Unit 2: Early Theories and Critiques

Question 1

Language and Gender: Paradigms

Answer 1

Historically, there have been four primary approaches to studying language and gender—based on observations of social dynamics between gender(ed) groups and how these were expressed or reflected at the level of language:

1) Deficit Paradigm
2) Difference Paradigm
3) Dominance Paradigm
4) Performative Paradigm

Question 2

1) Deficit Paradigm

Answer 2

The Deficit Paradigm attributes a content-related deficit to women’s language
- men’s language as the standard norm
- women’s language deviates from the norm and is therefore insufficient

Issues:
- very little scientific data; rather, an anecdotal phenomenon:
- eg: “Hall of Mirrors” (Eckert & McConnell)
- eg: “a woman’s thought is no sooner formed than uttered” (Jespersen 1922)
- very VERY sexist; perpetuation of linguistic hegemony

Question 3

Linguistic Hegemony

Answer 3

Linguistic Hegemony expresses and maintains power dynamics through language
- articulated by Antonio Gramsci (1971), an Italian Marxist philosopher
- “powerless believe in the system that causes their powerlessness, and often even collude in its perpetuation” (Kiesling 2019)

Question 4

2) Difference Paradigm

Answer 4

The Difference Paradigm states that there is a fundamental difference in “men’s” and “women’s” languages—this difference is inherent, rather than a conscious choice
- one is not better than the other

Attributable to different communication styles (Tannen 1990)
- eg: the interrupting man simply has a different style (more competitive) than women

Cross-gender talk is cross-cultural communication (Maltz & Borker 1982)
- gender-segregated play in childhood
- different genders have different sub-cultures; different goals, conventions

Question 5

Difference Paradigm Issues

Answer 5

Issues:
- why do subcultures arise? how do they arise?
- difference between men and women based in stereotypes (eg. women are nurturing, men are competitive)
- differences assumed to be inherent; lack of awareness on the part of individuals that display linguistic differences
- fails to account for variation within gender groups
- men and women BOTH use a variety of communicative styles depending on context, scope and genre
- binary classifications of gender identity and expression

Question 6

3) Dominance Paradigm

Answer 6

The Dominance Paradigm states that language differences are the result of men’s dominance and privilege, and the oppression of women
- behavioural differences expressed through language are enactments of male privilege

Language = “a way of ‘doing’ power in face-to-face interaction” (West & Zimmerman 1983)

Women do more “interactional shitwork” of facilitating talk just as they are expected to perform other undervalued labor (Fishman 1978)

Question 7

Dominance Paradigm Issues

Answer 7

Issues:
- no discussion of the intersections of power and inequality, focusing on patriarchy and ignoring other demographics (class, race, sexuality, etc.)
- description of male dominance overly broad—no context specified: in which situations, via which institutions, with which words, etc. does a group express dominance?
- no recognition of choice on the part of individuals to a form of self-expression or communication

Question 8

4) Performative Paradigm

Answer 8

Performative Paradigm: gender is something that we do
- social practices are adopted or appropriated by men, women, non-binary individuals, etc. and become iconically associated with masculinity or femininity
- features and use of language are consciously and unconsciously drawn upon to express and perform different masculinities or femininities

Question 9

Women and Language (Lakoff 1973, 1975)

Answer 9

Lakoff’s Language and Women’s Place recognized as the first feminist perspective on language and gender
- foundational article (1973) in the field, later published as a book (1975)
- 1970s: second-wave feminism, challenging hegemonic power dynamics

Linguistic consciousness raising: making the public aware of hegemonic dynamics in expressions of gender in language:
- descrimination against women
- invalidation of women’s individual views

Question 10

Lakoff’s Double Bind

Answer 10

Women “systematically denied access to power” (Lakoff 1975) through language
- even if women decide to use more powerful language, they are considered “unladylike” and thus less “successful” than if they adhered to the disempowering power dynamics expressed through their language

Double bind persists in:
1) the language used by women
- expletive
- tag questions
- uptalk
2) the language used to talk about women
- “lady” as a euphemism
- titles of address

Question 11

1) Language used by women:
Expletives

Answer 11

Expletives
Weaker expletives are part of “women’s language”:
- eg: “oh my, you forgot to fill up the gas tank again” (more characteristic of women)
- than“oh fuck, you forgot to fill up the gas tank again” (associated with men)
- a learned trait, mirroring non-linguistic differences
- men are allowed to rage, boys are punished less severely for tantrums
- rageful behaviour by a woman would have her labelled “hysterical” or “crazy”

Reinforces men’s position of power and independence
- women’s ‘correct’ option reduces her autonomy, power and seriousness
- used to express women’s powerlessness and invalidate their reactions; emotional repression
- a “lady doesn’t swear”; passivity imposed on women

