“Let’s talk about something juicy”: An analysis of patterns

in female discourse

Shannon Donelson Auburn University

COMM 4850 May 3, 2010

2

Introduction

What happens when girls get together to talk? What practices do females use in conversation

with one another and what roles do these practices play in the development of both individual and

group identity? How does dominance and power play into female interaction? The purpose of this

analysis is to answer these questions. This paper presents data collected from a dinner conversation at

a restaurant between three friends and sorority sisters. This paper will give background on female

and group interactional practices by defining common terminology associated with female and group

discourse. The data collected will be analyzed for several communication practices and conclusions

will be drawn regarding how these practices shape the interaction between a group of females.

Literature Review

There is a lot of research regarding same-sex discourse practices. In many cases, male

and female discourse has been compared in order to observe the distinctions between the two

gender groups. In a study of male discourse compared to female discourse among best friends,

Deborah Tannen (1990) found that girl talk among best friends is tightly focused while talk

among boys is very scattered. Females have been found to have an easy time finding topics to

discuss.

Girls open their conversations in a way which greatly differs from boys. They recount

stories of emotional appeal to one another (Tannen 1990). According to Tannen (1990), it is not

only easy for females to choose topics and talk about them, but also to talk about topics at length.

Topics among female discourse are typically focused on personal and specific concerns (1990).

Penelope Eckert (1990) defines “girl talk” as female speech events which engage in long,

detailed personal discussions about people norms, and beliefs. Both Eckert (1990) and Tannen

(1990) agree that female discourse has been seen to be cooperative rather than competitive

(Eckert 1990). Eckert (1990), however, has determined that female discourse is in fact

3

competitive. Women and men have a difference when it comes to their symbolic capital, which

Eckert (1990) describes as an image of the self as worthy of authority. Men and women define

their symbolic capital or status in different ways. Men, for instance, define their worth by how

much money they make, how educated they are, and what they have accomplished in life.

Women, on the other hand, gain their symbolic capital based on their character. Women define

themselves and their worthy by competing with one another to be the perfect spouse, friend, or

parent (1990). Girl talk is a way in which women increase their capital among one another.

Simplistic girl talk can serve as a driving force of social change or status. Eckert (1990) studies

girl talk and its role in symbolic capital among high school girls.

Another term which is directly involved with the competitive nature of female interaction

is dominance. Marjorie Goodwin’s (2002) research has found that dominance is used in female

interaction in order to build power amongst a group of females. This once again deviates from

the idea that male discourse is competitive and female discourse is not. The dominant discourse

produces relations of inequality (2002).

Interruption is a common communicative practice in conversation, but what role does it

play in female interaction? What are the status goals and norms that go into a conversation

among women and how can interruptions be interpreted? Interruptions in conversation,

according to Sally D. Farley (2008), are used to establish power among others. Interruptions are

associated with both perceived and actual power (2008). Farley discusses that while back-

channel utterances such as ‘‘uh-huh’’ or “mm hmm” are put into the category of interruptions,

these practices may in fact be used in order to create solidarity or show attentiveness to the

conversation rather than a power struggle. Three forms of interruption occur in conversation.

They are interruptions of dominance in which one person interrupts the conversation in order to

change the subject, successful interruptions in which the interruption causes the speaker to stop

4

talking, and intrusive interruptions which intrude into the core of another person’s point (1990).

One can use the Expectancy Violations Theory (EVT) to argue that interruptions are more

commonly used and accepted among people who are well-liked or who have a higher status in a

particular group (1990). This information supports why interruption is more common among

close friends during girl talk because the women involved are close. The interruptions occur due

to the need for symbolic capital as previously discussed.

A discourse practice which is commonly linked to female conversation is the term gossip.

Jaworski and Coupland (2005) state that gossip is traditionally related to bad, critical talk of

others, especially absent third parties. A basic definition of the term could be conversation about

someone who is not present for the conversation. Gossip has also been found to be information

giving, regardless of the fact that the information given is usually private (2005). Gossip serves

as a social function in conversation (2005). Jaworski and Coupland studied the discourse of

undergraduate students in aims of finding gossipy instances and to see how the gossip builds

solidarity among the group.

Data Collection

The data collected for this analysis is a dinner conversation among three girls. Sarah, Ashley,

and Maria are sorority sisters who have been close friends since their freshman year of college. They

have just come from their sorority’s weekly chapter meeting and are eating at a Mexican restaurant.

It is important to note that this is the Tuesday after their sorority’s spring formal. Ashley and Maria

are both single and Sarah is in a relationship.

The data begins with the girls meeting at their table at the restaurant. Sarah explains why

she is late and the group begins to discuss what they want to order for dinner. Sarah then begins

talking about the chapter meeting and the events that occurred during it. The talk then turns into

a discussion about the participants’ high school sports and extra-curricular activities. This

5

discussion ends when Michelle states that she wants to talk about something juicy. Sarah begins

to tell a story about her formal experience as well as some obstacles she has faced in her

relationship with her boyfriend. As this story is told, a new topic is brought up. Other small

topics are brought up, but the conversation then goes back to Sarah’s formal experience.

