Discussion of Variation in Language Use across Gender:Biological versus Sociological Theories

Journal By: Courtney M. Bell 

Philip M. McCarthy

Danielle S. McNamara

 

 Discussion of the Journal

INTRODUCTION

Gender is fact of being male or female (Oxford University Press, 2003). The term of gender is used rather than sex because has come to refer to categories distinguished by biological characteristics, while gender is more appropriate for distinguishing people on the basis of their socio-cultural behavior, including speech. The discussion of gender focuses on contrasts between features of women’s and men’s speech. The concept of gender allows for describing masculine and feminine behaviors in terms of scales or continua rather than absolute categories. Furthermore, gender is contextually defined and fluid, predicting that males and females use a variety of linguistic strategies.

SUMMARY OF JOURNAL

This journal examines gender differences in language use in light of the biological and social construction theories of gender. The biological theory defines gender in terms of biological sex resulting in polarized and static language differences based on sex. The social constructionist theory of gender assumes gender differences in language use depend on the context in which the interaction occurs. To determine if there was a difference in the number of self references, social words, and positive and negative emotion words males and females use, this journal conducted a one-way ANOVA on each variable. There was not a significant difference for males and females in positive emotion words, nor a significant difference between males and females for negative emotion words.

DISCUSSION

1.        BACKGROUND

Men and women have long been in dispute over things such as spending, emotions, division of labor, and male withdrawal during conflict. One of the factors that may contribute to the continuation of such disputes is language differences between the two genders.

2.        PURPOSE

To investigate whether the biological theory of gender or social constructionist theory of gender will better predict gender styles of language use, and  whether stereotypical language differences as predicted by the biological theory of gender persist within an emotional context.

3.        THEORY

•            Model of gender-marked language use is based on the assumptions of the biological theory.

•     Model of gender-marked conflict styles also provides an example of how researchers’ theoretical orientation towards gender influences their explanations of gender and language variation

•          Models predict that males will always use a linguistic style that reflect their concern for themselves, rules, dominance, and competition, whereas females will always use a linguistic style that reflects their affiliative nature, concern for others rather than themselves, cooperation, nurturance, and submission (Sheldon, 1990).

•            Coates and Johns on (2001) suggest that language and communication are integrally tied to the context in which they occur.

•            Found similar results in emotion talk between same and mixedgender dyads.

•            Anderson and Leaper’s study of actual behavior revealed no significant differences between same and mixed dyads.

•            Coates and Johnson also report that emotion talk was best predicted by the topic of conversation such that when subjects talked about an emotionally laden topic, more emotion talk occurred regardless of Gender.

4.        METHODS

Materials

A corpus of 54 texts, 27 by males and 27 by females, was generated from counseling transcripts of the relationship column “Can This Marriage Be Saved?” from the Ladies Home Journal website at www.lhj.com.

Procedure

Ladies Home Journal relationship column, “Can This Marriage Be Saved?”