Language and Gender research formally began in the 1970s.

Contributions to the topic from other areas-anthropology, education, women’s 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 pre-existing & maintaining social distinctions◦ Past: Gender roles were more well defined◦ Present: Subgroups within those gender categories◦ Future: Lack of language-gender differentiation possible

Labov’s New York City ◦ 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”

Caribs (men) Arawak (women)◦ 10% vocabulary not shared by both sexes

Native American languages◦ Different verb forms in Koasati, Hopi’s “Thank You”

Japanese◦ Women- Formal pronouns in informal situations◦ Women- Absence of deprecatory pronouns

South African-Xhosa speakers◦ Hlonipha-women’s language of respect

German women reference- Video

Direct relationships between gender & language (e.g. Japanese, Hopi, etc).

Language & gender research concerned with:Male and female differencesGender cultural difference verses power and dominance

Gendered language use interpreted as reflecting pre-existing & maintaining social distinctions◦ Past: Gender roles were more well defined◦ Present: Subgroups within those gender categories◦ Future: Lack of language-gender differentiation possible

Differing features of conversational style ◦ Amount of talk (Coates)

Mixed groups-men talk more especially in formal & public contexts Same sex groups- amt. talk equal

◦ Interruptions (Zimmerman & West) Men interrupt women more than vice versa

◦ Conversational support (Fishman) Women gave more conversational support than men leaving more opportunities for men’s

stories to get expanded upon.◦ Tentativeness (Lackoff, 1975, Holmes, 1995)

Women use more hedges and tag questions, ◦ Compliments (Metshire, et. al., 2001)

Women pay and receive more compliments◦ Topic of talk (Coates, Tannen)

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)

What are your mixed-gender miscommunication experiences?

MALTZ & BORKER◦ Gender Communication Differences Learned as Children. ◦ I Just don’t Understand You

Minimal responses indicate attention for women, but for men they signal agreement -> why females use them more

Women- “mmmhmm” = “I’m listening.” Men – “mmmhmmm” = “I agree.”

TANNEN- It’s Just a Difference◦ Men and Women just have different communication expectations.

Men say to women – “fight for your right to topic

Men want women to mount resistance when they lead the conversation in another direction and take center stage byu telling a story, etc. Women’s overlapping agreements and support seen as interruptions

Women are irritated by men who interrupt to change eht conversational topic.

Lakoff (1975) – Informal Observations and Intuitions◦ Deficit model of language use

Women’s speaking style (uncertainty and hesitancy) denies them access to power.

Zimmerman & West (1975)- Empirical Study of Conversation ◦ Interruptions- more occurred in mixed-sex groups, most

by men. 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- Don’t call it dominance

◦ You don’t have to ‘put down’ men to ‘bring up’ women.

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 pre-existing & maintaining social distinctionsPast: Gender roles were more well definedPresent: Subgroups within those gender categoriesFuture: Lack of language-gender differentiation possible

Past Concrete & Established Gender Identity◦ Men and Women had more defined gender roles

Remember the Language Forms ◦ Japanese pronouns & deprecatory words

Lack of Mobility - less interaction with different communication styles◦ 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

Value placed on upholding traditions (language)

Past no mobility-meant there weren’t 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 ◦ Female gender is more flexible

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◦ Value of Identifying Gender Immediately◦ Maltz & Borker

Single Sex Peer Groups from an early age Media

◦ Advertisements, etc. Sunderland (1995)

◦ German classroom research◦ The boys reported they would not say, “we’re girls.”

It’s not possible.◦ girls forfeit gender for participation – “We’re boys!”

People taking on different gender roles◦ 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, “you’re a diva” and mean it as a compliment.

Written Language Paradox- “he/she.” In the future will we create new vocabulary (“shim”)?

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).