Women Linguistic Behavior Is Seen as Part of a Shift in Cultural Loyalty for a Better Life in the Aimed-At Speech Community
Such a difference in thinking process appeared because of some physiological characteristics. The sections of man brain operate more independently, while the two brain hemispheres of woman’s brain has more nerve cables interconnecting. Moreover, typically men hormone testosterone contributes to focusing one’s attention, while woman hormone estrogen tends to promote typically female web thinking. It is considered that women while speaking can find an appropriate word easily than men. As Mark Twain said, “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightening and the lightning bug.” This very tendency begins from early childhood: girls babble definitely more than boys. Girls even start talking with longer utterances and more complex grammatical constructions before boys do. The scientists came to the conclusion that these two types of thinking were “build” during a very long time of womenmen evolution, where both of them were involved in the contrasting occupations. Actually, women use more standard language because they are expected by society to do so. If women act in a rule-breaking way they are judged more severe than men would be judged in the same situation. All over again this stereotyping sticks to the fact that women are associated with family-keepers that raises the children. Moreover language differences appear because of the physical aspects of human body, because of the education and the millions of years of human evolution.
and Zimmerman, D., 1985). In addition, I have argued that in many of these instances, the usage has been a conscious choice, supporting the difference approach in sex speech styles. Rather than acknowledging an imbalance of power between the sexes, I have supported the claim that speech styles are different due to contrasting interaction purposes. For women this includes the payoff of connection and solidarity. Often evaluated with men’s language as the norm, misunderstanding of women’s speech intentions is common. There are problems, however, with any research that attempts to define characteristics of men’s or women’s speech. First is the interpretation of differences. Associations that are found between specific feature use and women’s language should not be assumed to take place in all situations or contexts. As seen in Ian’s excessive minimal response use, for example, gender differences are not absolute. Secondly, many conversational features, such as tag questions and interruptions, do not have set functions (not to mention researcher’s varied definitions). An interpretation of a particular feature, in addition to a speaker’s intention, can only be done within the setting of the interaction (Trudgill, P. 1983).
Trudgill, P. 1983. Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society. Penguin.
West, C. and Zimmerman, D., 1985. ‘Gender, language and discourse. Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol. 4, Discourse analysis in society. van Dijk, T. A. (ed.).
Woods, N. 1989. ‘Talking shop: sex and status as determinants of floor apportionment in a working setting.’ in Coates, J. and Cameron, D. (eds.) 1989. Women in Their Speech Communities. 141-157. Longman.
Zimmerman, D. and West, C., 1975. ‘Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation.’ in Thorne and Henley (eds.).