THE REALIZATION OF GENDER ARGUMENTS IN TWITTER.

(1)

THE REALIZATION OF GENDER ARGUMENTS

IN TWITTER

A Thesis

Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

NAZRIANI LUBIS Registration Number : 8106111024

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

ABSTRACT

Nazriani Lubis, Regisration Number: 8106111024, The Realization of Gender Arguments in Twitter. English Applied Linguistics Study Program. Postgraduate School State University of Medan, 2015.

This research deals with the realization of gender arguments in Twitter. The objectives of the research were to identify the types of arguments used by male and female across gender and social status and to find out the factor underlying these types occured in that way. To achieve the objectives, this research was conducted by applying descriptive qualitative design. The subject of this research was the three different social status males and females. The pair interaction was appeared to conduct this research, namely; female to male interaction and female to female interaction across social status. The data was collected from the tweets with three different topics (death penalty, law and education) which posted on twitter by all the subjects. The data was analyzed by applying Mile’s ajd Hubberman’s model. The finding showed that males to female interaction argued by three type of arguments; conjunction, conditional and biconditional, female female to female interaction argued by all types of arguments; negation, disjunction, conjunction, conditional and biconditional, males were siginificantly are more aware with their status in establishing and maintaning the interaction than female, those were more considarate with their interlocutors.

(6)

ABSTRAK

Nazriani Lubis, Nomor Registrasi: 8106111024. Realisasi Argumen Jender di Twitter. Program Studi Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris, Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Medan.

Penelitian ini berkaitan dengan fenomena argumen yang digunakan jender;laki-laki dan perempuan dalam berinteraksi di Twitter. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menggambarkan tipe argumen yang terjadi di Twitter, dan untuk mengetahui alasan mengapa tipe argumen bisa terjadi dengan cara seperti itu. Untuk mencapai penelitian ini dilaksanakan dengan menerapkan desain deskriptif kualitatif. Subjek penelitian ini adalah tiga orang laki-laki dan wanita yang memiliki perbedaaan status sosial; lebih tinggi, lebih rendah dan setara. Ada dua interaksi yang muncul dalam penelitian ini yaitu; interaksi antara perempuan dan laki-laki, interaksi antara perempuan dan perempuan lintas status social. Data dikumpulkan dari tweet yang diambil dari tiga topik yang berbeda (hukuman mati, hukum, dan pendidikan) yang diposting oleh subjek di twitter. Data yang dikumpulkan dianalisis dengan menggunakan Miles and Hubberman Model. Temuan menunjukkan bahwa laki-laki bergargumen dengan tiga tipe argumen, yaitu; conjunction, conditional dan biconditional sedangkan wanita menggunakan lima tipe argumen; negation, disjunction, conjunction, conditional dan biconditional, ini menggambarkan bahwa laki-laki sangat mempertimbangkan status sosial ketika berargumen dengan lawan jenis yang mencerminkan kebijaksanaan dalam berinteraksi sedangkan wanita lebih mempertimbangkan lawan bicaranya.

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, the writer would like to express her greatest gratitude to Allah SWT for blessing her to complete this thesis project. This study is concerned with The Realization of Gender Arguments in Twitter which is submitted to Post Graduate School of State University of Medan in partial of fulfillment of the final academic requirements to obtain the degree of Magister of Humaniora from English Applied Linguistics.

This thesis project would not have been possible without the incomparable people who have carried out this thesis to a close. Hence, the writer would like to express her deep gratitude to all people mentioned below.

The writer would like to express her deep gratitude to Prof. Dr.Busmin Gurning, M.Pd., as the Head of English Applied Linguistics for his support and kindness. The writer would like to exprees her sincere thanks and high appreciation to her first adviser, Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd., thanks for his assistance, brilliance, guidance, advise, encouragment and constructive criticism. His truly brilliance lighted up every single thought of the writer to accomplish this thesis project. Prof. Dr. Sumarsih, M.Pd., the second adviser, thanks for support and understanding throughout this thesis project so the writer can complete it.

