4

I imagine that people will instinctively say, "There is no masculine or feminine speech in English," but I am not so sure.

For instance, the stereotype is that men speak roughly and women speak softly.

Then there is the usage of tag questions, fillers, and raising one's voice pitch so that the sentence sounds like a question.

Then again, it may be a question of assertiveness.

I hope someone knows what I am talking about!

ermanen
  • 62,797
Micheal Gignac
  • 219
  • 3
    Could you make this question more specific? Surely there are statistical differences between genders in many aspects of speech on average, but this will very a great deal between dialects and trying to enumerate all of them is far too broad of a question. – alphabet Sep 23 '23 at 22:13
  • 2
    Such a question isn't really on-topic for ELU. The rules of grammar are gender-agnostic. – TimR Sep 23 '23 at 22:23
  • 5
    @TimR There's nothing against sociolinguistic questions on EL&U. Not all interesting questions about English are about grammar. (but most are, of course) – Araucaria - Him Sep 23 '23 at 23:59
  • @Araucaria-Him How about questions relating to effeminate man speech patterns vs macho man speech patterns? – TimR Sep 24 '23 at 09:31
  • 7
    I think it's a fascinating question but very broad, and perhaps better addressed in a PhD or, indeed, the entirety of an academic career. There is a lot of prior research into the ways in which men and women use language in different ways, perhaps start with your search engine. – High Performance Mark Sep 24 '23 at 09:39
  • There are a lot of things discussed here - volume, fillers, tags, and upspeak (high rising terminal). The last is already covered in this question and a good Wikipedia article. As already mentioned, google or search academic databases - you already know most of the terminology to search for. – Stuart F Sep 24 '23 at 11:39
  • 1
    Although I've no idea what "men speak roughly" is meant to mean - loudly, talking in general/approximate terms, with more profanity, less politely, with more of a rasping or guttural quality? – Stuart F Sep 24 '23 at 11:42
  • I’m voting to close this question because although this is not a question for ELL, questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic. – Greybeard Sep 24 '23 at 13:34
  • 2
    @Greybeard They are not answered by commonly available references. The suggestions here are, to put it mildly, very silly. – Araucaria - Him Sep 24 '23 at 14:09
  • @Araucaria-Him Google scholar is common and available. The suggestions here are, to put it mildly, very silly. You will find yourself in a minority as far as linguists are concerned - but that is your choice and opinion. – Greybeard Sep 24 '23 at 15:04
  • @Greybeard The direction to Googlescholar is so bad, it's virtually worth flagging. This is A VERY BAD INDICATION to new users of what makes an acceptable question and what counts as research. – Araucaria - Him Sep 24 '23 at 16:30
  • @Araucaria-Him I'm afraid I can't discern your meaning: I am directing the OP to a place where they can start their research as to my mind the question should be closed. What do you think is happening? – Greybeard Sep 24 '23 at 21:01
  • 2
    @Greybeard That you're indicating to new users that they should do more research before asking a question than most respondents (including yourself) ever do before answering one. QED your answer here. – Araucaria - Him Sep 24 '23 at 22:24
  • 1
    @Greybeard Unfortunately, searching Google Scholar isn't really a very good way of introducing yourself to the vast literature on this topic. I might recommend putting this on Meta and asking where you can find a good intro to sociolinguistics and gender. – alphabet Sep 24 '23 at 23:05
  • I disagree. That is not necessary at all. A couple of hours on Google Scholar will give the OP enough background to make decisions and become familiar with this niche area. He's not doing a doctorate. – Greybeard Sep 24 '23 at 23:13
  • 1
    Other concerns aside, I think does need a bit more focus to fit into the site format. Is the distinction between masculine and feminine relevant, or are those a proxy for personality traits? If the question something like "Is there a known relationship between stylistic grammar choices in spoken [written?] English and other non-verbal characteristics, such as assertiveness?" – jimm101 Sep 26 '23 at 17:37
  • @jimm101 It seems like you would have to know something about the topic to assert that the differences are “proxies for personality traits.” Tendencies like how often one interrupts in conversation do appear to be strongly correlated to gender from what I have read. – Casey Sep 27 '23 at 21:03
  • @Casey Yes, and unfortunately it's all outside the domain of EL&U. Some multidisciplinary circling around may be necessary to find something consistent. – jimm101 Sep 29 '23 at 21:14
  • @jimm101 I don't see how you figure. Why is there a sociolinguistics tag if sociolinguistics is out of bounds? – Casey Sep 30 '23 at 06:46

1 Answers1

-5

The website "EduBirdie" has an article entitled "Differences in Language Use by Men and Women" Comparative Analysis.

... women tend to use linguistic devices that focus more on the affective functions than men do. Women communicate in such ways to increase their solidarity while men tend to communicate in such ways which focus on the masculinity and power.

Stylistically men are less flexible than women. The language of men and women has a number of differences in some ways (Lakoff, 1975).

Men prefer to use falling intonation to show their level of confidence of what they are saying and at times power. Conversely, women prefer to use high pitched voice to signify their womanly behavior.

To express feelings,to state something, ..or to describe things, women mostly tend to use adjectives, such as: adorable, sweet, lovely etc. ...than men.

This essay is a broad-brush approach but there is a lot of research (e.g. Google Scholar) that is readily available on this subject and so, with regret, as it is an interesting topic, I will vote to close this question.

Greybeard
  • 41,737
  • 5
    Please do not post an answer and also vote to close. It looks bad. – tchrist Sep 24 '23 at 14:07
  • 4
    I'm skeptical of this website's reliability; many of its claims lack citations and this seems like such a cherry-picked oversimplification of the literature that I find it questionable as an answer to the question. – alphabet Sep 24 '23 at 14:29
  • While the page does provide citations for a few of its facts, others just seem like blindly-repeated sexist stereotypes. Those could be true, sure, but you need evidence. – alphabet Sep 24 '23 at 14:30
  • @tchrist I have addressed this point before in Meta. – Greybeard Sep 24 '23 at 14:49
  • @alphabet you are justified in your doubts - the web page quoted is a mere example and as I say is "broad-brush". You will note that I have made a clear indication that the OP should do his own research. I am merely pointing out that he is not the first and will not be the last to ask this question, or I the first to answer. I would be careful about "stereotypes" and "woke" criticism as some languages alter depending on the sex of the speaker. – Greybeard Sep 24 '23 at 14:50
  • @alphabet Try https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Lakoff_1973.pdf – Greybeard Sep 24 '23 at 14:59
  • 4
    @Greybeard Don't post an answer citing a source whose reliability you yourself find questionable, and instructing the OP to verify its correctness. – alphabet Sep 24 '23 at 14:59
  • @alphabet - I found it "broad-brush": I perhaps am mistaken in my belief that you knew what that meant. It also has a reference in it that I have provided you with. – Greybeard Sep 24 '23 at 15:01
  • 4
    @Greybeard If you find that Lakoff paper a reliable source, by all means post an answer based on it, not on this (frankly) dumbed-down summary. It's an academic paper and thus a much more appropriate source than the link you posted. – alphabet Sep 24 '23 at 15:10
  • 4
    @alphabet The Lakoff is great, but it's 50 years old now and Lakoff was just kicking this kind of research off. Our understanding has changed massively since and so has the language use. But as for that article, the writer is barely literate. – Araucaria - Him Sep 24 '23 at 16:28