On a cross-national level, the effect of gender on language has been getting much attention that is spurring even deeper attention. The model developed by Gumperz for language differences and tensions between ethnic interactional groups has been expanded by Maltz & Borker to included differences and tensions between genders and further elaborated upon by Tannen.
It has been established that there are different gender based norms of language use that develop in childhood for boys and girls--and are in some cultures intentionally fostered by restricted vocabulary--and these separate norms carry over to adulthood, in some cultures without (until recently) the benefit of knowing there are separate norms. The result is that often in cultures, or communities of practice, women think men are breaking the norm while men think women are breaking the norm, so each representative of the gender may harbor an idea of the offenses of the other.
One impact relates to power. In dual-gender interaction occurrences, which norm has the power to govern the interaction? This is a question that is presently receiving research attention. The developing models seek to establish the place of individual choice--individual agency--in determining dual-gender interactive power since the idea that the gender-mutual view of violated norms rests solely on inadequate information about the existence of those norms is open to strong challenge.
[Consult "Think Practically and Look Locally: Language and Gender as Community-Based Practice" by Penelope Eckert and Sally McConnell-Ginet from which this answer was drawn for in-depth information].
No comments:
Post a Comment