In addition, the writer is grateful to express her deep thanks to board of examiners Dr. Sri Minda Murni, MS., Dr. Didik Santoso, M. Pd., and Dr. Rahmad Husein, M.Ed., for their criticism, comments and suggestions to construct this thesis. High appreciation and deep thanks must go to all lecturers who have given time, energy and expertise during the times of lecturing.

(8)

The writer must acknowledge her enormous gratitude and special thanks to her beloved parents; Mr. Ir. H. Nazaruddin Lubis and Mrs. Nurhalwani Siregar, SmHk. The writer is extremely grateful for their prayers, unconditional love, caring, support, and endless patience during her academic year. The writer also thanks with love to her beloved sisters Asnarni Lubis, S.Pd, M.Pd and Rizki Amalia Lubis, S.Pd for their love, prayers and understanding. Members of family actually helped her more than they can know.

Finally, the writer extends her thanks to all amazing people who have supported and helped her to complete this thesis project in so many ways directly or indireclty. May Allah SWT bless them.

Medan, 29 Juli 2015 The writer,

Nazriani Lubis

(9)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT ... i

ABSTRAK ... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... v

LIST OF MATRIXS ... vi

LIST OF FIGURE ... vii

LIST OF DIAGRAMS ... viii

LIST OF APPENDENCIES ... ix

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Background of Study ... 1

1.2 The Problems of the Study ... 7

1.3 The Objectives of the Study ... 8

1.4 The Scope of the Study ... 9

1.5 The Significance of the Study ... 9

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 2.1 Ways of Gender Arguments ... 10

2.2.1 The Nature of Gender ... 10

2.1.2 The Nature of Gender Arguments ... 13

(10)

2.2 The Underlying Factors of Gender Arguments ... 20

2.3 Computer Mediated Communication ... 23

2.4 Twitter ... 24

2.5 The Previous Relevant Studies... 27

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD 3.1 The Design of the Research ... 29

3.2 The Research Subject ... 29

3.3 The Data and Data Sources ... 30

3.4 The Technique of Collecting Data ... 30

3.5 The Technique of Analyzing Data ... 31

3.6 Trustworthiness of Study ... 32

CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Ways of Arguments Amonng Gender ... 35

4.2 Factors Underlying The Gender’s Making Arguments ... 45

4.2.1 Factors Underlying Male’s and Female’s Making of Arguments in Twitter ... 47

4.2.2 Factors Underlying Female’s and Female’s making of Arguments in Twitter ... 52

4.2.3 Factors Underlying the Making of Arguments by Participants Across Sex and Status ... 58

4.2.3.1 Factors Underlying Arguments Made by Participants of Different Sex with Higher Status and of the Same Sex with Different Status ... 59 4.2.3.2 Factors Underlying Arguments Made by

Participants of Different Sex with Lower Status and of the Same Sex with Different

(11)

Status ... 60 4.2.3.3 Factors Underlying Arguments Made by

Participants of Different Sex with Equal Status and of the Same Sex with Equal

Status ... 61 4.3 Research Findings ... 61 4.4 Disucussion ... 63

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions ……… … 65 5.2 Suggestions ………... 66 REFERENCES ………... 67 APPENDICES ………... 70-113

(12)

LISTS OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1 Categorization of The Domain ... 12

2.2 The Preference Of Men and Women in Speech Activity ... 15

2.3 The Differences Among the Gossiping, Arguing and Quarelling ... 16

2.4 Types of Arguments ... 19

2.5 The Purpose of Types of Arguments ... 20

2.6 Factors of Gender Arguments ... 22

(13)

LIST OF FIGURE

Figures Page

(14)

LISTS OF DIAGRAMS

Diagrams Page

4.1 Negation ... 33

4.2 Conjunction ... 35

4.3 Disjunction ... 37

4.4 Conditional ... 39

(15)

LISTS OF MATRIXS

Matrixs Page

4.1 Males and Females Interaction in Twitter ... 42 4.2 Male’s Interaction in Twitter ... 44 4.3 The Result of Data Analysis in the Three Differents

Pairs of Interaction ... 47 4.4 Female’s Interaction in Twitter ... 49 4.5 The Result of Data Analysis in the Three Differents

