Breakdowns, an overall lack of understanding and other difficulties in communication have often characterized the relationship between men and women. From a socio-linguistic perspective, Debora Tannen (1990) has shed light on this issue by observing that: “the minor and major frustrations that women and men encounter when they talk to each other lie in the different ways they use language.” Such distinction in the use of language, in addition, is said to be one of the many behavioural patterns society constructs for and expects from individuals of the opposite sex (Trudgill, 1972). In the light of these considerations, it seems reasonable to assess that misinterpretations between males and females can be accounted for by analyzing the distinctive way in which they perceive and produce language and in the differential expectations they have when addressing each other.
Sociolinguists have been able to show that from adolescence to adulthood, females produce more standard language than males. Based on the fact that hedges, tag-questions, adjectives and rising tones on statements are more frequent in women’s talk, it has been suggested that females are more uncertain than men. Males, on the contrary, are found to speak with more assertiveness, to be more interruptive, to tell more jokes and to produce more succinct utterances. As regards politeness, courtesy subjuncts (Quirk, 1976) and other well-bred forms occur more regularly among women, whereas an extended use of expletives and other bad-mannered formulas can be more commonly found among men.
Examples of difficultness in cross-gender communication abound. For instance, it is told that one Sunday, Calvin Coolidge, onetime president of the United States of America, returned home from church. After being greeted by his wife, he was asked: “What did the Priest speak about?” “Sin,” he replied. “And what did he say about it?” she insisted. Cooling made a silent pause and answered: “He said he was against it.” It could be suggested that incidents such as this are good representatives of several daily cross-gender conversations at home. They do not only show that females are by and large more eager to talk at home but also illustrate the fact that both speakers have different assumptions and expectations when engaging in conversation. Tannen further explains that while women’s talk seeks to establish and strengthen interpersonal connections (or rapport) men speak to preserve independence, negotiate status and display knowledge and skill. These behavioural patters explain the reason why when “trouble,” for example, arises as a topic within a cross-gender conversation, males have the tendency to provide a straightforward solution. Such demeanour normally puzzles and frustrates women because they simply want to talk about the problem and to be understood. Phrases such as “I know how you feel,” “It’s just as once happened to me,” or “Tell more about it” are the ones females yearn for when talking. This contention is rooted in the fact that little girls grow up in a world of intimacy, a world in which being a friend means sharing feelings and exchanging secrets. Little boys, conversely, acquire language in the context of making their way in larger, more competitive and hierarchical groups.
Thus, understanding both the different ways in which males and females produce and receive language and the expectation gap between them can enlighten the issue of cross-gender conversation and the difficulties thereof. Scholarly endeavour has also shown that an extended use of adjectives, referring tones, tag-questions and ambiguous remarks distinguish woman’s talk from men’s. The latter, on the contrary, seem to be more easily inclined to use assertions, the language of humour and less polite statements. Particularly at home, males are more likely to produce more concise utterances. It is on the basis of these differences that the conclusion that men are more confident than women is drawn. As far as expectations are concerned, women seem to value connection and rapport over other pragmatic intentions, whereas males are more concerned with status, practical solutions and power. In conclusion, an overall consideration of the phenomenon above described can not only help members of both sexes to know how their conversations may be improved but also ease the burden of not being understood.
Sociolinguists have been able to show that from adolescence to adulthood, females produce more standard language than males. Based on the fact that hedges, tag-questions, adjectives and rising tones on statements are more frequent in women’s talk, it has been suggested that females are more uncertain than men. Males, on the contrary, are found to speak with more assertiveness, to be more interruptive, to tell more jokes and to produce more succinct utterances. As regards politeness, courtesy subjuncts (Quirk, 1976) and other well-bred forms occur more regularly among women, whereas an extended use of expletives and other bad-mannered formulas can be more commonly found among men.
Examples of difficultness in cross-gender communication abound. For instance, it is told that one Sunday, Calvin Coolidge, onetime president of the United States of America, returned home from church. After being greeted by his wife, he was asked: “What did the Priest speak about?” “Sin,” he replied. “And what did he say about it?” she insisted. Cooling made a silent pause and answered: “He said he was against it.” It could be suggested that incidents such as this are good representatives of several daily cross-gender conversations at home. They do not only show that females are by and large more eager to talk at home but also illustrate the fact that both speakers have different assumptions and expectations when engaging in conversation. Tannen further explains that while women’s talk seeks to establish and strengthen interpersonal connections (or rapport) men speak to preserve independence, negotiate status and display knowledge and skill. These behavioural patters explain the reason why when “trouble,” for example, arises as a topic within a cross-gender conversation, males have the tendency to provide a straightforward solution. Such demeanour normally puzzles and frustrates women because they simply want to talk about the problem and to be understood. Phrases such as “I know how you feel,” “It’s just as once happened to me,” or “Tell more about it” are the ones females yearn for when talking. This contention is rooted in the fact that little girls grow up in a world of intimacy, a world in which being a friend means sharing feelings and exchanging secrets. Little boys, conversely, acquire language in the context of making their way in larger, more competitive and hierarchical groups.
