“She were a cracker”: Talking
gender and sexuality at work
Dr. Louise Mullany
University of Nottingham, UK
Gender and Language BAAL SIG:
Gender and Corpus Linguistics
Lancaster University
30th March 2010
Introduction
• “doing” gender
(Butler 1999; 2004)
• Gender identities as contested,
pluralised and fluid
Gender, sexual, personal and
professional identities
• Hegemonic Discourses: broader social
structuration
•
(Sunderland 2004; Baker 2008)
Methodology
Mixed methodologies
(Holmes & Meyerhoff 2003; Swann & Maybin 2008;
Mullany 2008)
Away from ‘armed camps’ (Silverman 2000: 10)
Quantitative, survey approaches: corpus
linguistic tools and techniques
Qualitative approaches
Approaches
•Indexicality of gender identity (Ochs 1992)
Direct indexicality: girl/boy:
talk-in-interaction/CA (Stokoe and
Smithson 2001)
Indirect indexicality: expectations, norms:
indexing social meanings: how gender is
relevant (McElhinny 2003)
•Feminine and masculine CofPs (Holmes and
Stubbe 2003)
CANBEC
24 companies in total: 2000-2004
‘Internal’ v ‘External’ (Handford 2007)
Manufacturing, IT, telecommunications, pub chain,
travel agents, accountants, museum, magazine,
hotel, management consultancy, finance/banking
Recordings: UK, also Ireland, Spain, Germany, Japan
Range of private companies and speakers
Meetings: 912,734 words
Handford and McCarthy (2004)
Company type: Words in 1000s
(Handford 2007: 76)
Gender and CANBEC
Corpus tagging
Gender make up:
79% men
21% women
Gender, professional role, status
Gendered term
FREQUENCIES
<M>
<F>
boy
14
2
12
boys
27
19
8
girl
29
22
7
girls
21
18
3
man
126
118
8
-man (occupational
titles)
37
32
5
men
55
37
18
woman
19
13
6
-woman
(occupational titles)
0
0
0
women
17
6
11
lad
28
28
0
lads
96
96
0
lass/lassie
lasses
0
0
-
-
guy
195
174
21
guys
147
120
27
Girl: random sample
Data
External meeting: Manufacturing
Hydraulics Company & Tyre Company
Sales/Negotiation
All male meeting: 7 participants
Tyres: M3, M5, M6
Hydraulics: M1, M2, M4, M7
Age: 30-39: 3; 40-49: 3; 50-59: 1
Analysis: frequencies
Direct indexicality: gender as topic
she
girl
woman
bird
last night: emerges as a narrative topic
about the same female referent
Give us a phone call a bit like that
bird
last night she was gonna have it
Oh right which one was that? This
bird
had fell out the ugly tree and had a
All the drugs trying to keep that
bird
out of his room
sitting in it (laughter) scary
woman
was she? She was like Joe on steroids
cos you may well have a
woman
replacement for yourself but they are
All Data © Cambridge University Press
Mick I did in my own little way
she
was so drunk she’ll never remember
You told her that I tell you what
she’d got a cracking pair of legs on her you know
nice cuppa thank you (2 sec)
she
was gonna have it any way which way but
The bicycle thing yeah I think
she
was just a tease she did the job on you
No I just sort of did that laughter
she
picked up chair and went over and sat
‘She was gonna have it any way which way but loose last night.’
27/32 instances of’ she’: same referent: ‘woman’ who they had met
socially ‘last night’
Evidence of a recurrent narrative topic: ‘last night’: Explore as a twoword cluster:
All Data © Cambridge University Press
Did you have a good night
last night
I did yeah we were just saying
last night
I’d got a job here (1 sec) same
trying to find James oh oh right
last night
be my guest I’m saying nothing
laughs cos we could have scored
last night
yeah definitely Mick you made
us a phone call bit like that bird
last night
She was gonna have it both ways
any way which way but loose
last night
till contraceptive came in (10 sec)
Off (4 sec) laughter that girl
last night
If you’d played your cards right
that’s why you went choir singing
last night
You can’t believe them they they
a lot for you ho= hospitality
last night
And thank you very much for the
he spoilt my fucking evening
last night
Didn’t he (1 sec) fucking hell Rod
was (laughter) you told me
Strategic positioning of this narrative: See Mullany (forthcoming)
All Data © Cambridge University Press
Qualitative analysis
Multifunctionality of:
Narrative: strategic positioning
Humour: banter, insults, sexist humour
small talk-----------------------core business talk
(Holmes 2000)
Display of dominant hegemonic masculinist
identities through these discourse devices
Opening
<M4> Did you have a good night last night?
<M6> I did yeah We were just saying that's all (1 sec) part of it and it gives
you that little bit of a buzz for the next day for (1 sec) you know the
business side
[…]
<M4> Morning Cecil
<M0> Morning
<M4> Are you coming Are you joining us?
<M0> I no I'm trying to find James
<M4> Oh oh right
<M3> last night
<M4> Be my guest
<all laugh>
<M5> I'm saying nothing <xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<M4> good company then
<M3> Eh she were a cracker
<1 sec subdued laughter>
All Data © Cambridge University Press
Mid-meeting
<M5> Yeah so if you elay= email me and Mick
<M3> Okay email yeah Rod and I
<M2> Yep
<M5> George
<M3> But give us a phone call
<M4> Yeah I will yeah You'll get it both ways
<M3> Give us a phone call
<M5> A bit like that bird last night She was gonna have it both ways until
you put your fucking nose in
<laughter>
< 3 sec>
<M5> Nice cuppa
<2 sec>
<M3> She was gonna have it any way which way but loose last night
<M5> Till contraceptive came in
All Data © Cambridge University Press
Negotiation
<M3> Hundred and twenty two hundred fucking hell
<M6> Can you tell us what's gone down please
<M5> (1 sec) ((laughs))
<M6> Do you normally get both?
