Language and Gender - Essay Example

When structuralism proclaims the arbitrary relationship between the signifier and the signified, which has left the speaker and their utterances all wrapped up in relative conventionalism and in the synchronicity of their diachrony; and ever since Simon de Beauvoir has written that one is not born a woman but rather becomes one, we have been provided with the legitimacy to question and challenge inherited social power structures and practices including linguistic ones (Beauvoir 1949/1992, p.281). The process of questioning an existing norm, however, is not an end in itself. It does have to satisfy a certain need even if it is not consciously done so. This particular reasoning is behind the pervasiveness and use of profanity in social interaction in Timothy Jay's article "The Utility and Ubiquity of Taboo Words" (Jay, 2009). Profanity as utility is as much part of language and communication as the norm that defines it as a deviation (Jay, 2009, p.155). According to Jay through the use of taboo/swear words "one can achieve myriads of personal and social goals" (Jay, 2009, p.155). Thus combining the socio-physical context and overarching emotiveness of foul language. For it is at a personal level that the dogmatic inappropriateness of taboo words is initially perceived through inflicted punishment and restrictions. Its inadvertent use, however, conveys a necessity to go beyond the formally recognized means of expression. A psychological sociolinguistic reading of taboo language would probably best describe it as an articulated emotional trespassing. Being extreme in essence it is often associated with extreme emotions and states of mind such as anger, frustration, violence, etc. in the expression of which the two genders perform differently depending on their age and social ranking (Eckert & McConnell-Ginet,2003; James, 1998; Jay, 2009 ). Course language and profanity have always existed in the discourse irrespective of language and culture. Profanity is a form of expression intended to convey a variety of feeling and emotions, as well as to intensify and emphasize a point in such a way that can not be paralleled by using correct and what are deemed appropriate words and expressions. Taboo words are used to express anger; they could be a form of rebellion against social norms as well as a means of belonging to a social group. Their frequent insertion between words in a sentence could be an involuntary way of phrasing, intending no harm and lacking significance, or it could simply be a way to fill the void of a limited vocabulary. Taboo words fall into a number of categories: Taboos in English are placed primarily on sexual references (blow job, cunt) and on those that are considered profane or blasphemous (goddamn, Jesus Christ). Taboos extend to scatological referents and disgusting objects (shit, crap, douche bag); some animal names (bitch, pig, ass); ethnic-racial-gender slurs (nigger, fag, dago); insulting references to perceived psychological, physical, or social deviations (retard, wimp, lard ass); ancestral allusions (son of a bitch, bastard); substandard vulgar terms (fart face, on the rag); and offensive slang (cluster fuck, tit run). (Jay, 2009, p. 154) In Language and Gender Eckert and McConnell-Ginet draw upon Robin Lakoff's 1970s theory about "women's language" (Eckert et al., 2003, p.158). They describe the choice of language utilized by women as historically, socially and culturally determined and sustained through existing power structures related to male dominance. Furthermore, a female is a priori perceived as powerless simply through positioning herself as a woman. Hence the language she uses is a "powerless language" and it prevents her from interactional effectiveness (Eckert et al., 2003, p.159). A type of language, which has been also attributed to other marginalized and discriminated against categories such as homosexuals and people of various racial and ethnic backgrounds. From an early age, people and especially women, are conditioned to perceive certain words as profane, vulgar or taboo and are further conditioned to refrain from using such for a variety of reasons, all related to the popular acceptable social norms and behavior. According to Allan, K. and Burridge, K. (2006) "A taboo is a proscription of behavior for a specifiable community of people, for a specific context, at a given place and time. There is no such thing as an absolute taboo that holds for all worlds, times and contexts (p. 39)." Usage of such dirty words is perceived to be improper, disrespectful displaying bad manners or lack there of. This is especially true for women, since they are considered to be the weaker gender and are bound to a stereotype. "Epithets for taboo topics, and the words naming them, are bad, dirty, filthy, foul, gross, gritty, unclean, vile and so forth; hence the parent's command to a child heard uttering a taboo term: Wash your mouth out! (Allan, K., & Burridge, K., 2006, p. 41)." Because of the social stigma associated with profanity and course language, the taboo words turn into powerful tools of expression for both sexes. Studies show that women's use of profanity in their day-to-day language is more constrained when compared to that of their male counterparts (Hughes, 1992). It is also documented that while women do use course language, it is that of a 'softer' nature, utilizing words that are deemed to be less aggressive and therefore less offensive as per the social norm (Hughes, 1992). This fact could be due to the existing stereotype which is entirely based on the gender bias that women have been burdened with; the stereotypical woman being one that is polite, gracious, feminine and maternal - being viewed as the caring nurturing positive role model in the children's upbringing. Thus, in view of this social bias, it is considered a far worse offence if a