Gender revision booklet.docx

**[\ ]** **[GENDERED LANGUAGE]** Within the study of 'Language Diversity', one of the biggest areas of study is the impact of gender on language. The study of gender ranges from the way a gender speaks to the way groups interact to the way women/men are targeted/portrayed in adverts. There are fou...

**[\ ]** **[GENDERED LANGUAGE]** Within the study of 'Language Diversity', one of the biggest areas of study is the impact of gender on language. The study of gender ranges from the way a gender speaks to the way groups interact to the way women/men are targeted/portrayed in adverts. There are four main schools of thought for gendered language, and you will often hear them referred to as the 'four Ds'. They are: dominance, difference, deficit and diversity. **[DOMINANCE THEORY]** Dominance theories examine language use in respect to men being more dominant. Schulz and Lakoff conducted research into the terms in which women and men are referred to. They looked at terms which are **marked** in a way to identify them as different. The research details that the '-ess' suffix marks out a feminine equivalent. For example, actress to mark a female actor. They also looked at **semantic derogation** which is where words have gains negative connotations as time has progressed. For example, master's female equivalent is 'mistress' which has connotations of prostitution. Janet Holmes's research looked into the way in which women are referred to in affectionate **nominatives** (names). She noted that the nominates used for women were predominately from the semantic fields of food and animals. For example, you may notice women being called 'sugar', 'honey', 'bitch' and 'cow'. Stanley's research from the 1970s examined the number of insults for women against men. She found that there were 220 insults to describe a promiscuous woman vs 20 for a promiscuous male. Whilst not as linguistically tested as other theories, in 2015 Tyger Drew-Honey asked people in the streets how they would describe a woman who had slept with 30 men and how they would describe a man who had slept with 30 women. Both men and women described the woman as a "slag" and "slut" whereas the man was labelled as a "lad". Perhaps the most prominent dominance theorist is Dale Spender, who believes that there is a culture of 'male as norm' in which men are the dominant models and women are add-ons. For example, the fact that men are almost always introduced first (Lord and Lady, Mr and Mrs) and when women are not introduced first, it is symbolic of their lesser role (mothers and fathers -- puts women in a maternal role). In addition, words like 'mankind' add to the idea that men are the norm. There has been recent backlash against the term 'history' (his story) as an attempt to try claim that history is the story of men. All of this has caused for a reshuffling and reclaiming of words for more gender-neutral words. For example, 'headteacher' instead of headmaster and headmistress. Germaine Greer has tried to linguistically reclaim the term 'c\*nt' in an attempt to remove the negative connotations attached to the female genitals. One area of gendered language that linguists continue to debate is the topic of **interruptions**. In 1975, Zimmerman and West found that men are 96-100% more likely to interrupt in mixed sex conversations. MOVING UP THE BANDS: AO2 -- Zimmerman and West At level 3, I can show detailed knowledge! Zimmerman and West studied interruptions in conversations between men and women. They found that men interrupted 96-100% more of the time. At level 4, I can challenge this! Beattie's research considered over ten times the corpus of Zimmerman and West and discovered that there was pretty much an equal number of interruptions by men and women alike. At level 5, I can evaluate this! Zimmerman and West examined a small number of subjects, all of whom were white, middle class and middle aged. This is not a representative sample and thus their research is flawed and not necessarily investigating what they think they are investigating. It is entirely possible that the research shows traits typical of middle class conversations, but this may be atypical of all over conversations. Beattie's research, however, is based on a much larger and representative corpus and so is likely to be more accurate than Zimmerman and West's study. Pamela Fishman's research discovered that conversations between men and women often fail because of how men act. She details that men use a third of the amount of questions as women and gave minimal responses. This leads to, as Fishman describes, women doing the 'conversational shitwork'. **[DEFICIT MODEL]**\ \ The deficit theory essentially states that women's language is weak or contains weak traits. The theory originates from Otto Jespersen's book published in 1922. Jespersen's research details that women speak without thinking and hence use more **non-fluency features** (features which disrupt the fluency of speech).\ \ MOVING UP THE BANDS: AO2 - Jespersen\ At level 3, I can show detailed knowledge!\ Jespersen investigated non-fluency features such as fillers and pauses.\ At level 4, I can challenge this!\ Jespersen's research is disputed by Onnela who found that with masters students, there was a very similar **MLU** ( mean length of utterance - the average time span of a piece of speech).\ At level 5, I can evaluate this!\ Jespersen's research relies on evidence from literature and travellers and thus is speculative and is often dismissed as folklinguistics. The deficit model was popularised by Robin Lakoff in 1975. Her research details a list of features of spoken language them makes women's language 'weak'. These include: 1. A hypercorrect grammar. 2. Over-apologising 3. Empty adjectives (e.g. lovely, brilliant, luscious) 4. **Tag questions** (adding something onto the end of a declarative syntax to make it interrogative -- e.g. you're going out tonight, aren't you?) 5. Overuse of **intensifiers** (like 'so') 6. Special lexicon for certain things, like colour. 7. Less swearing 8. Lacking a sense of humour This list is not exhaustive, but offers a good range. You can Google to find a number of other features. Lakoff's research has been built on by linguist Kira Hall who found that phone sex workers often made use of Lakoff's features to appear more feminine. MOVING UP THE BANDS: AO2 - Lakoff\ At level 3, I can show detailed knowledge!\ Lakoff states that women have a hypercorrect grammar, like for example avoiding **double negatives**, and she also says that women lack a sense of humour. At level 4, I can challenge this!\ Lakoff's work has been challenged by O'Barr and Atkins who looked at a courtroom and found that lower class men use Lakoff's language features in court. At level 5, I can evaluate this!