<M2> Level of service that's {dropping off}
((4 sec laughter))
<M4> That girl last night if you'd played your cards right
<M?> Yeah
(4 sec) ((raucous laughter))
<M?> You played your cards right
<M3> If you hadn't of hadn't have interfered
((laughter))
<M6> What if I'd have gone and sat on another table on my own
<M3> Yeah and then it might have been all right
<M5> We did hint We did hint
All Data © Cambridge University Press
Closing
<M4> Thanks very much for the business
<M5> I think on on behalf of of the three of us thanks a lot for your
ho= hospitality last night and thank you very much for the {xxxx}
Thanks a lot
<M4> Thank you
<3 sec>
<M3> The only thing is that on the next review meeting could we
keep it too two members of the
<M5> Yeah
<M6> be interested in coming anymore
<laughter>
<M5> Cos one member
<M3> Duncan won't be able to make it
<M5> Cos he won't be breathing
[…]
<M4> Do you want me book three rooms for you?
<M3> Please
<3 sec>
All Data © Cambridge University Press
Closing
<M4> Double for you and Rodney single for Dunc <1 sec> cos he
won't need+
<M5> No no+
<M4> +anything else will he
<M5> +bugger his room he can stay in the car <2 sec > nice spring
<M6> You got a double together?
<2 sec >
<M3> He spoilt my fucking evening la= last night didn't he
All Data © Cambridge University Press
Discussion
Co-construction of multiple identities
Stereotypically masculine CofP:
‘Last night’ narrative: hegemonic masculinist heroes
(M3, M5) and anti-hero (M6)
Expletives
Humour: Sexist humour, banter, insults
Transactional & affective talk: inextricably interlinked
Pluralised masculinities
Dominant hegemonic discourse of heterosexual
masculinity (Coates 2003; Sauntson 2008; Baker 2008)
Conclusions
•Direct indexing of gender terms: mixed methods
through corpus linguistics as initial survey approach
•Dominant hegemonic discourse of heterosexual
masculinity in this ‘masculine’ manufacturing CofP
•Integral and multifunctional role of humour,
narrative, small/social talk
•Strategic positioning of narrative: Openings,
negotiation, conflict/tension releaser, closings,
solidarity-building, social distancing
Handford, M & M. McCarthy (2004) “Invisible to us”: A preliminary corpusbased study of spoken business English. In T. Upton & U. Connor (eds) Discourse
in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics. pp. 167-201.
References
Baker, P. (2008) Sexed Texts. London: Equinox
Butler, J. (1999) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.
Second Edition. New York: Routledge.
Butler, J. (2004) Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge.
Coates, J. (2003) Men Talk. Oxford: Blackwell.
Handford, M & M. McCarthy (2004) “Invisible to us”: A preliminary corpusbased study of spoken business English. In T. Upton & U. Connor (eds)
Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics. pp. 167201.
Handford, M. (2007) The Genre of the Business Meeting: A Corpus Based Study.
Unpublished PhD Thesis. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.
Holmes, J. (2000) Doing collegiality and keeping control at work: small talk
in government departments. In J.Coupland (ed.) Small Talk. Harlow:
Pearson, pp. 32-61.
Holmes, J. and M. Meyerhoff (2003) Different voices, different views:
An introduction to current research in language and gender. In J. Holmes
and M. Meyerhoff (eds) The Handbook of Language and Gender. Oxford:
Blackwell, pp. 1-17.
References
Holmes, J. and Stubbe, M. (2003) `”Feminine” workplaces: stereotype and
reality’. In Holmes, J. and Meyerhoff, M. eds. The Handbook of Language
and Gender, Oxford, Blackwell, pp.573-600.
McElhinny, B. (2003) Theorizing gender in sociolinguistics and
linguistic anthropology. In J.Holmes and M. Meyerhoff (eds) The
Handbook of Language and Gender. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 21-42.
Mullany, L. (2008) Negotiating methodologies: Making language and
gender relevant in the professional workplace. In K. Harrington, L.
Litosseliti, H. Sauntson and J. Sunderland (eds) Gender and
Language Research Methodologies. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 43-55.
Mullany, L. (forthcoming) Managers performing masculinities in
business meetings: What we did “last night”. In J. Angouri & M. Marra
(eds) Identities at Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Ochs, E. (1992) Indexing gender. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (eds)
Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 335-358.
References
Sauntson, H. (2008)The contribution of queer theory to gender and
language research. In: K. Harrington, L. Litosseliti, H. Sauntson
and J. Sunderland (eds.), Gender and Language Research
Methodologies, 271–282. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Silverman, D. (2000) Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide.
London: Sage.
Stokoe, E.H., & J. Smithson ( 2001) Making gender relevant:
Conversation analysis and gender categories in interaction.
Discourse & Society, 12: 217-244.
Sunderland, J. (2004) Gendered Discourses. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Swann, J. and J. Maybin (2008) Sociolinguistic and ethnographic
approaches to language and gender. In K. Harrington, L.
Litosseliti, H. Sauntson and J. Sunderland (eds) Gender and
Language Research Methodologies Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 2142.