Download Report

Journal of Language Sciences & Linguistics. Vol., 3 (2), 22-29, 2015
Available online at http://www.jlsljournal.com
ISSN 2148-0672 ©2015
Review Article: Strategies of Verbal Behavior in
Interpersonal Relationships
Hamideh Ebrahimian*, Hassan Bashirnezhad
Department of linguistic and Teaching English, Sari branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran
*
Corresponding Author: Hamideh Ebrahimian
ABSTRACT Background: In everyday life human beings communicate with each other by the use of different
methods and exchange thoughts, feelings and leanings. Communication in its different verbal and non-verbal
forms is the main focus of our lives and it is highly important. Aim: The aim of conducting this research is
analyzing research findings done in the field of interpersonal relationships up to now. Conclusion: Regarding the
conducted studies it could be concluded that different factors have a role in interpersonal relationships, factors
such as gender, educational level, culture, style and age.
Keywords: Communication, Language, Culture, Strategy.
INTRODUCTION
Communication is a social activity requiring the efforts of two or more individuals. For communicating and
having a conversation we need information that are beyond the grammatical action and we need to decode
messages. Even necessarily we need to know what is the purpose of participating in an interaction and what are
the things expected from us. What is obvious is that both listener and speaker should participate in the
conversation whether through language or non-verbal signals. In our daily lives we communicate with others
through different methods and exchange thought, feelings and leanings. Communication in its different verbal
and non-verbal forms is the main focus of our lives and it is highly important. During the day we communicate
with many people and in all of these communications, information and subject matters are exchanged through
which we resolve our needs. Many of these communications include more important needs such as mental,
emotional and business needs. In our life we look for people to feel happiness with and to gain more experiences
with; in fact we need to communicate with others, we need their acceptance and approval.
According to Richmond (2008), communication is a process we make as we are. This subject is the most
unique and most individualistic feature of each and every one of us. No two people of us communicate exactly
alike. Richmond believes that human communication is a process in which one individual delivers a concept to
another individual’s mind by the use of verbal or non-verbal messages. In human beings’ life no communication
behavior has the extent and effect of verbal communication and no communication phenomenon is associated
with human beings’ life as much as verbal communication. Psychologists and linguistics agree about this matter
that it is through the language that human being’s life encounters fundamental changes. Some authors believe
that talking per se is attractive. The amount of individuals’ conversations includes main part of their daily life
(Miler, 2006). Miler states the importance of verbal communication in this way: verbal communication is
important because it is one of the effective tools of human beings for controlling and understanding their
environment and having an effect on it; at least for most people having the skills to use words is one of the best
tools for earning the highest rewards in life and minimizing the punishments. Verbal communication is highly
important, because it is one of the basic tools used by human beings for affecting the environment, controlling
and understanding it. Degrees and levels of formality of speakers and observing verbal behavior depend on the
social standing, age, educational level, and the culture of individuals. As Bateni (1976) believes about the
correlation between language, culture and society that what we call appropriate social behavior most of the
times are appropriate linguistic behavior; appropriate linguistic behavior is detecting what things could be said
or should be said and what things could not be said or should not be said on each occasion and most
importantly, how to say what should be said. In general, it could be said that dealing with language whether
verbal or non-verbal from the pragmatic perspective and depending on occasions, textures and fields is a high
important issue and especially different fields of humanities show tremendous capabilities and capabilities of
linguistics in different thematic and practical scopes. The current challenge is that in an educational environment
22
J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 3 (2), 22-29, 2015
which deals with students and teachers what types of strategies should be used for verbal communication and in
fact which of these strategies are used more or less and whether gender could have a role in use of these
strategies or not. The aim of conducting the current review article is analyzing and reviewing the previous
studies and concluding from their findings.
Combined Results
Interpersonal communication is a type of communication and this communication includes face to face
communication which is done through verbal or non-verbal method. In this type of communication the role of
sender and receiver of the message is switched; which means the role of sender and receiver changes and no one
stays as a continuous sender and the other one as a continuous receiver; rather their place changes and the
sender becomes the receiver and the receiver becomes the sender. In some cases, this change of role of sender
and receiver happens without planning and based on the communicational situation (Farhangi, 2008). According
to Labov (1996), in fact surveying language in its social context is the main subject of linguistics. In other
words, due to the social features of language it is impossible to fully survey it without paying attention to
different social variables. In fact there is a close relationship between construction of language, construction of
society, procedures, and linguistic and social variables and studying language separately from its social context
could not provide a comprehensive and realistic description of it. Labov states that social values and gender
roles affect the mentality of speakers about the language varieties and ultimately their practical application. For
example, Labov’s researches in England showed that Standard English or standard accent has high credibility.