Pairs of Interaction ... 54 4.6 The Comparison of Interaction in Twitter ... 56

(16)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

Topic 1: Death Penalty

1. Transcript of Female vs Male with Higher Status ... 67

2. Transcript of Female vs Male with Equal Status ... 69

3. Transcript of Female vs Male with Lower Status ... 72

4. Transcript of Female vs Female with Higher Status ... 75

5. Transcript of Female vs Female with Equal Status ... 78

6. Transcript of Female vs Female with Lower Status... 80

Topic 2: Law 1. Transcript of Female vs Male with Higher Status ... 83

2. Transcript of Female vs Male with Equal Status ... 85

3. Transcript of Female vs Male with Lower Status ... 87

4. Transcript of Female vs Female with Higher Status ... 89

5. Transcript of Female vs Female with Equal Status ... 91

6. Transcript of Female vs Female with Lower Status... 93

Topic 3: Education 1. Transcript of Female vs Male with Higher Status ... 96

2. Transcript of Female vs Male with Equal Status ... 98

3. Transcript of Female vs Male with Lower Status ... 99

4. Transcript of Female vs Female with Higher Status ... 101

5. Transcript of Female vs Female with Equal Status ... 103

(17)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1The Background of Study

The rapid growing of technology makes the great changes the way of communication recently. In this sophisticated information and technology age, the term of communication does not always mean face to face communciation, but also online communication provides the alternative for all people to communicate with others. The online communication is being a popular altenative that can be chosen as a medium of communication. People can keep in touch to others without any limitation by using the internet as media of communication.

Discussing about the internet as media of communciation, The development of information and technology has led people to use many internet’s media in communcating to others. Internet’s media is one of the most popular online communication which continually changes and moves on. A few years ago, some people used internet just for sending and receiving email or searching an important things, but nowdays, people feel free to surf anything from intrenet, suh as; social media (facebook, twitter, path, instagram, you tube, skype, ec), online shopping, blogging, campaign and online news.

Modern information and communications technologies such as the Internet arguably have the potential to offer greater beneﬁts to women than men (Carter & Grieco, 2000 in Bidgoli, 2004). Languge and gender has been an interesting topic

(18)

in linguistics. There are some studies point out the differences language and gender in language use. Tannen’s view in Goddard (2000 : 101) there are two fundamental forces at work in social interaction, power and solidarity. She stated that men and women are trained to pay more attention to one or other of these dimension, men monitoring their interaction for aspect power, and women monitoring theirs for signals of solidarity and intimacy.

This view means that male and female use the same language but they interact to one or other differently. It is just because male and female have the different purpose in communication. Male tends to show their status and power, while female just want to seek the close relationship to another. Besides, Men's goals in using language tend to be about getting things done, whereas women's tend to be about making connections to other people. Men talk more about things and facts, whereas womens’ talk more about people, relationships and feelings. That’s why, the way of man in using language is competitive, reflecting their general interest in acquiring and maintaining status; women's use of language is cooperative, reflecting their preference for equality and harmony in interaction and communication.

There are some studies had discussed about language and gender in online communication. Huffaker (2004) found the significant differences gender and language use in teenager bloggers, that is female do not use a more passive, cooperative and accomodating in as Lakoff proposed. Hasan and Khammat (2011) found that females use more simple sentence than males, whereas males tend to use more compound, complex sentences than females in their study gender differences in Computer Mediated Communication in Iraq. Gustiany (2012) found

(19)

gender’s language style in facebook status that the dominant style used by both male and female in facebook status are consultative style, male used advice more than female, and female use feeling more than male. While, Amir et al (2012) found the gender differences in the language use of Malaysian teenager bloggers, that male and female bloggers in the frequencies of five language features which are ‘intensifiers’, ‘hedging’, ‘tag questions’, ‘empty adjectives’ and ‘adverbs’. While, Jeong (2003) found the differences male and female in gender’s interaction in online debate, he found that female were significantly less likely to engage in argumentation with other female than with males, while males were equally like to respond to females and males. He also found that women are more criticsm than men. It is contrary to Eckert and Tanne’s theory; women more avoid conflict than men.

