The Dominance Paradigm
Based on Language and Woman’s
Place by Robin Lakoff
Originally published in 1975, this
document refers to the 2004 revised
and expanded edition, edited by Mary
Bucholtz.
Lakoff was the first researcher to approach the topic
of gender-based differences in speech. Her work laid
the foundations for a considerable body of
subsequent research.
And although some aspects of her work have been
challenged, the contribution she made to the field of
language and gender is unquestionable.
Supposing you wanted to draw conclusions about how
groups of speakers use language. What are the
advantages and drawbacks of these different
techniques?
• Recording data and analysing it
• Questionnaires
• Introspective judgements
Lakoff used the method of introspection. This is the
most frequently criticised aspect of her work, but it is
worth remembering that Lakoff’s paper was intended
more as a challenge for researchers to investigate,
rather than a definitive statement of fact. In her own
words,
“But granting that this study does in itself
represent the speech of only a small subpart of the
community, it is still of use for indicating
directions for further research in this area, ...a
means of discovering what is universal in the data
and what is not, and why.”
p.40
TASK: write down the features of “women's speech”.
Unlike last lesson, this time I'm asking you to write
down what you genuinely think are the features that
define women's use of language.
Features of “women's language”, according to Lakoff
• a greater vocabulary for describing colours
• use of “meaningless” particles, such as oh dear
instead of shit (i.e. polite euphemism)
• adjectives that “denote approval of the trivial”
(p.46), such as divine, adorable, charming, sweet
and lovely
• use of intensive so, e.g. I feel so unhappy
• greater use of tag questions, e.g. don't you?
• use of rising (question) intonation in declarative
sentences
• greater use of politeness strategies such as the
indirect forming of requests
Let's now consider one of those claims in more detail, and
interpret its significance. Lakoff claimed that women use
more tag questions than men. She notes that tag questions
can be used to seek corroboration for a personal opinion,
“The way prices are rising is horrendous, isn't it?” (p.49)
Lakoff claims that,
“It is my impression, though I do
not have precise statistical
evidence, that this sort of tag
question is much more apt to be
used by women than men.” (p. 49)
Assuming this to be true, how would you interpret it? Does
it suggest anything about male/female behaviour, or the
wider society?
Lakoff's conclusion is the following:
“While there are of course other
possible interpretations..., one
possibility is that the speaker is …
reluctant to state [their answer to
the question] baldly.” (p. 49)
In short, she is saying that women lack
confidence, and look to their interlocutor for
reassurance. Is this a useful interpretation?
Although Lakoff's conclusions seem rather patronising
towards women, her analysis was overtly feminist. She saw
language use as a two-step process that kept women in
their place (hence the title).
1. Little girls are taught to speak “like a
lady”, and not to adopt the rough and
unfeminine speech of boys
2. However, “The acquisition of this
special style of speech will later be an
excuse others use to keep her in a
demeaning position, to refuse to take her
seriously as a human being.” (p.41)
It should be pointed out here that subsequent research
has not supported Lakoff’s claims, we'll be looking at an
example later in the course.
Nonetheless, her work is extremely
important, she is associated with what
Cameron (1990) calls the dominance
framework, namely the attempt to explain
gender differences in language use in the
context of a gender disparity in power
But Lakoff's careful and tentative approach was not
always evident in mass media sources that seized on her
ideas and promulgated them as the definitive truth.
I'll give you a copy of “Girl talk - boy talk”, an article
taken from May 1990's edition of Glamour magazine.
Read it, and consider these questions.
• Which of the claims reported in the article reflect
general stereotypes, and which seem to be based on
Lakoff's ideas?
• What stylistic differences are there between this
and Lakoff's representation of her ideas?
References
Bucholtz, M. (ed.) (2004) Language and Woman's Place: Text and
Commentaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Cameron, D. (ed.) (1990) The Feminist Critique of Language: A Reader.
London: Routeledge