The participants then discuss how girls acted at formal, and the effects that alcohol had

on the night’s events. The data ends with their thoughts on how to better regulate rules of

drinking at formal. The data sections chosen for analysis demonstrate various examples of the

terminology present in the literature review of this paper.

Analysis of Data

The data collected shows instances of several communication practices among each of

the participants during their dinner conversation. In the analyses that follow certain

conversational practices are found to be occurring in the discourse. Practices such as topic

selection, group identity building, power enhancement, and instances of gossip have been

recognized and analyzed throughout the conversation.

Topic Selection:

At this point in the conversation, the girls have been talking about high school activities,

but mainly sharing what their experiences were with sports.

Maria: Let’s talk about something juicy 1

Sarah: Oh so this wasn’t juicy but 2

Ashley :So what happened after formal 3

Sarah:Oh nothing um:: 4

Ashley: [Damn I was really looking forward to hearing about that story HAHA 5

Maria: [Hhhhh 6

6

Sarah: No literally we went home and see for the longest time at formal I thought I was gonna 7 have to drive back to get Cora and Kasey at the hospital so Bill was supposed to sleep over at 8 MY house cuz we haven’t like done anything in like ever::: and [sorry no I’m not trying to 9 be like that right 10

M: [man that must be rough [just kidding no I’m just kidding I do it to 11 Lauren too it’s fine.12

This excerpt is very similar to one found in Tannen’s (1990) data collection. Up to this

point, the conversation between the girls has focused on several different topics. The discussion

topic of sports is ended when Maria states that the girls should talk about something juicy. Sarah

responds in line 2 by stating that she has something to say, but nothing juicy. Ashley then asks

what happened to Sarah after formal on Saturday night. When Sarah replies in line 4 with “oh

nothing,” Ashley exclaims that she was looking forward to hearing a story. Maria’s initial topic

suggestion allows for the question of what happened to Sarah to be asked by Ashley. Although

Sarah initially states “oh nothing,” Ashley’s response serves as encouragement for Sarah to

elaborate. The topic then shifts into Sarah’s story-telling and the topic of her boyfriend.

Interruption:

At this point in the conversation, Sarah has just begun to tell her friends that she went to a

counselor earlier that day. She has just told Ashley that her counselor was the same one that

Ashley used to go to.

Sarah: Yea but I remember you said you talked to her.(.5) I told her about like (.03) just the anxiety I 1 have right now and all that kind of stuffn. 2

Ashley: Is she not the coolest↑ 3

Sarah: Oh my god 4

Ashley: Lo↑ve her (.03) love her office 5

Sarah: [I hope I get assigned to her because like (.2) she’s 6

Maria: [Wait 7 like did you talk to her about like (.4) 8

7

Sarah: Hm↑ 9

Maria: Like (.2) stuff like (.1) us↑ or just like in general↓ like 10

Sarah: [Just like↑ like↓ lately I’ve been 11

Ashley: [Did 12 you ask her if she knew me↑ 13

Sarah: I didn’t talk to(.1) I didn’t ask.(.2) I figured patient confidentiality would come in like OH MY 14 FRIEND goes to you TOO HEY no like but like I talked to her about 15

Ashley: [I don’t go to her anymore 16

Sarah: But like i:: (.4) I’ve been thinking ab 17

Maria: [You went today↑ 18

Sarah: Yea it was my first time well, my second time actually going.

Different kinds of interruption are occurring in this excerpt that serve different purposes

among the group interaction. Sarah is giving a narrative about her trip to the counselor and

giving details as to what she talked with her counselor about, but there is much interruption and

overlap throughout her story. In the first part of the excerpt, Ashley and Sarah are talking about

the counselor. In line 7, Maria interjects by asking what Sarah talked to the counselor about.

This interruption moves along Sarah’s story to what she was talking to the counselor about. This

particular instance acts as a back-channel utterance (Farley 2008) which reflects Maria’s

attentiveness and interest in Sarah’s story.

Sarah then begins to respond to Maria’s back-channel interruption by saying in line 11

“Just like lately I’ve been.” Her response is interrupted by Ashley in line 12 when she asks if

Sarah asked the counselor if she knew Ashley. Sarah answers Ashley’s question and then

diverges back to her story when she says in line 15 “but like I talked to her about.” She is then

interrupted again by Ashley stating “I don’t go to her anymore.” While these utterances could be

argued as simply being instances of overlap in the conversation, the utterances take the

conversational focus off of just Sarah and onto Ashley’s previous counseling experiences.

Ashley’s interruptions dominate the conversation because they change the subject of Sarah’s

8

personal narrative to something which involves Ashley’s experience. Ashley’s interruptions

during this conversation display the power she has in the group. Her interjections are welcomed

and responded to, even though Sarah is in the middle of telling her own story.