Question 12

1) Language used by women:
Tag Questions

Answer 12

Tag Questions
a. Is John here? (question)
b. John is here, isn’t he? (seeking conformation)
c. I has my glasses off, that was John, wasn’t it? (perception)
d. The war in Vietnam is terrible, isn’t it? (*opinion)

Lakoff suggests that women use tags like (b-d) more than men
- low commitment to statement
- avoidance of conflict
- women are expected to be less certain

Question 13

1) Language used by women:
Tag Question Issues

Answer 13

Tag Q Issues: (Lakoff)
- no commitment = uncertainty
- confirmation of statement deferred to addressee
- speaker thus apprears to not have any real opinions of their own
- no conflict = passive
- opp: not women’s language, instead used to establish flow in dialogue

Question 14

1) Language used by women:
Uptalk

Answer 14

Uptalk: rising intonation at the end of a declarative clause
- aka “high-rising terminals”

Example
Speaker 1: “when will dinner be ready?”
Speaker 2: “oh, around six o’clock.” / “oh, around six o’clock?”

For Lakoff, this signals “unwillingness to assert an opinion” and plays “a part in not taking a woman seriously, or trust her with any real responsibilities”
- indecisiveness
- uncertainty
- unwillingness to asser an opinion

Question 15

2) Language used to talk about women:
“Lady” as a euphemism

Answer 15

Euphemism: something said to lighten the impact of an unpleasant statement or to avoid direct mention of the unpleasant fact (eg: “his aunt passed away” instead of died)

Lakoff—lady is a euphemism for woman that reduces bodily autonomy
a. euphemism removes the sexual connotation of “woman”
- eg: “she’s only sixteen, but she’s already a woman/lady”

b. “lady” is used to ennoble (lend greater dignity to) professions viewed as unpleasant by mainstream society
- “gentleman” does not have this connotation
- eg: cleaning lady; cleaning gentleman

Question 16

2) Language used to talk about women:
Title of address

Answer 16

Title of Address:
Relation
Women are more likely than men to be referred to by their relations, especially to men:
- John’s wife
- Sarah’s daughter
- Antonio’s sister
Reflects the idea that women are defined primarily by their relations, rather than as individuals

Mr. vs Mrs/Ms/Miss
- Mr.: male title doesn’t refer to marital status
- Ms.: unmarried woman
- Mrs.: married woman
- Mx.: suggests that the relevant contrast is indeed gender rather than marital status (likely due to similarity to Ms)

Last Name
a. “Hi, Harry Potter!” “Hi, Hermoine Granger!”
b. “Hello, Mr. Potter!” “Hello, Miss Granger!”
c. “Hi, Harry!” “Hi, Hermoine!”
d. “Hey, Potter!” “Hey, Granger!”

Lakoff (1973): “I have virtually never encountered last-name alone for women”

Question 17

“Lip Service on the Fantasy Lines” (Hall 1995)

Answer 17

Kira Hall (1995): a series of interviews with women working in the phone sex industry—relationship between emotional labor and empowerment

Illustrates how workers manipulate and co-opt stereotypical language (depicting them as powerless) to gain a position of power

Question 18

Hall (1995):
a. Recall the discussion of symbolic capital and women’s reputations. Are the findings of the paper consistent with the idea that women are evaluated based on who they appear to be, or does it challege this assumption?

Answer 18

• expectation to uphold “appearance”—women’s worth is dependent on their ability to conform
• fantasy line job = anonymous, preserves any reputation they have in the capital sphere
• people in sex work are less respected, not taken seriously

Question 19

Hall (1995):
b. In the interviews, the hotline workers made it clear that the fantasy line services allowed them greater economic freedom and social power. Why is this the case? What are potential counterexamples?

Answer 19

Greater economic freedom/social power:
- basically their own boss (few interactions with company owner)
- create their own hours
- side hustle—extra $$$ while working other day jobs/studying/creating
- power in client dynamic: ability to choose who they serve
- employees found there was a better work environment, working conditions and more empathy at women-owned hotlines

Less economic freedom/social power:
- no access to benefits, healthcare, unions
- high social stigma surrounding sex work
- income = based off performance, ability to work

Question 20

Hall (1995):
c. Imagine and describe a community of practice where female sex workers do not have to utilize “women’s language”

Question 21

Hall (1995):
d. How does Lakoff’s “double bind” affect the phone sex workers, and the power dynamics in their work?

Answer 21

Subverting the double bind:
- through their line of work
- freeing, reclamation of power

Perpetuating the double bind:
- embodying passiveness/submissiveness
- they enter the industry knowing the reality of how they’ll be treated