Labov says that speakers, who significantly pay attention to their speech, linguistically move toward this
type of credibility. But it must be noted that lower social class and non-standard language varieties also have a
kind of credibility, this is especially true for men. If this is not right then the number of speakers is different. In
some societies these differences include many differences in vocabulary, pronunciation and grammar. Males’
and females’ language differences have different non-linguistic reasons and one of them is their different social
roles in the society. It seems that the more different their patterns of behavior the more different their patterns of
linguistic behavior will be. On the other hand, Labov also states that females in all different socio-economic
classes, ages, or races considerably use more standard language compared to males (Zimmerman, 1983). Labov
points out one of the important things about gender asymmetry and states that inside the house females bring up
children of both genders; girls have a clear image of the role they should play and it seems that they have simple
and nearly simple methods for reaching this pattern. In fact this interior space fosters the girl with a clear pattern
of responsibilities for lifelong and limitations; but it is not the same for boys. Boys should learn how to be a man
and if they foster indoors they will be unable to perform roles in men’s activities such as working outdoors,
having political discussions and other activities. In fact, boys gradually learn that they should break the bonds
with home and build their manhood apart from it. Due to this boys try to play outdoors and compete to gain their
identity among other boys; and since the activities of adult males are far away from them, boys see manhood in
a set of abstract rights and duties and due to this they define their identity based on roles played outdoors.
Childhood games of boys are mainly games in which boys try to gain prestige accompanied by these imaginary
roles. Trudegill (1974) concluded that females have more tend to use standard language compared to males.
This could be clearly seen in syntactic levels, phonological and phonetic structure of language. Males use
less pronunciations showing prestige in speech; maybe this is because they search for covert prestige but with
use of highly prestigious pronunciations, females sometimes show tendency toward extreme correction.
According to Trudegill this tendency of females to use prestigious pronunciations is because they want to show
themselves in higher social class. From Trudegill’s perspective (1974), different social roles create different
patterns of behavior and different social expectations and that is why the social expectations of males and
females regarding their social behavior are not the same. Language behavior is one of the aspects of social
behavior of human beings and thus it follows its criteria and main principles. According to sociolinguistics since
in most societies females are more expected to show appropriate social behavior than males thus not only their
language behavior is different from males but also it is socially better. According to the conducted surveys
generally, females use more linguistic forms close to the standard language compared to males; maybe this is
due to more sociocultural pressures on females; and this is why they are more sensitive about their language
behavior and use of authentic linguistic features. It could be said that: compared to males, females show more
sensitivity toward some of the linguistic features of high social classes that have more credibility; and this
sensitivity results in development of valid and standard linguistic features and generally it has a significant role
in linguistic changes. According to Trudegill, this sensitivity of females to their language behavior makes them
the pioneers in linguistic changes toward development of its valid features; because with their sensitivity to
valid linguistic features they use them more and because of their significant role in teaching language to their
children, they transfer these features easily and rapidly to the next generation. The first viewpoint which
attracted the attention of supporters of gender theory such as Lakoff (1975) was dominance theory. He stated
that sexism in language only reflects the sexism inside the society; in fact, this is a sign not a reason. Lakoff
believes that it is just by changing the common sexism in societies that any change happens in the language.
23
J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 3 (2), 22-29, 2015
After conducting a few researches Lakoff stated that since women do not have power and they have a
cautious language speak with powerless language. The reason for pointing out this feminine style (which was
later called language variety) is use of attenuator tools such as mild profanity, hesitating tone, and statements in
the form of questions (in English language) in females’ speaking. Then he did the first extensive study about the
specifications of language usage in an article named language and woman’s place. He concluded that form of
speech used by women in the society results in fading their identity, because society encourages them to use
ordinary phrases and statements that show uncertainty. According to Lakoff, basically females do not use the
powerful terms of males and instead they tend to use common and ordinary terms; and some features appear
more than normal in their speech; he divides these features into 4 categories: lexical items, syntax items,
intonation and hyper politeness features. From his perspective, basically females do not state themselves in an
acceptable way because they usually they don’t speak about important matters such as politics and instead they
talk about colors, nurturing kids, and/or family relationships; whereas males like to talk about sports, politics,
cars and these types of things. Lakoff (1975) also believes that females do not have the vital and essential
feeling of humor for building good social relationships and also their questions during conversations mostly
show their insecurity and their doubt in the conversation. According to him, use of powerful style among males
not only shows linguistic creativity but also shows their power. Tannen (1994) believes that because of
differences created during the socialization males and females speak differently. This researcher welcomes the
things imposed on females by the patriarchal structures of society.