Thus, understanding both the different ways in which males and females produce and receive language and the expectation gap between them can enlighten the issue of cross-gender conversation and the difficulties thereof. Scholarly endeavour has also shown that an extended use of adjectives, referring tones, tag-questions and ambiguous remarks distinguish woman’s talk from men’s. The latter, on the contrary, seem to be more easily inclined to use assertions, the language of humour and less polite statements. Particularly at home, males are more likely to produce more concise utterances. It is on the basis of these differences that the conclusion that men are more confident than women is drawn. As far as expectations are concerned, women seem to value connection and rapport over other pragmatic intentions, whereas males are more concerned with status, practical solutions and power. In conclusion, an overall consideration of the phenomenon above described can not only help members of both sexes to know how their conversations may be improved but also ease the burden of not being understood.
7 comments:
Hi Rony, the article is interesting. I think there are obvious differencies between the way women talk and the way men do it. For instance, it's mentioned in the article that women rely on tag questions and rising tones, suggesting their speech to be less uncertain than that of men. Additionally, it's mentioned that expletives and bad mannered formulas are more frequently used among men, while courtesy subjuncts are found among women. With reference to this last statement,I wonder if this is so. The other day, I was travelling by bus from Merlo to Moreno hearing a group of women sitting at the back of the bus and going to dance who were totally irrespective of themselves when conversating and talking to each other with absolute bad words rather than with courtesy subjuncts. Frankly speaking, one of them was so bad mannered when talking, that I thought she was a soccer fan shouting in a stadium. This puts into evidence the fact that women can sometimes be as bad mannered as men rarely are. Careful, I've just mentioned a particular fact that I observed a couple of days ago, from where I've already drawn a particular conclusion. This does not necesarily mean that I am generalizing from that particular incident in that bus the idea that all women tend to behave in such a way when conversating. I agree with your article that a 99% of women are very kind and by far sweeter than men when talking. ok Bye. nestor
testing
first of all, i thank you nestor for taking the trouble to read the article. as regrads your impression that the language that some of "our" females teenagers use is far far away from being standard and polite, i confess that i am fully aware of it. i word at high school :) however, think of the boys... if they are even worse the generalization still works. if not, we can think that the social expectations that i refer to at the begining of the paper are being challenge. now that i think about it... very likely. what do you think?
Yes Ronaldo, I agree with you that these social expectations are being challenged. By the way, could you please tell me whether or not the following hypothetical situation refer to the concept of 'cross gender conversation' with its difficulties? Supposing a boy is in couple, deeply in love with his fiancee. Due to this reason, they have plenty of things to talk to each other at the start of their relationship. However, as years pass, their relationshionship starts cooling, with difficulness in their conversation. For example, the girl tells the boy about her personal situations but this is so far distracted that ignores completely what she has been trying to say. He acts as though he were in another planet. For this matter, the girl believes he is somewhat undermining her and hungs up with him. The question I would like to ask you is if this situation can be labelled or categorized as one of the difficulties within the concept of 'cross gender conversation' between male and female relation . Well bye.
well... i don't think i have an "answer" but these are the things that come to my mind. the situation you bring about (a quite regular one by the way) can indeed be looked at from this socio linguistic perspective. however, they must be other things there that deserve consideration. conversations may fail due to the distintion in the use of language which i refer to, but they may also fail because of pride, self-centerness, lack of interes,etc.
the whole picture should be looked at in each case.
Ok, so failures in conversation should be considered form different angles. I mean, taking into account the emotive aspect of the person participant of the act of communication and the distinction in the use of language of the participants as well. I do not why, but this reminds me of Susana's classes in third, when she referred to Edgar Morin with his complex thinking as a way of considering a matter of study or any phenomenon not only from a specific part, but regarding the overall aspects that affects the phenomenon in question. Well, very interesting indeed. As soon as I can, I will try to write something to publish on the blog too. Bye
i look foward to reading it.
take care!
Post a Comment