From the previous studies above, the writer is interested in exploring language and gender which is in the different context, that is in Twitter. Twitter is one of the social networks with all over the world users. It has been a popular social media around the world. According to Alexa.com which is California-based subsidiary company of Amazon.com which provides commercial web traffic data, twitter is in 8th ranks globally and in the 10th ranks as the popular social networkings site in Indonesia.

Twitter is now well established as the world's second most important social media platform, after Facebook. Its 140-character updates are designed for brief messaging, and its network structures are kept relatively flat and simple. it enables for the users of twitter to share short textual messages, which is called as

(20)

“tweet” with others with the system. The length of message or “tweet” makes twitter is different with the others social media.

Twitter is different with another social networks because it only allows the users to express their thought, idea and feeling. The users are free to tweet whatever they feel and think and free to follow and stalk whoever they want to see, and seek the information from over the world without confirmation the friends’ invitation. In other words, there is no filter in searching the news, the information and the hottest issues over the world. Twitter can be the media of communication which encourages the users of twitter to argue directly. Sometimes, the users of twitter do not have any consideration to argue.

This situation makes people argue as easy as they want. The users of twitter in which men and women has the same oppurtunity to involve in arguing. It is quite different with face to face communication, particularly women which has many consideration to talk or argue just because feel afraid of being mistake and conflict with others. Women always try to avoid conflict because they are not strong enough to argue logically.

In this study, writer will focus on “argument” term. According to Eckert (2003) argument involves giving reasons and evidences and using rational principles of inference to support a position. Males are more argue in debating while females are more quarell. Men do more argue than women (Eckert, 2003). Men have the tendency to invlove in arguing in order to look more stronger than women. Women have the tendency to avoid the arguments because women are easily keep the relationship with another.

(21)

The circle of communication in twitter does not links to people whom you know, but also it links to the official accounts of government, the official account of national and international news, the offical account of politics, the official account of celebrities, and . In this case, male and female feel free to participate in discussing all the latest issue in internet. It allows people to argue and discuss the issue directly. It means that men and women have the oppurtunity to express their idea and feeling. For example, the users of twitter can communicate directly to President of Indonesia by mentioning his official accounts (@SBY), or the users of twitter can communicate directlt to President of America by mentioning his officical accounts (@barackobama).

For Example, how male and female are giving argument to the some official acoounts.

Female’s tweet :

(@SM) : Setujuuuhh @ynurma02: No 1 lulus No 2 remed min @pkspiyungan menurutmu pidato prabowo vs jokowi, skornya brapa?

Male’s tweet :

(@RIA) : @pln_123 Setelah 8 jam mati di daerah Tebing Tinggi (mulai jam 9), jam 22.52 mati lampu lagi disini. Benar-benar membiadapkan peradaban.

In addition, According to Barwis (in Boole, 1999), there are five types of arguments namely; negation, conjunction, disjunction, conditional and biconditional. All of these theories lead to difference between male and female in arguing. It shows how male responds female’s argument, male respond male’s

(22)

argument and how female respond male’s argument, female responds male’s argument.

For example;

Female respond male’s argument:

@RiaisRia Banget RT @TimMarbun commercial break adalah saatnya memantau komentar-komentar di twitter soal debat capres. Seru!

The example above shows that female to male interaction which is rewritten in the logical argument should be categorized as conditional. Theoritically conditional is defined as types of argument to combine two sentences to form a new sentence by using the notion “if..then”;

“Jika commercial break maka kami saatnya kami memanatu komentar-komentar soal debat capres di Twitter”

Female responds to male’s argument;

@RiaisRia apapun itu keduanya pasti akan jadi future President of Indonesia RT @CherylTanzil Yang satu ngomong rencana, yang satu ngomong udah ngapain aja.

The example above shows that female to male interaction which is rewritten in the logical argument should be categorized as conjunction. Theoritically conjunction is defined as type of arguments that is used to conjoin two equal statement in the logical argument by using the notion “and, but”: “Yang satu ngomong rencana tapi yang satu ngomongi udah ngapain aja”

(23)

Theoritically, males and females are different in speech activity. Eckert (2003 :98) states that the set of speech activity are: gossiping, quarelling and arguing. The writer will focus on one of them, that is arguing.