Tannen considers six features for distinguishing between males and females: status vs. support,
independence vs. intimacy, advice vs. understanding, information vs. feeling, orders vs. proposals, conflict vs.
compromise. Tannen states that the correlation between language and gender is the foundation. Females ask
more questions and give short answers; but males talk more and use more slangs and informal language in
private situations; whereas females tend to polite and standard language. Males tend to use conflict strategies
whereas females tend to use social and communicational strategies. According to Tannen (1994) in addition to
asking indirect questions, females turn a declarative sentence to a question because they want to state their
demand before making a decision thus they may seem weaker than males; whereas males seem to be
domineering and self-sufficient in stating their demand. According to Tannen, males and females have different
verbal societies thus they use different verbal features. Tannen believes that males participate in speaking for
gaining or keeping a social standing and thus they tend toward competitive speech such as showing off, explicit
insult, witticism and exchanging sports news; whereas females participate in speaking for communicating and
increasing closeness to minimize the contradiction. At first this contradiction is caused during childhood and
adolescence when different genders are separated. They choose their type of play based on their early
relationships with their peers.
Brown & Levinson (1987) state that face has two aspects, positive face and negative face. Positive face
indicates that each individual tends to be encouraged, understood and loved in a group or in public and to be
confirmed by others; on the other hand, negative face indicates that individuals want to be free of others’
imposition, want to protect their territory and to be free at what they do and not to be banned by others.
According to Brown and Levinson, negative and positive faces exist in all individuals in all societies and this is
the different cultures that emphasize on one of these.
According to them, being disingenuous could be a kind of dialect. Politeness is a system of interpersonal
relationships with the aim of facilitating the interaction which is happened through minimizing the conflict and
confrontation which are parts of all human interactions. In some cases, participants could agree in their
interactions and both achieve their demands but in terms of other needs one of the two parties should lose
something, even a little bit for the other party to achieve something. In such cases the risk of breaking the
communication exists. If societies did not find methods for softening the conflict and confrontation moments,
saving and continuing the social relationships would have been very difficult and the required understanding in
the relationship would have also be broken. Politeness strategies are the tools for maintaining consensus,
artificial and real cohesion. C. West (1983) believes that interrupting females by males even when females are at
a higher social class also happens. They conducted researches about the interactions between male and female
physicians and their patients and they found out that male physicians interrupt their patients more and female
physicians are more interrupted by their male patients. Caots (1995) compares the communication strategies of
females and males in medical and educational environments and concluded that females in these types of jobs
use empathy and thus they reduce the existing problems in the environment caused by asymmetric interactions
between specialists and non-specialists. Wodac (1997) conducted a research on males’ and females’ interactions
at work and their participation and their effect. Researches have indicated that males have more tend to control
the subject, they speak more and longer compared to females and they make pauses, they use specific language
strategies for challenging the subject and to hold and maintain their position and this results in more social
differentiation between them and the audience; but females less tend to control the subject, they cause less
speech interruption and they use language strategies that have supportive role and lead to decreasing the social
gap. One of the communication strategies is speech interruption and most studies have shown that speech
24
J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 3 (2), 22-29, 2015
interruption is a kind of weakness. In her book (Power and Language) Deborah Tannen (1994) states that power
and language are different based on cultural differences; for example, in surveying the teacher-student
relationship in USA, students have the right to evaluate and comment in the classroom, but in another culture
the students do not have the right to talk in the classroom and they just have to listen to their teacher and this
shows respecting the teacher who is at the powerful position. But this is not the same in American culture and
the teacher considers this type of behavior as students’ lack of cooperation and impudence. Even this issue is
visible among subcultures; for example in different religious ethnicities of USA the role of power of speech is
different, speech interruption is considered as a linguistic tool for showing power. After that C. West concluded
that males continuously interrupt females and this show males’ dominance on females; but in a family between
husband and wife if each one of them interrupts the other one this interruption means the lack of power by that
person. Thus in here speech interruption has a different role and it does not show any power.
