This advert shows us how even though men and women do exactly the same things like jobs, that they are automatically given labels to define them for example in this case of a job, the male is described as the boss where as the female is described as bossy.This shows how language towards male and females are different and males have the stereotypically high status lanaguage where as women have the language which people look down upon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOjNcZvwjxI
Wednesday, 19 March 2014
Peter Trudgill and Robin Lakoff
These two researchers look into language and gender and what they discovered.
Peter Trudgill, 1970's
Trudgill wanted to find out how people's ways of speaking varied and how so used Norwich speech as an example. One of the variables he looked at was the gerund ending of "ing" in words like "walking" and "running" and he found in Norwich that they missed this out on the end of words like "walking" to say "walkin" making it sound like there was an "n" on the end of the sentence. He also found that it wasn't just unique for Norwich as he says:
"Nearly everywhere in the Eng-speaking world we find this alternation between higher-class/formal ng and lower class/informal n. It goes back to the fact that in Old English (and later) there were two forms, a gerund ending in -ing (walking is good for you) and a present participle ending in -end (he was walking). The -end form was the ancestor of -n' and -ing (obviously) of -ing. "
The two have been merged and sorted into two terms in forms of prestige and "correctives" has happened in the last 300 years. Upper class Edwardian said words like "huntin", "finshin" and "shootin" which shows just how recent it is.
His study discovered:
1. In all social classes, the more careful the speech, the more likely people were to say walking rather than walkin'. 2. The proportion of walkin' type forms was higher in lower social classes. 3. The nonstandard -in' forms occurred much more often in men's speech than in women's, and this was true for all social classes. 4. When women were questioned about what they thought they were saying, they tended to say they used the standard -ing forms more often than they really did. 5. When men were questioned about what they thought they were saying, they tended to say they used the nonstandard -in' forms more often than they really did.
Robin Lakoff, 1975
Lakoff did a study into language and specifically women's. She wrote a book called "Language and Women's Place" that looked at the woman's language is often now common place.Her work looks at attention to class, power, and social justice in addition to gender.
Lakoff says that women's speech can be distinguished from men in a number of ways:
Peter Trudgill, 1970's
Trudgill wanted to find out how people's ways of speaking varied and how so used Norwich speech as an example. One of the variables he looked at was the gerund ending of "ing" in words like "walking" and "running" and he found in Norwich that they missed this out on the end of words like "walking" to say "walkin" making it sound like there was an "n" on the end of the sentence. He also found that it wasn't just unique for Norwich as he says:
"Nearly everywhere in the Eng-speaking world we find this alternation between higher-class/formal ng and lower class/informal n. It goes back to the fact that in Old English (and later) there were two forms, a gerund ending in -ing (walking is good for you) and a present participle ending in -end (he was walking). The -end form was the ancestor of -n' and -ing (obviously) of -ing. "
The two have been merged and sorted into two terms in forms of prestige and "correctives" has happened in the last 300 years. Upper class Edwardian said words like "huntin", "finshin" and "shootin" which shows just how recent it is.
His study discovered:
1. In all social classes, the more careful the speech, the more likely people were to say walking rather than walkin'. 2. The proportion of walkin' type forms was higher in lower social classes. 3. The nonstandard -in' forms occurred much more often in men's speech than in women's, and this was true for all social classes. 4. When women were questioned about what they thought they were saying, they tended to say they used the standard -ing forms more often than they really did. 5. When men were questioned about what they thought they were saying, they tended to say they used the nonstandard -in' forms more often than they really did.
Robin Lakoff, 1975
Lakoff did a study into language and specifically women's. She wrote a book called "Language and Women's Place" that looked at the woman's language is often now common place.Her work looks at attention to class, power, and social justice in addition to gender.
Lakoff says that women's speech can be distinguished from men in a number of ways:
- Hedges: Phrases like "sort of", "kind of", "it seems like"
- Empty adjectives: "divine", "adorable", "gorgeous"
- Super-polite forms: "Would you mind..." "...if it’s not too much to ask" "Is it o.k if...?"
- Apologise more: "I'm sorry, but I think that..."
- Speak less frequently
- Avoid coarse language or expletives
- Tag questions "You don't mind eating this, do you?".
- Hyper-correct grammar and pronunciation: Use of prestige grammar and clear articulation
- Indirect requests: "Wow, I'm so thirsty." – really asking for a drink
- Speak in italics: Use tone to emphasis certain words, e.g., "so", "very", "quite"
Wednesday, 5 March 2014
Language and Gender
Language and gender can seem a very intresting idea to look at as at first, I don't really think about how women and mens laguage could actually be all that different as we all use it and get to know what type of language is new, when it acceptable to use certin language and how to use it in conversation. However, when you actually look into it you can begin to see the differences which could also link back to the ideas of sexism, sterotypes ect that have been made known. The idea that women could be considered the more chatty ones, good at changing topics but threre could be more masculine elemants especially with certin lexcial feilds in topics like football and maybe a bigger use of swear words which links to being sterotypical.
The other day, someone came up with the thought that they couldn't imagine men really using the term "OMG" and this is just one tiny example that actually ahows how language is differently used and how it has been interpreted into which gender would more likly to use. This links into the idea that women supposedly have a wider, superioir language use to men which is just a veiw but is this a valid point? Are women more domaint in language and how is this proven? What effects this? Nature or nurture? Age? Status? These are some of the ideas I would like to explore and find out ehy the divide between the two genders language had becoming more noticble over and become some linguists like Deborah Cameron, research topics and what they have found out helps to exaplin the divide.
This is an intresting article my Deborah Cameron which gives her veiw on what this whole debate is about and what conclusion he reaserch has come up with and her owh opinions:
www.theguardian.com/world/2007/oct/01/gender.books
The other day, someone came up with the thought that they couldn't imagine men really using the term "OMG" and this is just one tiny example that actually ahows how language is differently used and how it has been interpreted into which gender would more likly to use. This links into the idea that women supposedly have a wider, superioir language use to men which is just a veiw but is this a valid point? Are women more domaint in language and how is this proven? What effects this? Nature or nurture? Age? Status? These are some of the ideas I would like to explore and find out ehy the divide between the two genders language had becoming more noticble over and become some linguists like Deborah Cameron, research topics and what they have found out helps to exaplin the divide.
This is an intresting article my Deborah Cameron which gives her veiw on what this whole debate is about and what conclusion he reaserch has come up with and her owh opinions:
www.theguardian.com/world/2007/oct/01/gender.books
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)