Gossip:

This talk episode is a traditional instance of the genre of gossip. The dialogue is

surrounded by Sarah’s question to Ashley about when she got to the chapter meeting. Ashley

answers that she entered the chapter room when the sorority was being visited by members of

two groups. It is important to note that it is a common occurrence during chapter meetings for

members of campus organizations as well as other sororities to visit the chapter meeting to

promote various events. At this chapter meeting, the sorority had been visited by members of a

student organization on campus as well as members of another sorority. It is also important to

note that Sarah, Ashley, and Maria’s sorority has a rivalry with the sorority which is mentioned

in this excerpt.

Sarah: ↑When did you get to chapter I didn’t see you the whole ↓time. 1

Ashley: Uh when the Gamma Phis were walking out I like walked in behind those two guys 2 for what were they for? 3

Sarah: [Mhmm 4

Maria: Peer counselors? 5

Sarah: Uhh Impact? 6

Ashley: Oh yea like the (makes sound) and then he wasn’t really like dressed up very nicely 7 yea I came in 8

Sarah: [Hhhh [yea 9

Sarah: Sorry but the Gamma Phis had like greasy hair 10

Maria: The one did yea 11

Ashley: I was like no oh I didn’t notice. I like didn’t see them. 12 13

9

Sarah: I was like did you shack last night? ↑Hello↓

During this point in the conversation, Sarah is participating in gossip about the

Gamma Phi sisters. They are a third party which is not present at the table and are being

evaluated based on appearance when Sarah states in line 10 that the girls had greasy hair.

The gossip in this situation serves to build community among the group members at the

table as well as display superiority over the members of the other sorority. The gossip is

serving to identify group membership among Sarah, Maria, and Ashley’s sorority as well

as moral policing. Moral policing occurs when Sarah states in line 13 “I was like did you

shack last night? ↑Hello↓.”

Conclusion

Female discourse is a very distinct form of talk. In this one conversation, many language

practices are occurring. The conversation combines discourse practices that are both gender-specific

as well as gender-unspecific. For instance, this interaction supported what Tannen (1990) has

studied about topic selection among females. The analysis of the dinner conversation between

female friends also shows how the group members gain solidarity and show group identity through

gossip, but also how individual dominance and power exists within the group dynamic through

interruption. One can learn through this analysis that female interaction creates different dynamics

and identities. While females are traditionally seen as being less competitive by nature compared to

men, it is important to see that this is not always true. Female discourse builds group identity

through expressing solidarity but also invites competition for power and dominance.

The simplest part of analyzing this female discourse was finding many different

conversational practices within the dialogue. The most challenge part of this analysis was to piece

each of the conversational practices together in order to analyze what the combination says about

10

female discourse as a whole. After further examination, I have found that while these practices are

different, together they say a lot about what is accomplished during female interaction.

11

Appendix

Note: The following transcript was used for this analysis but did not occur during the 30

minutes of transcribed dialogue. I have provided this transcript below.

Sarah: She was one of the counselors in the:: chapter room after La:ura died. 1

Maria: O:::h 2

Ashley: See I wasn’t there for that so I don’t kno::w 3

Sarah: Yea but I remember you said you talked to her.(.5) I told her about like (.03) just 4 the anxiety I have right now and all that kind of stuffn. 5

Ashley: Is she not the coolest↑ 6

Sarah: Oh my god 7

Ashley: Lo↑ve her (.03) love her office 8

Sarah: [I hope I get assigned to her because like (.2) 9 she’s 10

Maria: 11 [Wait like did you talk to her about like (.4) 12

Allsion: Hm↑ 13

Maria: Like (.2) stuff like (.1) us↑ or just like in general↓ like 14

Sarah: [Just like↑ like↓ lately 15 I’ve been 16

Ashley: 17 [Did you ask her if she knew me↑ 18

Sarah: I didn’t talk to(.1) I didn’t ask.(.2) I figured patient confidentiality would come in 19 like OH MY FRIEND goes to you TOO HEY no like but like I talked to her about 20

Ashley: [I don’t go to her anymore 21

Sarah: But like i:: (.4) I’ve been thinking ab 22

Maria: [You went today↑ 23

Sarah: Yea it was my first time well, my second time actually going. 24

12

References

Coupland, J., & Jaworski, A. (2005). Othering in gossip: you go out and you have a laugh and

you can pull yeah okay but like.... Language in Society, 34, 667-694.

Eckert, P. (1990). Cooperative competition in adolescent "girl talk". Discourse Processes, 13,

91-122.

Farley, S. D. (2008). Attaining status at the expense of likability: Pilfering power through

conversational interruption. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32, 241-260.

Goodwin, M. H. (2002). Building power asymmetries in girls' interaction. Discourse & Society,

13, 715-730.

Tannen, D. (1990). Gender differences in topical coherence: Creating involvement in best

friends' talk. Discourse Processes, 13, 73-90.