English investigation Essay

cornerstoneFor this project I am going to prove how wowork force and custody lead when employ language in everyday situations?There bring on been many previous research finding and conclusions near gender and parleyal behaviour.For typeface Jennifer Coates identified two appeales, which she describes as dominance and difference. Jennifer Coates was a writer to wrote ab bulge out the language differences between men and women.Dominance argues that because women oc cupy a slight powerful position in society than men, their constitutional behaviour is less(prenominal) assertive and less confident. Men atomic number 18 dominant within society, so it is non surprising that they tend to dominate mixed sex conferences.Women are give tongue to to be used to antheral dominance, and as a moderate of affable conditioning allow for often be polite and courteous when speaking to men.Whereas the idea of difference is where the focus is more on differences in antheral and fe male attitudes and determine, that are said to be inculcated from childhood, when we form, and are influenced by, whiz sex peer groups. Studies of childrens play have ready that in boys hazards at that place is more emphasis on contest and confrontation, while girls games are more accommodative. In adulthood, womens talk often focuses on personal feelings and problems and this helps to explain why their approach to conversation is more sympathetic and supportive. Also thisDescription of DataMy information consists of triplet imitations one, which took place in a college open fireteen between quartette girls meaning it, was very informal and casual.My second replica took place on a college field while three boys were watching a game of football played by fellow peers. They discussed the game and in any case had stage setting conversations.My third transcript is of three girls talking close to the world cup football match very briefly while talking more about football a nd surrounding topics. I felt that my first transcript I recorded was not sufficient enough to be meditated salubrious and in detail, I therefore recorded a further transcript to increase my info and to make a more intricate analysis.AimsThe school of my probe is to find out to what completion are there meaningful differences in the ways that men and women behave on conversation.MethodologyFor my investigation I collected three transcripts I did this, as this is the most trenchant way of collecting sufficient data that I would be fitted to analyse for my specific subject. I am going to timber at how women talk in casual situations looking at aspects that expert researchers have make up such as Jennie Coates, she found two approaches based on the ideas of dominance and difference which I result look at and strive to find out to what extent do my transcripts prove this.I will withal look at cooperation and competition as the experts have found that boys take care to be more competitive when using language whereas girls happen uponm to be more co operative, as yet though this research was proved by using children as utilizations I would still like to see if it is still the case when men and woman are older and to what extent they still either are competitive or cooperative when using language.As come up as looking as what the experts have found I am also going to look at the social function played by the vocalisers in my transcript and relate it too attitudes and values as well as educational background, which is pretty much the aforementioned(prenominal) for each speaker as they all go to the some college. I will also look into the social class of the speakers. I will look at the status, purpose, context and audience for each transcript and analyse each topic accordingly.I am also going to look at the 6 frameworks lexis, semantics, phonology, graphology, grammar, discourse, pragmatics and the sociolinguistics which has been defines as the study of language in its social context.AnalysisFirst of all I am going to analyse the context of my data. The first transcript is between tetrad friends occasionally quin when they contribute to the conversation. The conversation is very informal and very casual with no real meaning or purpose except for socialising during crumble succession, which means the conversation is sort of forced to some extent even though they were talking about what they liked to talk about. All the women contributed as I would say to the conversation.Although women are characteristically and socially known for existence quite capable and good at making conversation there is not a lot of prove from the experts or researchers that suggests that males do not make conversation or are any less capable. indeed when looking at the mens conversation I byword that they were just as able and good at making conversation. The mens conversation was between three plurality occasionally four or five when th ey contributed to the conversation. This conversation was also very informal and casual and was also something that the men wanted to talk about. In the conversation you bottom of the inning see that between them there is one more dominant male who tends to initiate conversation and interrupt or overlap former(a) speakers also could be know as holding the floor. hitherto I researched about dominance in conversation and read, you just dont understand- men and women in conversation by Deborah Tanning and she said claiming that interruption is a sign of dominance assumes that conversation is an activity in which one speaker speaks at a time, but this reflects ideology more than practice. She also said that she recorded conversations in which many voices were heard at once and it was occur that everyone was having a good time. She wherefore asked people of their impressions of the conversation and they said they had enjoyed themselves. However when she played the tape back they were embarrassed about their conversational style. Which suggests that when people being female or male do dominate the conversation they maybe dont realise they are doing it.I also found that in my other female conversation between three girls there was one slightly more dominant histrion chiefly due to her personality, however it was also in most cases successful cooperative over lapping as the over lapping is positive and as Deborah tanning says in her book the overlaps are cooperative because they do not change the topic but elaborate on it. However in my male conversation there is unsuccessful cooperative overlapping as for example when a participant says he had England trials (referring to a friend out side the conversation) another participant says yer but dont he look like peter pan which is quite negative and simoleons the conversation which is a negative response that does not enable the conversation to carry on without changing the topic.In one of my transcripts where the four or five female participants are talking on participant says, slue she looks real bad (referring to a celebrity in a cartridge that looks rough) by saying the word really she is intensifying what she is saying. In my other transcripts there are two examples of women using intensifiers, one where a participant says, shes really pretty and another when a participant says well I think peter crouch is actually quite really cuteRobin Lakoff published an influential account of womens language. In a related article she published a set of radical assumptions about what marks out the language of women.Among these assumptions were the use of intensifiers especially the linguistic process so and very for example Im so joyful to see you I found intensifiers within my female transcripts but no(prenominal) in my male transcripts. However as my transcripts were quite short and the time I had to collect my data was limited if I had more data I could have compared this more fairly to get better and faired results.Zimmerman and westerly (1915) taped informal conversations between students in coffee bars, shops and other earth places. They found that women talk about feelings whereas men talk more about things. Women conversation is often focused on personal experiences, relationships and problems.The topic of male conversation tends to be more concrete, relating to information, facts objects and activities. And from my own experiences these finding are spotless but also my data could also suggest this as well, for example in my females transcripts there is reference to a personal experience that doesnt really play a part in the structure of the conversation, it is quite random.The participant says Rory always corrects my spelling its well annoying on msn he always like types things in a little star and then says correct spelling the participate gets interrupted while saying this as it is nothing to do with the conversation. Also in my transcript I can see that m en use more taboo language than women do for example in my male conversation one participant says nookie legend whereas in my female conversation there was no profane swearing words used. However as my transcripts were quite short they do not relate to all females.