Power as an Issue in Language Studies - Essay Example

Why is Power an issue in Language Studies? Discuss in relation to Gender From time immemorial, language is always an important part of human activity, as it not only aids in communication but also expresses an individual’s thought process, defines his/her cultural and national identities, influences others’ thought process and action, etc, etc. Although, “mother tongue” will be the main language that a child will be exposed and will start to learn, languages naturally evolve in individuals based on what they hear, feel and even see from their childhood in their environment. When an individual speaks a language, the words spoken, the tone with which it was uttered, pauses, etc., will all happen, based on the individual’s thought process. At the same time that thought process and the resultant language could be influenced by wide range of factors starting from that individual’s gender to the identity of power, he/she wants to exhibit. That is, a single word uttered by a male and then by a female could provide different meanings and connotation. On the same lines, if an individual wants to reflect or exhibit his/her mental power, he/she may exhibit through the language or the spoken words. Thus, it can be said languages cannot be expressed without involving other symbol systems like gender and power. Gender and power can be synonymously used when one looks at the male-female gender equation. That is, from earlier times, due to physical, cultural and even historical reasons, men have always had power over women in most of the situation. Although, that equation has changed or changing in the current times, still in certain scenarios, men hold power in their gender equation with women. That holding and exhibiting of power can be visible in the languages or words spoken by the men. Thus, the focus will be on how and why power is an issue in language studies, with gender playing a key influencing role. Speaking of language studies, particularly in relation to gender and the role of power, extensive studies were being done for the past 20 years, which have been providing key perspectives. “Studies of language and gender in the past twenty years have looked at many different dimensions of language use and have offered a rich variety of hypotheses about the interaction between gender and language and especially about the connection of power to that interaction.” (Eckert & McConnell-Ginet, 1999). Before delving into what started or triggered these gender based language studies, it is important to understand how studying about languages could be ambiguous in nature, with stereotypes and traditions plaguing those studies. This is particularly relevant when one studies languages in relation to gender and power equations. “With no access to abstract constructs like linguistic systems and social categories and relations, we could not hope to engage in any kind of illuminating investigation into how and why language and gender interact.” (McConnell-Ginet, 2011, pg.94). Although, this indefinite nature is present in the language studies involving gender and power, certain studies by experts have provided strong as well as in-depth perspectives regarding why power is a key issue in language, when it involves gender. The basic perspective is, when it comes to conversation or communication between a male and a female, power is reflected in all aspects of that communication starting from what the actual topic for conversation to the language or words which are spoken. Although both male and female will try to exhibit their power through the language spoken, the commonly held perception is male will try to assert their power more than the women. In a way, it seems that male as an extension of their dominating behaviour over women could also use language to strengthen that domination in their personal as well as social circles. Gal (1991, pg.197) validates this perspective by observing “that power is more than an authoritative voice in decision making, and that its strongest form may well be the ability to define social reality, to impose visions of the world.” Although common viewpoints were there among the experts as well as among the general public regarding the role of gender and power during language expression, language studies in relation to gender and power got initiated in 1960s and 1970s. The Feminist movements in the Western countries in 1960s were a major reason, but the prominent 1973 book, Language and Womans Place written by Robin Lakoff was the main trigger. However, before that book, in 1922 grammarian Otto Jespersen came up with a book titled, Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin, which dealt with gender role in language expression. In the book, Jespersen talks about “Deficit” theory according to which language spoken by adult male is the “standard”, thereby the language spoken by the women is deficient. “In Jespersen’s work, male language is normative and the language of others (the ‘child’, the ‘foreigner’ and the ‘woman’) is considered extra to that norm and, as such, deficient.” (Mellor, 2010). This approach by using the language spoken by men as the benchmark, in a way, dubbed that the language spoken by women as inherently wrong. Here, the power was not bestowed on the men as their language was viewed as standard and not superior. However, the power directly or indirectly got shifted to men, or if said aptly got strengthened, when new studies particularly that of Robin Lakoff emerged challenging Jespersen’s Deficient idea. That is, the book along with other works of Lakoff brought out key perspectives of how men were viewed as superior and powerful to women, and so women are subjugated in all aspects including in the way language is used during communication between a man and a woman. In the book, Lakoff came up with a “womens register,” through which she argued that women are stereotypically kept in a restricted state by men and the society, particularly when it comes to communication, in order continue their inferior role in the society. That is, Lakoff stated women due to subjugation from their childhood are facilitated or even forced to speak the language in a certain way, when interacting with males. “The marginality and powerlessness of women is reflected in both the ways women are expected to speak, and the ways in which women are spoken of.” (Lakoff, 1973, pg. 45). In addition, women are also restricted from expressing their feeling through strong language, and instead favoured to express their feelings and also the thought process with uncertainty. Thus, Lakoff (1973, pg. 45) stressed that by subjugating women through language, “The personal identity of women is linguistically submerged; with the language working against the treatment of women, as serious persons with individual views.” While focusing on language studies regarding gender and power, it is clear that subjugation of women through language were done mainly as an exhibition of power by men. That is, as mentioned above, men due to physical, cultural and historical reasons