each other - Women tend to use ling devices that stress solidarity more often than men do • Power: who’s in charge - Women tend to interact in ways which will maintain and increase solidarity, while (especially in formal contexts) men tend to interact in ways which will maintain and increase their power and status • Status: how speech indicates social status - Women use more standard forms than men from the same social group in the same social context - Women are more stylistically flexible than men • But Kiesling - Frat men studies show that men do solidarity through insults (indirect solidarity) http://www.pitt.edu/~kiesling/skresearch.html#_Language_and_Identity Synthesis of approaches

  12. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Non discourse - language change and variation (dialect studies) • Women use less stigmatized forms (th, negative concord, -ing) - conservative • Women lead language change - innovative • Paradox of behavior that women are conservative and innovative at the same time - resolved in Philadelphia • Interacts with social class • Why do women lead language change? Women are more prestige conscious = Prestige approach • Is there something inherently masculine about stigmatized language/more vernacular speech? What about swearing? Language and gender in ling variation

  13. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Not always true that women use less vernacular/stigmatized forms • Also has access to how the speech community is organized – who has more access/interaction with standard language – women or men? Class again – Contact based approach ECKERT ARTICLE • According to Eckert, the fact that women have less power is the reason they use linguistic resources for symbolic capital (Eckert handout) • Shows the greater linguistic differences between the girl groups versus the boy groups and how gender interacts with other social variables • She suggests that gender is the most important social factor - what happens when you see someone and you can’t figure out what sex they are? • Go here to hear some of these variables: http://www.stanford.edu/~eckert/vowels.html Language and gender in ling variation

  14. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Zimmerman & West, 1987 - Doing Gender • Language is part of behavior which we use to construct identity (social construction theory) • Gender different from sex - adopted from Judith Butler - the idea that we perform our gender • Mismatches between expected gender behavior and sex of performer • How does this change things? If we think about why women or men act the way they do linguistically this means it is because they are creating gendered identities - this is always within the culture that includes the EXPECTATIONS of how women and men SHOULD behave. Language and identity - Sex vs. Gender

  15. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • West, studies of patient/doctor interaction • Found women doctors interrupted more than male doctors • Found women doctors use different request strategies than men: more indirect requests - could you sit up here? - more inclusive requests - let’s ... • The patient compliance was greater for these types of requests, so physicians are recently being taught to use these types of “women’s” directives to increase patient compliancy rates Language and Gender applied

  16. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • How is sexual orientation identity revealed in our speech? (Wardhaudh, p. 353) • Sounding gay and sounding lesbian • The sex/gender difference in transsexuals/transgendered persons • Can you tell the sexual orientation of someone without even seeing them? • What I found in Philadelphia - lesbians lead language change, not necessarily all women - couldn’t link it to Gender Index, but maybe tomboys or more masculine-oriented women? Language and Sexuality

  17. Wardhaugh – Chapter 13 – GENDER • Many instances of gender in various languages • Carib and Arawak example • Japanese example • Malagasay - shows that a male or female style is not universal - also shows that in patriarchal cultures, that the style or ling features associated with men are the ones that are valued regardless of what those features are