From the tweet above, the writer believes that males and females have the different way in arguing. Females like to support the another tweet by using conjunction which is showing an optional event. While males like to talk about the issue by showing their angers and reply another tweet by giving crtiqiues and judgement through the conditioned event.

Based on the phenomenon of the language use in twitter, it is belived that men and women are different in expressing their arguments in twitter. The writer will see and analyze “The Realization of Gender Arguments in Twitter”. That is the writer’s reason to choose gender differences in twitter. Relating to this fact, the researcher focuses on two points; 1. The gender arguments are used by male and female in expressing their idea in twitter, 3. The reason of male and female choose use arguments in expressing their ideas in twitter.

1.2The Problem of the Study

Based on the background of the research, the problem of the research are formulated as the following:

1. How do male and female argue in Twitter? 2. Why do they argue the way they do?

(24)

1.3The Objective of Research

In carrying out the research, it is necessary to state clearly the objectives of study in the relation of the problem posed. The objectives are :

1. To find out what types of argument occur in Twitter

2. To describe the reasons of male and female in arguing in Twitter.

1.4The Scope of Study

In accordance with the research problem, this research is limited to find out the data of male and female’s argument on twitter which use Bahasa Indonesia. This study will focus on female to male’s interaction and female to female’s interaction in expressing their arguments in twitter and the underlying factors which male and female make argument. The researcher will directly encourage the participants by posting some hot issues in Twitter. Due to the limitation of the researcher, male to male interaction is not included. The type of male and female argument consists of negation, conjucntion, disjunction, conditional and biconditional. The underlying factors consist of social status. This study will focus on two pairs interaction, namely; male to female interaction, female to female interaction.

1.5Significance of Study

Findings of the study are expected to be significantly relevant theoritical and practical aspects:

1. Theoretically, the findings of the study are expected to enrich language and gender theory, thus it will be the additional resources for either

(25)

lecturers and students who are interested in language and gender in social media.

2. Practically, since the study focuses on gender arguments which shows the way male and female argue in Twitter and the underlying factors. Hopefully, the findings are expected in giving the information for the students and lecturers of linguistics either male and female to be aware their social status and interlocutor consideration in expressing their argument, thus they can argue as well as they can.

(26)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONAND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the analysis, the conclusions were stated as the following:

1. Based on the data analysis, it was found that male argue by using only three types of arguments, namely; conjunction, conditional and biconditional, while female argued by using five types of arguments, namely; negation, disjunction, conjunction, conditional and bicnoditional. 2. The different social status is the factor underlying male and female make

arguments. Male with higher status argued by biconditional and conditional to female with lower status, female who has higher status argued by negation, disjunction and biconditional to female with lower status. Male with lower status argued by conjunction to female with higher status, female who has lower status argued by conjunction and conditional to female with higher status. Male with equal status argued by conjunction, to female and female with equal status argued by negation and conditional to female. It indicates that males are wiser and more aware with their social status than females because females are likely more considerate with with their interlocutor.

(27)

5.2 Suggestions

In relation to the conclusions, suggestions are offered as the following: 1. Based on the finding that all not pair interactions are discussed in this

study, it is suggested to further researcher to conduct another pair of interaction which is male to male interaction in expressing the arguments to enrich the researchers and the readers’ knowledge in gender arguments. 2. Based on the finding, this study is focused on social status, it is suggested

to further reasercher to point out the other factors to get deeper findings, such as; culture, age, and etc.

(28)

REFERENCES

Amir, Z,. Abidin, H,. Daris,S,. Ismail, K. 2012. Gender Differences in The Language Use of Malaysian Teenager Bloggers. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, Volume 12 (1). [Posted on 4 March 2013].