held a superior position in their gender equation with women. To further accentuate that position and also gain more power, they used language. In a way, men through the language they spoke, wanted to reflect their power, and at the same time ‘forced’ women to speak the language in such a way, to reveal that those women had no such power. After the publication of Lakoff’s Language and Womans Place, other scholars started doing studies, which supported or countered Lakoff’s arguments. In addition, those studies brought in newer perspectives, and when one looks at those studies, one can see that power has become a key issue. That is, when the deficit argument was refined by other scholars, it led to the formation of the so-called “dominance approach,” which strongly reflected how power differences between male and female led to gender inequalities during speaking of languages. Jennifer Coates has focused on and studied this approach in her book, Women, Men and Language, by stating how dominance and the resultant power is always associated with the male member of the population, with the female members seen as the subordinate group. (Coates, 1986). This association of power with men gives them the upper hand in conversation and use of language, thereby resulting in male-centred language. This strengthening of power on men in the case of language studies through this dominance approach was ascribed by scholars like Don Zimmerman and Candace West as well. Zimmerman and West (1975, pg.106) had this to say in this regards, “Just as male dominance is exhibited through male control of macro-institutions in society, it is also exhibited through male control of at least a part of micro-institutions like languages.” In some of the studies done regarding languages, in relation to gender and power in language use, it was clear that this dominance by the men was “quantified by means of interruptions, tag questions, silences, length of utterance and number utterances.” (Keating, 1988). Among these modes of dominance, scholars were of the view that men maximally adopt the strategy of interrupting. By interrupting the speaking of women with irrelevant comments and questions, they could try to establish their dominance and thereby reflect their power. Women, on the other hand, are powerless regarding their social as well as economic position, and that leads to fewer interruptions from their side during cross-sex conversations. (Kunsmann, n. d). In some cultures, men could also use questions to impede and thereby dominate their conversations with their female counterparts. That is, on the lines of the no-gap-rule, men could continuously ask questions, without allowing the women to express their point fully, thus using questions as a controlling mechanism. “When questions in form of facilitative rather than polite or modal tag-questions, therefore, are combined with a specific statement they can be used to maintain or to control the direction of the conversation.” (Kunsmann, n. d). This strategy could be used by men to increase their power, and thereby dominate the female members, with whom they are having the conversation. Apart from interrupting and raising questions, men could highlight their power by speaking verbosely. This aspect of power was also studied as part of language studies, with Helena Leet-Pellegrini stating how confident males would speak more verbosely when compared to their female counterparts. (Leet-Pellegrini, 1980). Jennifer Coates supports this above perspective by pointing out how male students in their classrooms by exhibiting their power and talking verbosely get maximum attention from their teachers, and that results in performing well and gaining confidence. The exhibition of power by men during conversations in a way implies that the men are more focused on elevating their status, while women on the other hand, are less focused on power, and so are more concerned regarding forming as well as maintaining relationships. By lowering their stress on power and also by telling stories revolving around others and not about themselves, women are more likely to find friends, while men would continue to place high priority for power by coming up with stories in which they will be positively and highly portrayed. Thus, statements like "women emphasize connection in their talk whereas men seek status" may have some statistical support within a particular community.” (McConnell-Ginet, 2011, pg.94). From the above analysis, it is clear that the issue of power is focused in many language studies, particularly when the study is done in relation to gender. As power is bestowed on the male members of the population due to physical, cultural and historical reasons, it gets outputted in various ways particularly during speaking of languages or words. With men taking the dominant role, and the women being suppressed and subjugated, the words spoken by the men also reflect their dominance and power. While speaking a language with women, men would exhibit their dominance by adopting various strategies like interruption, questioning, speaking verbosely, etc., all of which would reflect their power as well. .References Coates, J. (1986). Women, Men and Language: A Sociolinguistic Account of Gender Differences in Language. London: Longman. Eckert, P & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1999). “Communities of practice: Where language, gender, and power all live.” In Kira Hall, M. Bucholtz and B. Moonwomon (eds)., Locating Power, Proceedings of the 1992 Berkeley Women and Language Conference. Berkeley: Berkeley Women and Language Group, 89-99. Retrieved from: http://www.stanford.edu/~eckert/PDF/Communitiesof.pdf Gal, S. (1991). “Between Speech and Silence: The Problematic of Research on Language and Dender.” In M. diLeonard (ed.). Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge. 175-203. Berkeley: University of California Press. Keating, E. (1988). Power Sharing: Language, Rank, Gender and Social Space in Pohnpei, Micronesia. London: Oxford University Press Kunsmann, P. (n. d). Gender, Status and Power in Discourse Behavior of Men and Women. Retrieved from: http://www.linguistik-online.de/1_00/KUNSMANN.HTM Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and Womans Place. Language in Society, 2 (1): pp. 45-80 Leet-Pellegrini, H. M. (1980) “Conversational Dominance as a function of Gender and Expertise.” In H. Giles, P. W. Robinson & P. M. Smith (eds). Language: Social Psychological Perspectives. pp. 97-104. Oxford: Pergamon Press. McConnell-Ginet, S. (2011). Gender, Sexuality, and Meaning: Linguistic Practice and Politics. London: Oxford University Press. Mellor, B. (2010). Deficit, Dominance, Difference and Discursive: the Changing Approaches to Language and Gender. Retrieved from: http://atp.uclan.ac.uk/buddypress/diffusion/?p=736 Zimmerman, D and West, C. (1975). “Sex roles, Interruptions and Silences in Conversation.” In B. Thorne & N. Henly (eds.). Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance. pp. 105-29. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury Publishers. Read More