When people talk to each other at work they should consider the hierarchical relationships. The way the
employer talks to the employee or vice versa is different. According to Tannen, language strategies are
ambiguous and have multiple meanings. In some occasions at work people who have high social status interact
with their employees in a way that they consider themselves at the same level with them and this is one of the
complications and multidimensional aspects of language strategies. In the field of connection and social status at
workplace Tannen proposes a model named framing. According to Tannen, social status and connections are
two incompatible poles and both have important roles in interactions.
Hierarchy
Distance
Closeness
Equality
Figure 1. A multidimensional model of status and connection.
Based on the model provided by Tannen, in the USA business relationships are placed at the right part and
above the axis, and the family relationships are placed at the left and below the axis; which means that
hierarchical relationships have meaning at workplace; and workplace a series of hierarchical relationships
between employer and employees of lower ranks are observed; but in American families there is no hierarchy
and while having closeness, they have equal relationships.
Hierarchy
American: employer/employee
Closeness
Distance
Equality
American: sibling
Figure 2. The American model of status and connection.
Indirectness is one of the basic elements of human communications and even it is different from one culture to
another. Also at workplace employees have demands from each other. Different people have different strategies
for expressing a demand and individuals’ strategies depend on the hierarchical relationships. For example,
indirectness does not always show lack of power and self-confidence. In Japanese culture the way the employer
expresses a demand from the employee is very politely and indirectly and this is a sign of respecting the other
party. According to Tannen (2000) this is important that conversational methods do not show the mental status
of individuals such as lack of self-confidence thus many components are effective on conversational methods
and individuals have habits that they think those habits are appropriate at different occasions and they act that
way. About Lebra’s researches (1989) in China, Tannen states that: one of the cultural values in China is
25
J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 3 (2), 22-29, 2015
Omoiyari, which means that not everyone is required to have directness while having a conversation and
individuals should inherently have the ability to understand the other party’s intention. B. Johnstone (1995)
conducted a research about 4 successful females in Texas. These 4 females were journalist, writer, musician and
lawyer. In an interview she asked them where their conversational method originated from; and they all denied
the effect of gender on their conversational method; but they confirmed the effect of their nationality which was
being from Texas on their conversational method. For example the lawyer said that her gender did not have an
effect on her success and in all occasions she had tried to be herself without imitation, while everyone thought
that her success was because of the close relationship she had with the judge. Lidia & Tanaka (2009) conducted
a research about the gender differences in TV interviews (as an official organ) in Japan and they concluded that
there was no significant difference between strategies used by males and females in Japan and use of different
Omoiyari and/or competitive strategies depended on the relationship between the speaker and the audience. In
this research they concluded that even in official organs females’ independence is more than males; which
means that it is possible that females use strategies that compared to males at the same social level seem to show
their superiority over males. Standard English was more than what it actually is. Labov calls this prestige a
covert prestige; because such characteristics are not usually clearly visible; and they are distinctly separated
from the values of the general process of social integration that are consciously understood by all people.
According to Labov, females and males’ language behavior in different language communities are different
from each other with different degrees.
