Discuss the difference between men’s and women’s use of language
Today the issue of the difference between men’s and women’s use of language raises hot debates among sociolinguists, psychologists and other scholars. In their analysis of language and gender they create various theories that complicate the issue because of the fact that they observe gender differences from various perspectives.
In particular, they propose three principal theories: the sociolinguistic approach, the structural approach and the discourse approach. The sociolinguistic approach investigates cultural differences and language norms of two opposite genders. The structural approach evaluates a language structure in general and the discourse approach reveals the discourse elements that characterise males and females. These three theories are followed by a great variety of other theories that provide rather contradictory findings. The aim of this essay is two-fold: 1) to analyse the difference between men’s and women’s use of language and 2) to observe the way women and men are described by language.
However, in order to rightfully explain the difference in language usage, it is crucial to regard gender as a social category, but not as a simple biological criterion. The fact is that the identities of men and women are shaped by and within society, thus their language also conforms to the language standards of society, in which they live. Language reflects cultural biases and stereotypes of this society; as stereotypes are imposed on a person, they are further activated by him/her. This means that when society creates stereotypes on feminine gender, they are extended on all aspects of women’s identity, including language, traits of character and interests. As in a modern world language serves as the principal tool for producing reality, it also uncovers the difference in communication and a close connection between language and gender. A society that regards women lower than men maintains not only linguistic distinctions, but also social, cultural and political inequality. Thus, sociolinguistics investigates various social phenomena to provide a valid explanation to the impact of these social events on people and their language.
With the spread of feminism sociolinguists have directed their analysis to the evaluation of language variations through gender and social aspects. This especially regards the phonological variability of men’s and women’s use of language. The controversial findings of the conducted researches and experiments reveal that the issue of language and gender has been analysed only on the basis of one or two perspectives, such as social or cultural, psychological or political. For instance, Trudgill (1978) and Labov (1972) evaluate a social aspect of language, pointing out that women’s language is more standardised than men’s language.
Applying to the analysis of linguistic elements in women’s speech, Robin Lakoff (1975) suggests that speech style of females differs from men’s style. In particular, women prefer to use such evasive utterances as I think, I suppose, sort of and polite phrases, like Could you please, I would appreciate it much. Besides, Lakoff (1975) claims that feminine language is characterised by modified pronunciation and grammar, as well as the usage of tag questions. However, Lakoff’s findings are criticised for the lack of scientific proof. Dubois and Crouch (1975) challenge the issue of tag questions, pointing at the fact that men apply to tag questions more frequently than women. O’Barr and Atkins (1980) provide several examples of feminine language, demonstrating that women’s speech is closely connected with their social positions and earlier experience. Cameron (1985) rejects the idea of language neutrality, claiming that as language belongs to and is controlled by men, it is permeated by sexism through and through (p.91). Tannen (1995) analyses the aspect of power in language of males, claiming that the very notion of authority is associated with maleness (p.167).
Although Tannen (1995) and Lakoff (1975) point at the ability of a woman to utilise specific strategies for communication and overcome misunderstanding, the researchers reveal that such attempts are treated ironically by males and females. If a female utilises authoritative language, she is usually criticised for a lack of femininity, but if she applies to feminine language in a working place, she is accused of lack of professional skills. This contradictory attitude deprives a woman of the possibility to acquire a high position in her profession; instead, she experiences subordination from the side of male colleagues. Alice Sheppard (1991) analyses the difference between men’s and women’s use of humour, claiming that women tell jokes rarely in comparison with men. As the researcher explains, It has been known for some time that humour in a social setting is initiated by someone of higher status. Women, of course, are recognized as being of lower status than males (Sheppard, 1991, p.39). Investigating a connection between gender and interruptions in the process of speech, Geoffrey Beattie (1981) suggests that it is a social status of males and females that inspires them to utilise interruptions in the conversations, although Holmes (1995) stresses a gender aspect of interruptions. Contrary to these researchers, Johnson and Meinhof (1997) claim that men’s and women’s languages are based on the similar linguistics rules. As they suggest, there must be some degree of similarity or overlap in the speech of men and women, otherwise it would be impossible to envisage a situation where they could ever communicate (Johnson & Meinhof, 1997, p.11). In view of such ambiguous results in regard to the issue of men’s and women’s use of language, further analysis makes an attempt to evaluate language and gender differences through the female deficit theory, the cultural difference theory, the cultural dominance theory and the performative theory.
Language and gender differences
Nowadays some scholars who research human physiology and psychology apply to the female deficit theory to explain the difference between men’s and women’s behaviour and use of language. According to this theory, females are insufficient in certain spheres, such as politics and business, thus women should find the way to overcome this deficiency. The female deficit theory demonstrates that if a female wants to be understood by males and utilise her own mode of expression, she has to apply to both males’ and females’ languages. If a woman utilises men’s language patterns, her speech becomes more powerful and confident. Henley and Kramarae (1991) challenge the female deficit theory, pointing at the fact that this approach makes women adjust to males’ language and interpret their speech in a different way, while men should not adjust to females’ language. It is obvious that women can act like men in certain situations, while men find it disgraceful to turn to females’ behaviour; this is just the case with men’s and women’s use of language. Thus, this theory implicitly reveals that men’s language is better than women’s language.
