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, 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.
Main Points of Gender and Language
Use


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
Relationships Between Gender &
Language

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”
Gender & Language Relationships
(cont.)

Caribs (men) Arawak (women)


Native American languages



Women- Formal pronouns in informal situations
Women- Absence of deprecatory pronouns
South African-Xhosa speakers


Different verb forms in Koasati, Hopi’s “Thank You”
Japanese


10% vocabulary not shared by both sexes
Hlonipha-women’s language of respect
German women reference- Video
Main Points of Gender and Language
Use
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
Gender Differences (cont.)

Differing features of conversational style

Amount of talk (Coates)



Interruptions (Zimmerman & West)


Women use more hedges and tag questions,
Compliments (Metshire, et. al., 2001)


Women gave more conversational support than men leaving more opportunities for men’s stories to
get expanded upon.
Tentativeness (Lackoff, 1975, Holmes, 1995)


Men interrupt women more than vice versa
Conversational support (Fishman)


Mixed groups-men talk more especially in formal & public contexts
Same sex groups- amt. talk equal
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?
Gender as Cultural Difference

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.
Gender Dominance

Lakoff (1975) – Informal Observations and Intuitions

Deficit model of language use


Zimmerman & West (1975)- Empirical Study of Conversation

Interruptions- more occurred in mixed-sex groups, most by men.




Women’s 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- Don’t call it dominance

You don’t have to ‘put down’ men to ‘bring up’ women.
Main Points of Gender and Language
Use


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
Pre-Existing Social Distinctions

Past Concrete & Established Gender Identity


Remember the Language Forms


Japanese pronouns & deprecatory words
Lack of Mobility - less interaction with different
communication styles


Men and Women had more defined gender roles
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)
Individual Gender Fluidity



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.)
Maintaining Social Distinctions:
Present

Childrearing Practices


Value of Identifying Gender Immediately
Maltz & Borker


Media


Single Sex Peer Groups from an early age
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!”
Changing Social Distinctions:
Present/Future

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”)?
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).