Ghafar Samar and Alibakhshi (2007) conducted a study about the face to face communication between
Persian males and females to find out the verbal strategies used among them’ and they concluded that there was
a correlation between gender, experience, education and power of both parties in using verbal strategies. There
were significant differences in use of verbal strategies among educated and uneducated females in an
environment with only females. Educated females paid more attention to taking turns compared to uneducated
females. In a mixed environment educated males and females paid more attention to taking turns; thus there was
no significant difference between males and females at a same level of education in verbal strategies and also
length of words were the same. Yaghoubi (2008) studied the effect of factors of gender on method of expressing
request in Persian language among students of Sari University to determine the verbal differences of the
methods used by males and females to express request in that city. Among different methods of expressing
request such as direct requests, conventional indirect demands, hints, alerters, supportive moves and internal
modifiers, generally in comparing males and females it is observed that males use more direct request,
conventional indirect request and hints; whereas females use more alerts, supportive moves and internal
modifiers. Females are more polite while speaking compared to males and also they act more conservatively in
their communications; on the other hand, females also have learned to use more polite, weaker, and more
modest and more timid forms. Use of sentences such as sorry to disturb you indicates politeness, tact and
gentleness. Sentences such as I want to use this machine but unfortunately I do not know how indicates that
females sometimes speak from a lower position to easily achieve what they want. They use the word excuse me
several times and with this language behavior they show that they are modest. In other words, it could be said
that they speak in a way to protect their social character. However the gender discourse in culture of society has
interactions with language behavior of males and females who are members of organizations and social aspect
of gender is a guide for individuals’ behavior at workplace. Based on this, the more the gender positions move
toward specialty at jobs the more the gender language comes close to areas of other social interactions such as
equality and freedom of opinion of inequality. Mohammadi Asl (2010) states that common gender language in
workplace has a few main patterns. Firstly at employer-employees’ negotiations in organizational meetings,
mainly the employees no matter what gender remain silent and listen; thus the more horizontal the
organizational hierarchy and the more important the specialty of participants in these meetings the more their
verbal participation will be, despite their gender. According to Mohammadi Asl, even in completely female
organizational meetings without having specialty the only speakers will be female bosses and other females only
listen to them and this means that the organizational role and base is more effective than the gender on the
position of the speakers of the organizations and thus in meetings held by female managers males turn into
completely obedient audience. Secondly, despite common thoughts, they turn toward other attractions such as
humor and telling jokes because of their lack of specialty, and it must be noted that inexpert males of the
organization also use this type of language; because lack of expertise results in use of this language to restore
the organizational role and base. Due to this in completely female or male organizational meetings when male
and female employees talk to each other or talk to their employers they distinguish between ordinary language
and attractive language and this means use of blarney beyond gender for gaining administrative support in
absence of organizational equal positions. Thirdly, in organizational meetings females more tend to whisper but
males talk more freely and at the time of encountering an issue they say it out loud directly to others and
especially to managers of the meetings; whereas females working at factories talk loudly and similar to
shouting, the same as their male colleagues and the female seller also use this method in a more charming way
to attract customers and gain profit and this method is like the method used by males. Also increased expertise
26
J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 3 (2), 22-29, 2015
of females helps them talk more directly and not be afraid of the male or female management and this is exactly
the model and pattern shown by expert males. Mohammadi Asl also believes that increased presence of females
in specialized and management positions is one of the recent figures of organizational changes. Parallel to
development of females’ employment and their efforts to gain expertise and skills that were formerly considered
skills for males, contemplating in gender language and males and females in organizations also indicates the
proximity of their verbal methods for exercising their authority. These methods have also been detected among
employed couples; because financial independence of females and the role of verbal participation and the same
professional-managerial role toward the employees will be shown toward their children. This is while being a
housewife or lack of expertise in the organization results in their language development which seems more
passive, peaceful and supportive and reproduces an attached identity in them. This all means creation of gender
language and power in the family and income based on gender identity development through face to face
interactions and access to positions of power. According to Mohammadi Asl female managers are more able to
use the emotions in addition to wisdom to further the organizational goals and administrative affairs and to
improve their employees, compared to male managers. Reflection of this situation in management language
shows that female managers encourage their subordinates to optimize their administrative behavior but male
managers do the same thing by giving orders and especially to fulfill their repressed emotions during their
business growth. Male physicians are more aggressive talking to their patients compared to female physicians;