But the findings of sociolinguistics reject this viewpoint. In particular, Maltz and Borker (1982) maintain the cultural difference theory, demonstrating that males and females belong to different cultures, and this difference aggravates their communication. Cultural differences are formed in childhood when boys and girls interact within their sex groups that have various spoken patterns, styles and ways of interpretation. As a result, boys’ language is rather competitive and is aimed at assert[ing] one’s position of dominance (Maltz & Borker, 1982, p.207), while girls’ language reflects their attempts to create and maintain relationships of closeness and equality (Maltz & Borker, 1982, p.205). Girls are usually given an incentive to speak in a lady-like manner, but boys are not prohibited from speaking in a rough manner. As Lakoff (1975) puts it, Rough talk is discouraged in little girls more strongly than in little boys, in whom parents may often find it more amusing than shocking (p.6). Cameron and Coates (1989) demonstrate that games in childhood influence men’s and women’s ways of speech: girls usually play the games that decrease the levels of conflicts and intensify closeness, while boys gather in large groups and practice clear speech. In this regard, the cultural difference theory interrelates with the cultural dominance theory that considers the differences between men’s and women’s use of language as a consequence of social dominance. Since early times every society has created and maintained the principles of prevalence that allowed men to occupy superior position to women; thus there were dominant modes of expression in any society which have been generated by the dominant structure within it (Ardener, 1975, p.20).
In such a patriarchal society a woman had to utilise a dominant language mode, if she wanted to be understood by men. A woman was deprived of the opportunity to create her own way of expression, and she used to express her views in a weak and uncertain manner. On the contrary, man’s speech was more aggressive and dominant, revealing his power and control over women. In general, the whole language system was created for the benefits of men, and, as women could not utilise this male language to reveal their feelings and thoughts, they preferred to keep silence. When language was formed, many words had only masculine forms, but, as the differences between men and women were aggravated, language acquired a generic nature. As a result, words began to possess either a masculine form or a feminine form, for instance, hero heroine, waiter waitress. Similar, different language patterns are utilised to describe women and men. These patterns are formed by society that makes constant attempts to intensify gender gaps by uncovering the differences between the language of men and women and by concealing any similarities. As men are regarded as straightforward, they are less polite in their talks than females. As women try not to injure a person with the words, they apply to more considerate utterances. As a result, women’s language is also implicit in nature, unlike men’s language that is characterised by clarity. But these differences can be explained by various childhood experiences of men and women. Society, in which boys and girls are brought up, creates certain language guidelines for both sexes. For instance, boys are expected to speak in a clear and concise manner, while girls are allowed to communicate in a free and ambiguous manner.
Such social stereotypes influence the identities of men and women, and, as they start to identify themselves with these stereotypes, their languages also conform to certain language patterns. In particular, language styles of men and women reveal cultural differences and status differences between two opposite sexes. In this regard, miscommunication appears because of gender inequality (Henley & Kramarae, 1991). Males and females usually create certain communicative rules for others and further apply these outlooks to evaluate speech of the opposite sex. If a person’s speech does not conform to the created rules, he/she is misunderstood. Thus, communication between men and women is based on the principles of power. According to Henley and Kramarae (1991), a person with more power can determine whose version of communication will prevail (p.19) and what style of conversation is more appropriate under certain conditions. This is especially obvious in the working environment, where males possess more power and control than females, and these aspects influence men’s speech. Henley and Kramarae (1991) consider that the social power of males gives them the privilege of defining the situation (p.27), thus the social power is more important for the analysis of the difference between men’s and women’s usage of language than cultural differences.
The cultural difference theory operates with two principal modes - ‘femininity’ and ‘masculinity’; these are various subcultures that create different ideas of speech, contributing to misunderstanding. For instance, during a talk a woman may nod in a response to a man, meaning that she listens to him, while a man may interpret her nod in a different way, considering that she agrees with him. As Henley and Kramarae (1991) put it, females are required to develop special sensitivity to interpret males silence, lack of emotional expression while men often seem to be trained deliberately to misinterpret much of women’s meaning (p.42). The social power of men gives them an opportunity to influence the process of decision-making in the workplace and to interrupt females whenever they want to interfere into the flaw of the conversation (Holmes, 1995, p.211). In view of such a division on subcultures, males and females can be placed into positions of the majority and minority groups; thus the difference in language styles of men and women should be analysed through social and cultural status of opposite genders. Deborah Tannen (1990) reveals that males’ and females’ languages are characterised by various genderlects; the principal dissimilarity between these genderlects is that women are engaged in a conversation to preserve close relations, while men talk to prove their persistence and power.
Male dominance over women is obvious in many aspects of a conversation; as males are engaged in a talk, they start to demonstrate their awareness of all issues, they divert attention from women and, instead, set the direction of a conversation. In this regard, males’ interruption is aimed at proving their dominant positions in social interactions. Women also apply to interruptions, but their interruptions are aimed at revealing their interest in the speaker or in the discussed issue. The same regards questions that males and females utilise in a conversation. Applying to some researches, Holmes (1995) reveals that women prefer to use supportive questions, with the help of which they involve a person into a talk, while men usually apply to the questions that require short answers. This difference is explained by the fact that men want to receive factual information from their conversations, but women are more interested in the very process of conversation. Thus, according to the performative linguistic approach, men and women perform different actions through their speech, but these performative differences are inspired by cultural differences between two genders (Austin, 1975). In other words, women and men imitate language patterns and styles of their own gender group (Butler, 1990). Identities of both sexes are formed through these performative speech acts. As a result, males and females begin to apprehend reality in different ways, and this influences their behaviour and language usage. For instance, females prefer to be engaged in private conversations, while males are used to speak in public; women like to gossip and men like to tell jokes (Tannen, 1990).
Tags: gender differences, language, men, society, sociolinguistics, stereotypes, women
