Gender and Language: Mac Stant and Stephanie Cotton
Gender and Language: Mac Stant and Stephanie Cotton
Gender and Language: Mac Stant and Stephanie Cotton
Introduction
Language and Gender research formally began in the 1970s. Contributions to the topic from other areasanthropology, education, womens studies, social psychology, etc. Different types of studies have looked at gender: variationist (quantifying gender differences), interactional studies (context, same-gender, mixed-gender), Fluid models (e.g. unisex), Alternative contexts for communication.
Direct relationships between gender & language (e.g. Japanese, Hopi, etc). Language & gender research concerned with:
Male and female differences Gender cultural difference verses power and dominance
Gendered language use interpreted as reflecting preexisting & maintaining social distinctions
Past: Gender roles were more well defined Present: Subgroups within those gender categories Future: Lack of language-gender differentiation possible
Not only did language vary based on socioeconomic status. . . But he found women use more prestige features (status conscious) , men more vernacular features (overt prestige)
Problems with methodologies Social class divisions not necessarily accurate Interpreting differences - lack of convincing evidence
10% vocabulary not shared by both sexes Different verb forms in Koasati, Hopis Thank You Women- Formal pronouns in informal situations Women- Absence of deprecatory pronouns
Japanese
Male and female differences Gender cultural difference verses power and dominance
Gendered language use interpreted as reflecting preexisting & maintaining social distinctions
Past: Gender roles were more well defined Present: Subgroups within those gender categories Future: Lack of language-gender differentiation possible
Mixed groups-men talk more especially in formal & public contexts Same sex groups- amt. talk equal Men interrupt women more than vice versa
Women gave more conversational support than men leaving more opportunities for mens stories to get expanded upon.
Women use more hedges and tag questions, Women pay and receive more compliments Women speak and hear a language of connection and intimacy (Tannen), Personal Topics (Coates) Men speak and hear a language of status and independence (Tannen), Non-personal Topics (Coates)
Minimal responses indicate attention for women, but for men they signal agreement -> why females use them more Women- mmmhmm = Im listening. Men mmmhmmm = I agree.
Gender Dominance
Womens speaking style (uncertainty and hesitancy) denies them access to power.
Women are not inadequate but men oppress women with their interruptions, denying them an = status as a communication partner
UCHIA & TROEMEL-PLOETZ- Men are BAD! CAMERON- Men are BAD! COATES- Dont call it dominance
Direct relationships between gender & language (e.g. Japanese, Hopi, etc). Language & gender research concerned with:
Male and female differences Gender cultural difference verses power and dominance
Gendered language use interpreted as reflecting preexisting & maintaining social distinctions
Past: Gender roles were more well defined Present: Subgroups within those gender categories Future: Lack of language-gender differentiation possible
Men and Women had more defined gender roles Japanese pronouns & deprecatory words
Nichols (1979) the women who took less traditional work roles outside of the homes & further from their homes experienced language variation different from those who stayed home. Older women and men stayed in local community and maintained their Creole language
Past no mobility-meant there werent as many subgroups to identify with. Male, female, or undesirable. Present: Greater subgroups to choose from due to increased interactions/mobility (Nichols). More flexible gender roles
Milroy- language reflects community integration as opposed to gender differences German school girls Japanese school girls Women can violate gender rules more easily than men can (posture, etc. ) however, that gap is beginning to close (stay at home dads, dancing, etc.)
Childrearing Practices
Media
Advertisements, etc. German classroom research The boys reported they would not say, were girls. Its not possible. girls forfeit gender for participation Were boys!
Sunderland (1995)
Transexuals Electronic Communication lack of gender identification and adress on the internet may effect how people habitually interact (McAdams).
Japanese Girls using vernacular terms in school but not with their elders. In the future a heterosexual man may say to another heterosexual male friend, youre a diva and mean it as a compliment. Written Language Paradox- he/she. In the future will we create new vocabulary (shim)?
References
Metshire, Swainn, Deumert, & Leap (2000). Gender and Language Use. In Introducing Sociolinguistics. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. (216-247). Tannen, D. (1994). Interpreting interruption in conversation. In Gender & discourse. Oxford University Press (53-79).