Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:55:08.492Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gender and conversational dominance in Japanese conversation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2004

HIROKO ITAKURA  and
AMY B. M. TSUI
HIROKO ITAKURA
Affiliation:
Department of English, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, [email protected]
AMY B. M. TSUI
Affiliation:
Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A number of studies have been conducted on “dominance” as reflected in spoken interactional features, most of which deal with English. Many of these studies adopt a quantitative approach, examining the amount and distribution of interactional features such as amount of talk, interruptions and overlaps, turn-taking, questions, and topic initiations, and they have drawn conclusions on “dominance” accordingly. The present study explores gender dominance in conversation by analyzing conversational data from eight Japanese dyads by integrating quantitative and qualitative analyses. The quantitative analysis of two dimensions of conversational dominance, sequential dominance and participatory dominance, does not show any obvious gender dominance; however, the qualitative analysis of three of the dyads finds a clear pattern of male speakers' self-oriented conversational style, which is manifested in their storytelling and claiming expertise, and this is supported by female speakers' other-oriented conversational style. Gender dominance therefore is seen as a mutual construction. The conclusion discusses the importance of integrating findings from both quantitative and qualitative analyses in situated contexts to deepen understanding of the complexity of gender dominance.The authors wish to thank Dwight Atkinson, Andy Curtis, Jane Hill, and two anonymous reviewers for their encouragement and valuable comments on earlier drafts of the paper. They also wish to thank Simon Lai, senior research assistant, for his help in conducting the statistical test.