woman uses profanity in public than if a man proceeds to do so. The general social environment of interaction also greatly influences the use of profanity by women. The frequent use of foul language depends to a large extent on the social status of the person as well as their surrounding environment. Studies show that the usage of profanity is most common among the less educated, lower class and lower income part of the population. "It seems that there is more overall sexual differentiation of speech in some groups than in others, for example, socioeconomic, age, occupational, and religious (Hughes, 1992, p. 293)." It is very clear in which circumstances the use of profanity is not condoned and where it is an acceptable norm. A study by Hughes (1992) of lower-class women in an impoverished urban area in Britain points out that "the lack of adequate education and the absence of social aspirations ensure that the vernacular of these women is adhere to and sustained; words and accent that differ from their norm are quickly mimicked and ridiculed (p. 297)." This reaffirms the popular saying When in Rome do as the Romans do, suggesting that in order to gracefully fit in a particular social group, one must behave, and in this case chose words that belong to and that are identified with that particular social group. In such circumstances, the level of English used must take into account the physical environment, the auditory and its intellectual capacity. Irrespective of age, gender and socioeconomic position, the use of profanity as well as euphemisms to replace taboo words is widespread. Since euphemisms are socially accepted as stand-in words for profanity, they are used in situations where course language is not tolerated. This is most apparent in the speech of children, young adults and women in such conditions. In most recent literature, euphemisms are used to stand-in for expressions that aim to be politically correct (Allan, K., & Burridge, K., 2006). Even though the use of profanity is mostly associated with men on account of their stereotypical gender biases of being the more aggressive, vulgar and masculine of the sexes, it is well-established that far more than just the concept of gender influences the use of foul language. Social circles as well as socioeconomic position play an important role in the choice of vocabulary and self-expression. Due to its popularity and common usage, it should be of no surprise that the list of profanities and taboo words continues to expand to reflect the diverse and constantly evolving social environment. In their research both Eckert and McConnell-Ginet and Deborah James maintain that women tend to be more social in nature and therefore less self-centered and assertive in the way they communicate, which translates into making others do something (Eckert et al., 2003; James 1998). Male socialization encourages aggressive and self-interested behavior men are more likely to be in positions of power over others, wielding power they can then misuse. (James, 1998, p.405) This is a reference to the study conducted by Deborah James on the use of derogatory terms in male and female lexica. There she draws several conclusions about the use of foul language based on gender. Existing power relations between the genders are nourished where the female is positioned as passive, subordinate, weak, docile (James, 1998). In other words stereotypical. On the other hand men are expected to be successful achievers, imposing and "legitimate" (James, 1998, p.409) in their notion of women in terms of derogation. That is women do see the use of female-biased derogatory terms by men as sanctioning while the opposite is not the case. What is more all of them Jay, James, Eckert and McConnell-Ginet state that men have the upper hand when it comes down to profanity (Eckert et al. 2003; James,1998; Jay, 2009). Eckert-McConnell Ginet (2003) put it as something women are being denied referring to Lakoff's assertion that access to profanity is gender privileged "depriving them (women) of resources they need" (Eckert et al., 2003, p.182).Which brings us back to the idea of profanity as utility. The need within the individual to find, consciously or not, an extreme form to an extreme emotion. The need to break the conventional gender role and interpersonal distribution, i.e. the choice to use a profane language or not. Thus fashioning the style of one's own persona or personae (Eckert et al., 2003) where choice is gender-neutral. The neuro-psycho-social (NPS) conditioning of an individual (Jay, 2009, p.159). A trend pointed out to by James as essential in developing current social and gender power structures: part of the derogatory terms have been placed under the 'non-preferred' gender category in the questionnaire (James, 1998, p.). Should a simple sociolinguistic stance towards English be adopted, one cannot help but notice that it is essentially a gender-neutral language. If it tends to be so in terms of expletives and foul language, then so be it. Provided it is so. References Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (2006). Forbidden words: Taboo and the censoring of language. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Beauvoir, S.de. (1992). The Second Sex. H. M. Parshley Trans.& Ed.London: David Campbell Publishers Ltd. (Original work published 1949). Eckert. P. & G. (2003), Language and gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hughes, S. E. (Jun., 1992). Expletives of lower working-class women. Language in Society, Vol. 21, No. 2, 291-303. Retrieved on 2 December 2009 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4168347 James, D. (1998) Gender-linked derogatory terms and their use by women and men. American Speech, 73(4), 399-420 Jay, T. (2009). The utility and ubiquity of taboo words. Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, Vol.4, No.2, 153-161. Read More