and language of female managers in factories more encourages the staff to do activities compared to male
managers. By the use of maternal spirit, female managers use punishment language and because of experiencing
powerlessness in life they attract the attention of employees to their performance and change the organizational
behavior. They pay close attention to the condition of the audience and stimulate their thoughts and emotions
and achieve a result for their favor. Generalizing this common thought that knowledge is power causes males to
use commands and to issue final rules in a management position whereas female managers use empathy,
cooperation and convincing their subordinates. As children prefer their mothers more than fathers to judge their
play organizational employees also prefer the judgments of female managers. Female managers’ language is
accompanied by more appreciation, encouragement and demands compared to male managers’ language and if
the maternal sententious language of females be associated with maternal perception of subordinates toward
them the organizational change happens with more power and speed. This empathy of female managers with
their subordinates is also because of the experience of inferiority of the second sex. In a master this Mahrami
(2011) conducted a research about Multimedia Messaging Service and the aim of this research was function of
overlaps and interruptions. Mahrami concluded that overlaps and interruption did not always show lack of
respect; and due to the research context which surveyed daily conversations, overlaps and interruptions
sometimes show the audience’s respect and interest to take part in the conversation. In a study called
comparative survey of employees’ speech style with clients of two units of cinema complex, Kiani Sabet (2011)
studied the variables of gender, education and job background. Based on the achieved results males with
associate degree, bachelor degree and job background of two years in Mellat Cinema Complex use more formal
speech style; and females with associate degree and master degree and job background of one year or less in
Mellat Cinema Complex use more respectful speech style. Males with educational level of below diploma and
job background of two years in Razi Cinema Complex use more cautious speech style. Males and females with
educational level below diploma and job background of three years in Razi Cinema Complex use more
conversational speech style.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The aim of conducting the current research was reviewing and analyzing the research findings about
strategies of verbal behavior in interpersonal relationships. Regarding the analysis of conducted articles in this
field it could be said that different factors are effective on interpersonal relationships which will be further
discussed. A group of sociologists determine social class based on social status and privileges and they use a
series of factors (such as occupation, income, place of living and etc.) as the determinants of social status.
Another group believes that members of a society have a general concept of their role and social status and
thus it is possible to determine social class based on individuals’ judgment. Some other sociologists also
determine the social class based on the role and status of individuals in production relations of society. Another
important factor of language varieties in a society is the age of the speakers of that language and the same as
gender, it has a biological aspect but in sociolinguistic surveys it is considered as a social factor (Miler, 1989).
Generally, members of a linguistic society have different behavioral patterns at different ages and the
language behavior pattern is one of them; which means that the same as other social behavior aspects, the
language behavior does not have a fixed, consistent and unchanged pattern and it changes during life and by
passing through ages. In the early years of life children learn the basic grammars and vocabulary of language
and at different ages they expand their knowledge of language. In each period of life different features and
patterns reveal in language behavior. On the other hand, although children consider the language behavior of
27
J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 3 (2), 22-29, 2015
their parents (previous generation) as a model, each generation also has its own new tendencies and innovations;
due to this new innovations and tendencies occur all the time and language of each generation is different from
the previous generation (Modaresi, 1984). According to sociolinguistics, style is a set of language features used
in speech and writing in different social conditions. Different types of a language used according to the social
context of speech are considered as different styles of that language. Speakers of one language choose their
appropriate style according to their evaluations about the conditions of language communication. Different
factors affect choosing a specific style and using it in a specific occasion; subject, aim, condition (in terms of
time, place, presence or absence of others), relationship between speaker and listener (in terms of equality or
inequality of age, social class, job, and also in terms of intimacy level), and expressing tools (in terms of speech
or writing) are some of the most important factors (Kiani Sabet, 2011). Educational level is also effective on
creation of language varieties. In a language society, language differences that are completely visible show a
significant correlation with individuals’ educational level. According to Modaresi, in a language society, the
higher the educational level of individuals the more extensive style continuum or linguistic treasures they have.
Lower educational groups have a limited style continuum and limited language features and thus in
different social conditions they use relatively constant styles (usually conversational style); whereas educated
speakers are more familiar with other formal styles in addition to conversational style and they have a more
extensive language continuum and they could choose an appropriate style for each occasion Ghafar Samar &
Alibakhshi, 2007). It is concluded from the linguistic researches that in many societies, males and females have
different speech styles, which means gender is an effective factor on interpersonal relationships (Bateni, 1976).