\ O'Barr and Atkins research implies that it is potentially not to do with gender, but to do with power. This is denoted as 'powerless language'. In addition, Lakoff's research is based purely on her own observations and not any linguistically rigorous testing. In 2017, research published by 'Economic and Social Research Council' discovered that there had been a 500% increase in the use of 'fuck' by women since the 1990s. **[DIFFERENCE MODEL]** The difference model is concerned with the idea that men and women are simply inherently different. The difference model was originated by Deborah Tannen. Tannen defines there being 6 clear continuums of difference between the genders: Advice vs understanding -- men would rather find a solution that just understand. Orders vs proposals -- men use more imperatives and women use **ameliorated** requests (using nicer language like 'would you take the bins out?') Status vs support -- Male conversation are characterised by a constant desire to be in control. Women prefer to be supported. Information vs feelings -- men tend to give factual information over women giving an emotional overview. Independence vs intimacy -- men focus more on being independent whereas women prefer the intimacy of a situation. Conflict vs compromise -- Women will often compromise rather than cause a conflict, unlike men. Tannen has also looked at speakers in groups and said there are two categories speakers can fall into: high involvement and high considerateness. High involvement speakers tend to take a very active role in the conversation, be this leading conversation or **backchanneling** (not direct responses, but comments like 'yep', 'uh-huh' and 'ok'). In addition, Tannen says there are two ways types of talking -- report and rapport talk. Report talk, used by men, is direct (like reporting on something) and rapport talk, used by women, is used to create and sustain relationships. Jennifer Coates researched all-male and all-female groups and states that they converse differently, although topics of conversation tend to be similar. She also states that techniques used by women to maintain conversation aren't signs of inferiority, but signs of intelligence. This acts as a counterpoint to Fishman. Other linguists have looked at what makes up the conversation between all-male and all-female groups. Deborah Jones has researched gossiping amongst women and calls this 'house talk'. This 'house talk' comes in three parts: - Scandal -- women discuss the behaviour of others (usually women) - Bitching -- expression of anger, not because they want something to change, but just as a relief. - Chatting -- this is an intimate form of gossiping where women mutually self-disclose and nurturing takes place. This work has been built on by Deborah Cameron who says that girls bitch because **covertly** (secretive) dominant behaviour is more acceptable for women. In in similar way, linguists have looked at the way men talk to each other. Kuiper's research details that men use more insults and **expletives** (swearing). Pilkington's research looks at the way a 'locker-room banter' is created within all-male groups. He found that insults were part of this culture and created bonds. Millet's research states that "The tone and ethos of men\'s house culture is **sadistic**, **power-oriented, and latently homosexual**, **frequently narcissistic in its energy and motives". (This is direct quote from Millet's research -- I'm not sure about copyright restrictions on this -- I would argue it comes under fair usage. It's your call.)** **[DIVERSITY MODEL]** The final model claims that there are more differences within the genders than there are between them. It looks closely at things like the language of the LGBT+ community. Many of these theories are transferrable to a question on social groups. You have probably heard the term 'gaydar' used in relation to be able to detect when someone is gay (gay radar). Czech linguists Valentova and Havlicek have investigated what is called someone's 'perceived sexual orientation'. Their research looked whether or not someone could tell a man's sexuality based on their aesthetics and voice. They discovered that participants were in fact able to detect someone's sexuality based on both their voice and how they looked (even to the extent of facial features). Participants stated that there was a certain femininity in the voice of the homosexual men such as elongated /l/ vowel (/l:/) sound in words like 'towel'. Their research has been supported by some 2004 research by the Northwestern University which found that lesbians, gays and bisexuals showed no difference at birth in vowel production, but chose to selectively adopt vowel productions of certain social groups. Their research also found that gay/bisexual men didn't necessarily adopt vowel sounds from women and that lesbian/bisexual women didn't necessarily adopt vowel sounds from men -- it was more from their social groups. Leading linguist, William Leap has published work on what he denotes as 'Lavender Linguistics'. This term describes the **sociolect** (language of a social group) of homosexuals. Leap believes that the way homosexuals interact with heterosexuals and with other homosexuals differs. He claims that this is a whole other language. Towards the end of the 19^th^ century, a **code** (a language) developed from performers and workers in theatre, fairgrounds, circuses and fish markets. This code was used to mask homosexual behaviour in a time when it was illegal to be gay. Some terms like 'naff' and 'camp' are still widely in use, but Polari is not. Finally, a key theory for gender, and your entire diversity study, is Butler's theory of performativity. Butler believes that you construct your gender based on how you behave and the language you use. In other words, your language **linguistically determines** you. **[When do I write about gender?]** Your knowledge of gender can be assessed in a couple of ways: - Paper 2, Section A, question 1: Evaluate the idea that... - this question is asking you for a discussion of your knowledge of gendered language. It is worth 30 marks -- 10 are for your argument and terminology, 20 are for your knowledge of theories and concepts. You should write formally and in an academic style. - Paper 2, Section B, question 4: Write a/an... - this question is worth 30 marks and assesses your ability to write creatively (10 marks) and your knowledge of theories and concepts (20 marks). It will ask you to write an opinion-based piece based on two articles you will have analysed in the previous question. You MUST bring in your knowledge of genderlect, and it must be relevant to the topic the articles are about. You should also try to bring in these articles to your piece. In Paper 1, Section A, questions 1,2 and 3, you may get texts which are about/feature women. You should not bring in your theories into these questions at all. In Paper 2, Section B, question 3, the texts may be about genderlect -- you MUST NOT bring theory into this question.