The Deficit Approach
- Women's language lacked authority
- Women spoke less than men
- Women used less or weaker explentives ('blimey')
- Women used hedges more often ('maybe')
- Women used more intensifiers ('very')
- Women used more apologetic requests ('sorry but could you...')
- Women used more tag questions, showing uncertainty ('isn't it?')
- Women used more indirect requests
- Women had more specialized vocab for domestic chores
- Women used more euphemisms (politer ways of expressing things e.g spend a penny)
- Women used more empty adjectives.
Robin Lakoff (1975) suggested that socialization ensured that female language remained deficient and less authoritative and more insecure in comparatives to the language used by males. The differences were socially constructed rather that biological constructs.
Janet Holmes (1992) suggested that tag questions were a device to maintain discussion or to be polite, therefore rather than show uncertainty, it shows a desire to co-operate. She also stated that the use of hedges and filler were not simply markers of indecision but were used for a variety of reasons. Holmes believed that these features are boosting devices used to intensify the force of an expression for added emphasis or power.
Betty Dubois and Isobel Crouch (1975)
Observations made by these two linguists found that in their data set, men used more tag questions than women, Interestingly it was NOT suggested that they were somehow less confident speakers.
Willian O'Barr and Bowman Atkins (1980)
These two linguists focused some of their studies on the language used within a courtroom setting. Some of their findings agreed with Lakoff's initial conclusions about women's language, but they also saw similarities between women's language and the language used by men of a lower social class. They concluded that uncertain or deficient language was more to do with power than gender.
They suggested the term 'powerless language' was more accurate than 'women's language'
This theory pays more attention to the influence of social status rather than gender as an indicator of dominance and is a slight move away from the deficit model.
The Dominance Approach
This approach focused on the ways in which men were seem to control and dominate mixed-sex interactions.
Zimmerman and West
- Most interruptions (96%) made in mixed-sex conversations were made by men.
- Men were dominant in conversation and sought to apply their dominance by applying constraints to the conversation.
- They believed that this reflected the male domination in society.
Subsequent research has concluded that men and women don't hold equal positions when it comes to conversation.
The Difference Approach
This approach seeks to explain the ways in which men and women talk in relation to their sub-cultures and ways in which their talk is shaped by attitudes towards, or preference form a type of talk.
A summary of the difference approach...
Men:
-Interrupt a lot
-Are concerned with status and independence
-Give direct orders and don't mind conflict
-Are interested in gaining factual information and solutions to problems
Women:
-Talk less, agree more than men and are more polite (form bonds, avoid conflict)
-Compromise and offer support rather than solutions (show understanding)
-Therefore want to create positive and strong social relationships
Difference may be to do with the topics of conversation. Traditionally and stereo-typically male conversations have been about work and sport (factual information) whereas women have spoken about family and the home (emotional and relational communication)
Jennifer Coates (1989)
- All female talk is cooperative
- Female talk supports the speakers and how they contribute to the discussions
- However, as this was not the case in mixed-sex conversation, this revealed that men and women had different socio-cultural expectations
Jane Pilkington (1992)
- In same sex talk, women were more collaborative and supportive than men.
- Women therefore seemed more concerned with using positive politeness strategies than men
Koenraad Kuiper (1991)
- Studied all male talk within a team of rugby players.
- Men used insults to express solidarity rather than use positive politeness strategies
LIMITATIONS
-The limitations of the linguists dataset
-The changes in language use by gender
-The changed in gender roles and society
-That they focus on differences not similarities so are already biased
-They offer generalisations