In some cases these differences are insignificant and unnoticeable; for example, Wolfram’s survey about
many American English accents showed that vowels used by females are more peripheral (which means more
pre, more post, more closed or more opened) than the vowels used by males. Additionally in Yu Kagiri which is
one of the languages used in Northeast Asia, /tj/ and /dj/ in males’ language are similar to /ts/ and /dz/ in
females’ language. About this matter it is required to make sure that these differences are made consciously;
because it also has correlations with age differences; which means that children also use /ts/ and /dz/ common in
females’ language; whereas old males and females use other forms which means /cj/ and /jj/. Generally males
have longer speech channel, larger larynx, and thicker vocal folds compared to females; and as a result males
usually talk with pitch range of (80-200 Hertz) whereas females talk with pitch range of (120-240 Hertz). With
less vibration the speech sounds are heard lower and with fast vibration the sound are heard higher. R. Lakeoff
(1975) states that different speech style of females compared to males show their inferiority in social class. Thus
females’ language lacks power which is accompanied by modifiers and unnecessary features and prevents
females from having a powerful status. The most important difference or cultural difference is the difference in
sociolinguistics and social differences in social status. Based on this theory, the biological differences have
resulted in different speech speed among males and females. For example, females pay more attention to
communicating and males are after independence and focusing on hierarchical relationships. The other reason
for this language behavior difference among males and females is lack of social status. Based on this theory, the
higher social status of males has resulted in their dominance at interactions (West and Zimmerman, 1987).
Basically this theory believes that differences appeared during childhood in boys and girls are tendency to play
in groups that are segregated and have different rules. Girls play in smaller and more empathic groups. Boys
play in groups that are hierarchically organized (Freeman & Mcelhinny, 1996).
REFERENCES
Bateni MR, 1976. Problems of modern linguistics. Tehran: Agah Publications. 1 st ed.
Brown P, Levinson S, 1987. Politeness, some universals of language usage. Cambridge university press.
Caots L, 1995. Language, gender and career. in Sara Mills (ed) , language and gender : interdisciplinary
perspectives. London: Longman. 13-30
Farhangi AK, 2008. Fundamentals of human communication. Tehran: Rasa institute of cultural services. 1: 10.
Freeman & Mcelhinny, 1996. Language variation and gender. Handbook of Research in Second Language
Teaching and Learning, Volume 1 edited by Eli Hinkel.
Ghafar Samar R,Alibakhshi G, 2007. The Gender Linked Differences in the Use of Linguistic Strategies in
Face-to-face Communication. Tarbiat Modares University, Iran. Linguistics Journal. 3(3): 46-61.
Johnstone B, 1995. Sociolinguistics resources, individual identities and public speech styles of Texas women.
Journal of linguistic anthropology.
Kiani Sabet M, 2011. Comparative survey of speech style of employees with clients in two units of Cinema
Complex, based on variables of gender, educational level and job background. Master thesis of Islamic
Azad University.
Labov W, 1996. The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington DC: center for applied
linguistics.
28
J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 3 (2), 22-29, 2015
Lakoff R, 1975. Language and woman’s place, language in society. 2: 45-80. Reprinted in 1975 by Harper
Colephen. New York.
Mahrami A, 2011. Function of overlaps and interruption in multimedia messaging service. Master thesis,
Tarbiat Modares University.
Miler G, 2006. Verbal communication. Translated by Zekavati Gharagozloo A, 3 rd ed. Tehran: Soroush
Publications.
Modaresi Y, 1984. Some theoretical issues of sociolinguistics. Journal of linguistics. 1(1): 23-34.
Modaresi Y, 1989. Introduction to sociolinguistics.
Mohammadi Asl A, 2010. Gender and sociolinguistics. Tehran: Gol Azin Publications.
Richmond VP, 2008. Non-verbal behavior in interpersonal relationships. Translated by Mousavi F., Tehran:
Danzheh Publications. 1st ed.
Schein, Virginia E, 1975. The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management
characteristics among female managers. Journal of Applied Psychology. 60(3): 340-4.
Tanaka L, 2009. Communicative stances in Japanese interviews: Gender differences in formal interactions.
www.elsevier.com/locate/langcom.
Tannen D, 2000. Indirectness at work. Language in action: new studies of language in society.
Tannen D, 1994. Talking from 9 to 5; how women’s and men’s conversational styles affect who gets heard, who
gets credit, and who gets done at work. New York NY: William Morrow and Company, Inc.
Tannen D, 1994. The sex class linked framing of talk at work, Gender and Discourse. New York and Oxford
Press.
Trudegill P, 1974. Sex, covert prestige and linguistic change in the urban England. Language in society L. 179195.
Wodak R, 1997. Gender and discourse. London; sage.
Yaghoubi H, 2008. Effect of gender on methods of expressing demand in Persian language. Master thesis,
Shahid Beheshti University.
Zimmerman D, West C, 1938. Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation. In: Thorne B, Kramarae C,
Henley N (Eds.).
29