Keywords

Japanese conversationgenderconversational dominanceconversational orientationconversational style.
Type
Research Article
Information
Language in Society , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , April 2004 , pp. 223 - 248
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baron, Bettina, & Kotthoff, Helga (eds.) (2002). Gender in interaction: Perspectives on femininity and masculinity in ethnography and discourse. Amseterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRef
Burton, Deidre (1981). Analysing spoken discourse. In Malcolm Coulthard & Martin Montgomery (eds.) Studies in Discourse Analysis, 61–81. London: Routledge.
Coates, Jennifer (1996). Women talk. Oxford: Blackwell.
Coates, Jennifer (1997). One-at-a-time: The organization of men's talk. In Sally Johnson & Ulrike Hanna Meinhof (eds.), Language and masculinity, 107–29. Oxford: Blackwell.
Coulthard, Malcolm, & Brazil, David (1981). Exchange structure. In Malcolm Coulthard & Martin Montgomery (eds.), Studies in discourse analysis, 82–106. London: Routledge.
DeFrancisco, V. L. (1998). The sounds of silence: How men silence women in marital relations. In Jennifer Coates (ed.), Language and gender: A reader, 176–84. Oxford: Blackwell.
Drew, Paul (1984). Speakers' reportings in invitation sequences. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, 129–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Drew, Paul, & Heritage, John (1992). Analysing talk at work: An introduction. In Paul Drew & John Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, 3–65. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fishman, Pamela M. (1983). Interaction: The work women do. In Barrie Thorne et al. (eds.), Language, gender and society, 89–101. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
Freed, Alice F., & Greenwood, Alice (1996). Women, men, and type of talk: What makes the difference? Language in Society 25:1–26.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Allen D. (1987). Finishing other's talk: some structural and pragmatic features of completion offers. In Ross Steele & Terry Threadgold (eds.), Language topics, essays in honour of Michael Halliday, 213–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gunnarsson, Britt-Louise (1997). Women and men in the academic discourse community. In Helga Kotthoff & Ruth Wodak (eds.), Communicating gender in context, 219–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRef
Hirschman, Lynette (1973). Female-male differences in conversational interaction. Paper presented at annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, CA. [Published in Language in Society 23:427–42, 1994.]Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet (1984). Hedging your bets and sitting on the fence: Some evidence for hedges as support structures. Te Reo 27:47–62.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet (1995). Women, men and politeness. London: Longman.
Ide, Sachiko (1992). Gender and function of language use: Quantitative and qualitative evidence from Japanese. Pragmatics and Language Learning 3:117–29.Google Scholar
Itakura, Hiroko (2001a). Conversational dominance and gender: A study of Japanese speakers in first and second language contexts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Itakura, Hiroko (2001b). Describing conversational dominance. Journal of Pragmatics 33:1859–80.Google Scholar
James, Deborah, & Clarke, Sandra (1993). Women, men and interruptions: A critical review. In Deborah Tannen (ed.), Gender and conversational interaction, 231–280. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jefferson, Gail (1984). Transcription notation. In J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, ix–xvi. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kendall, Shari, & Tannen, Deborah (1997). Gender and language in the workplace. In Ruth Wodak (ed.), Gender and discourse, 81–105. London: Sage.CrossRef
Kiesling, Scott Fabius (1998). Men's identities and sociolinguistic variation: The case of fraternity men. Journal of Sociolinguistics 2:69–99.Google Scholar
Leet-Pellegrini, Helena M. (1980). Conversational dominance as a function of gender and expertise. In Howard Giles et al. (eds.), Language: Social psychological perspectives, 97–104. Oxford: Pergamon.
Linell, Per (1990). The power of dialogue dynamics. In Ivana Markovà & Klaus Foppa (eds.), The dynamics of dialogue, 147–77. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Linell, Per, & Luckmann, Thomas (1991). Asymmetries in dialogue: Some conceptual preliminaries. In Ivana Markovà & Klaus Foppa (eds.), Asymmetries in dialogue, 1–20. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Linell, Per; Lennart Gustavsson; & Juvonen, Päivi (1988). Interactional dominance in dyadic communication: A presentation of initiative-response analysis. Linguistics 26:415–42.Google Scholar
Murray, Stephen O. (1998). The sound of simultaneous speech, the meaning of interruption. Journal of Pragmatics 12:115–16.Google Scholar
Murray, Stephen O., & Covelli, Lucille H. (1988). Women and men speaking at the same time. Journal of Pragmatics 12:103–11.Google Scholar
Okamoto, Shigeko (1995). “Tasteless Japanese”: Less “feminine” speech among young Japanese women. In Kira Hall & Mary Buchholtz (eds.), Gender articulated: Language and the socially constructed self, 297–325. New York & London: Routledge.
Pomerantz, Anita (1978). Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints. In Jim Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction, 79–112. New York: Academic Press.CrossRef
Pomerantz, Anita (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rommetveit, Ragnar (1987). Meaning, context, and control: Convergent trends and controversial issues in current social-scientific research on human cognition and communication. Inquiry 30:77–99.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey (1992a). Lectures on Conversation, vol. 1. Gail Jefferson (ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Sacks, Harvey (1992b). Lectures on Conversation, vol. 2. Gail Jefferson (ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Schegloff, Emanuel A., & Sacks, Harvey (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica 7:289–327.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John McH., & Coulthard, Malcolm (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils: Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tannen, Deborah (1986). That's not what I meant! How conversational style makes or breaks your relations with others. New York: William Morrow.
Tannen, Deborah (1990). You just don't understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: William Morrow.
Tannen, Deborah (1994). Gender and discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tsui, Amy B. M. (1991). The interpretation of language as code and language as behavior: A description of evaluative statements. In Eija Ventola (ed.), Functional and systemic linguistics: Approaches and use, 193–212. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Tsui, Amy B. M. (1994). English conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Uchida, Aki (1992). When “difference” is “dominance”: A critique of the “anti-power-based” cultural approach to sex differences. Language in Society 21:547–68.Google Scholar
Uchida, Nobuko (1997). Kaiwa koodoo ni mirareru seesa [Gender differences in conversation]. In Sachiko Ide (ed.), Joseego no sekai [The world of women's language]. 74–93. Tokyo: Meeji Shoin.
West, Candace, & Fenstermaker, Sarah (2002). Accountability in action: the accomplishment of gender, race and class in a meeting of the University of California Board of Regents. Discourse and Society 13:537–63.Google Scholar
West, Candace, & Garcia, Angela (1988). Conversational shift work: A study of topical transitions between women and men. Social Problems 35:551–75.Google Scholar
West, Candace, & Zimmerman, Don H. (1983). Small insults: A study of interruptions in cross-sex conversations between unacquainted persons. In Barrie Thorne et al. (eds.), Language, gender and society, 102–17. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
West, Candace, Zimmerman, Don H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society 1:125–51.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth (ed.) (1997). Gender and discourse. London: Sage.
Zimmerman, Don H., & West, Candace (1975). Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation. In Barrie Thorne & Nancy Henley (eds.), Language and sex: Difference and dominance, 105–29. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Woods, N. (1988). Talking shop: Sex and status as determinants of floor appointment in a work setting. In Jennifer Coates & Deborah Cameron (eds.), Women in their speech communities, 141–57. London: Longman.