Linguist Deborah Tannen, who I mentioned earlier, is known
for the Difference Theory. This is essentially highlighting the contrasts
between men and women’s reasoning behind their choice of language. There are
different parts to this theory. One is titled: Status vs. support which
proposes men see language as a means of asserting dominance and women see it as
a way of discussing ideas and feelings. Tannen also has other theories falling
under gender difference such as the idea that whilst woman regularly discuss
their feelings, men tend to put up an emotion barrier and would rather discuss
their interests. This seems true, right?
Let’s talk you through an example we can all relate to,
hopefully!
I’m sure you’ve all been in a sticky situation when it comes
to romance in the past? In a transcript between Elaine and Roger who have been
dating for six months, Elaine is unsure as to where she sees the relationship
going. "Maybe I should never have…Oh, I feel so..." Elaine is
protecting her negative face by using ‘maybe’ which is an example of low
modality, which expresses her uncertainty of what she wants from Roger. Elaine
represents women as a gender, relating to Tannen’s Difference theory and the
idea that women seek intimacy whereas males seek independence. She is clearly
seeking a verbal response from Roger, to assure her that she has nothing to
feel guilty about. Elaine uses negative face saving acts throughout the
transcript which demonstrates to Roger, her vulnerability as she isn’t ready to
commit to him. ‘Please don’t torture yourself like this’ Elaine uses this order
which expresses an anticipation of an action, to be performed in the future and
thereby restricts the personal freedom of Roger. This corresponds to Brown and
Levinson’s face theory, 1987 which suggests speakers in a conversation will use
certain ways of expressing themselves, as a way of getting a response from the
other participants. Contrastingly, Roger replies to Elaine with very minimal
answers at times, for example “What?” and “No!" Roger tends to use
declaratives such as these, which suggests to me he is holding back his feelings
slightly as these replied lack development; he hasn’t elaborated on his
statements. His use of declaratives also highlight the power asymmetry within
the transcript, Roger has authority of Elaine as she is addressing him with the
issue. Are you all with me so far? Good!
Have you ever noticed men take long pauses in a
conversation? During the transcript, it states Roger pauses for a few seconds
in between his speech. According to theorist Pilkington, men see pauses within
conversation as acceptable, treating it as time to think about their response
and how they wish to sound to the other party. Elaine on the other hand, does
not hesitate to respond to Roger. Pilkington also states that women focus on
maintaining relationships and feelings; Elaine clearly conforms to this theory
as the abstract nouns ‘feel’ and ‘time’ appear within her speech frequently.
Her use of abstract nouns relates to her mind being focused on thoughts and
feelings towards Roger and their uncertain future.
Simply by comparing these few examples of how Roger and
Elaine use different language techniques within the transcript, we can already
see the blatant difference emerging between the genders. It is clear through
Elaine’s attempts to intimately communicate her feelings to Roger, that Tannen’s
intimacy VS independence theory is correct. Roger’s simple sentences and
declarative answers state his authority in the conversation, as Elaine has
linguistically moulded herself to be the weaker party, showing her
vulnerability through expressing her feelings towards Roger through board on
record statements such as ‘I really know that. It is silly!’
I wonder what happened between Elaine and Roger in the end,
I guess we’ll never know.
Moving on to some more material now; John Gray author of the
famous relationship guide ‘Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus’ agrees that
men and women have different approaches towards language and how they
communicate with others. He states that: Men like to receive individual
acknowledgement whereas women like to be seen as part of a team. Specifically
in the work place, Gray found the way that men and women show their
appreciation towards fellow colleagues, noticeably differs. Men seek individual
team member’s results to be acknowledged. For example "John did a great
job on that report". This shows praise directed towards one member of the
team, which implies authority which links to males holding dominance over
others. Opposing to this, women tend to share praise as part of a team effort
where everyone involved has helped to produce the outcome, "I couldn't
have done it without Kate's help." The female example uses the negative
face saving act (Brown and Levinson), which sees the speaker degrading herself,
to show her appreciation to her colleague. Also, this is an example of
protecting her colleague’s positive face, making an effort to include each
member of the team in the praise.
So, Men and Women, why so different? Well I don’t have the
direct answer but from my research, I think we can conclude that language plays
a big part in distinguishing between the genders, don’t you think? So next time
you are having a conversation with your partner, friend or even a family
member, have a think about the examples I have analysed and how they could
relate to why we are so different.
Send any more of your questions to me at;
kimblerlytime@inbox.com I’ll get through as many as I can but there are a lot
of you and only one of me! Bye all.
No comments:
Post a Comment