Barwise, Jon & Etchemendy. 1999. Language, proof and logic. Seven Bridges Press. New York

Besnard P & Hunter A. 2008. Elements of Argumentation. The MIT Press Cambridge. London

Bidgoli, Hossein. 2004a. The Internet Encyclopedia Volume 2 G-O. New Jersey : John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Bidgoli, Hossein. 2004b. The Internet Encyclopedia Volume 3 P-Z. New Jersey : John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Bogdan, R & Biklen, S. 1982. Qualitative Research for Education ( 2nd Ed). Boston: Allan and Bacon.

Boyd, Gelder, &Lotan. 2010. Tweet, Tweet, Retweet; Conversational Aspect of Retweet on Twitter. HICSS-43. IEEE: Kauai, HI, Jan 6 [Posted on 2 June 2014].

Bucholtz, Mary. 1999. Reinventing Identities; The Gendered Self in Discourse. Oxford University Press. New York

Burger, JD,. Henderson, J,. Kim. G,. Zarrella, G. Discriminating on Twitter. The Mitre Corporation USA 01730. [Posted on 26 June 2012].

Crystal, David. 2004. Language and Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Eckert, P & Sally MC. G,. 2003. Language and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Green, D, W, EdD,. The Summary Of “You Just Don’t Understand: Women And Men In Conversation by Deborah Tannen”. DrDougGreen.com.

Dgreen@STNY.RR.com. [Posted on 3 Juy 2012[.

Goddard, A & Patterson, M, L,. 2000. Language and Gender. London and New York: Routledge.

Griffin, Em., McClash,. Langan, J, Emily,. 2006. A First Look At Communication

(29)

Hasan, M. J & Khammat, H. A. 2011. Gender Differences In The Use Of Sentences Type and Sentences Modifiers, An Analysis of Email by Iraqi Learners Of English. Journal Of The College of Arts. University Of Basrah No (17). [Posted on 4 April 2013].

Hellinger, M and Bubman, H. 2003. Gender Across Language. Amsterdam/Philadelpia. John Benjamins.

Herring, Susan C. 2001. Gender and Power in Online Communication. Indiana University

Huffaker,David. 2004. Gender Similarities and Differences in Online Identity And

Language Use Among Teenager Bloggers. Washignton DC [Posted on

3 July 2012].

Hurley, J Patrcik. 2012. A Concise Introduction to Logic. Wadsworth. Cengag Learnin.

Jeon, Allan. 2003. Gender Interaction in Online Debates: Look Who’s Arguing

With Whom. The Annual Meeting of The American Educational

Research Association, Chicago [Posted on 21 Jan 2014].

Johnson, L Steven. 2009. Winning Debates. International Deabate Education Association. New York.

Miles, Mattew B and A, Michael Huberman. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Pease, Allam & Barbara. 2001. Why Men Don’t Listen & Women Can’t Read Maps. Great Britain: Pease International Ply Ltd. [Posted on 19 March 2014].

Pines, Gat & Al. 2002. Gender Differences and Style of Argument Between Couple During Divorce Mediation. The Journal of Conflict Resolution Quarterly Vol.20 no.1. Willey Periodical Inc

Suciu, Giulia. Why Don’t You Understand? Male and Female Communication. University of Oradea [Posted on 3 July 2012].

Talbot, M,. Atkinson K,. & Atkinson, Daud. 2003. Language and Power in The Modern World. Cambridge: Edinburgh University Press.

Thompson, D. 2003. Commincation and Language. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wood, T, Julia. 2007. Gendered Lives; Communication, Gender, Culture. USA: Thomson Wadworth.

William, Terras, Warwick. 2013. What People Study When They Study Twitter. Journal Documentation 69 (3) [Posted on 2 june 2014].

(30)

Yulie, George. 2006. The Study of Language 3rd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiy Press.

Zhao, & Rosson. 2012. How and Why People Twitter: The Role That Microblogging in Informal Communication at Work. Pennsylvania State University.

(1)

lecturers and students who are interested in language and gender in social media.

(2)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONAND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the analysis, the conclusions were stated as the following:

2. The different social status is the factor underlying male and female make arguments. Male with higher status argued by biconditional and conditional to female with lower status, female who has higher status argued by negation, disjunction and biconditional to female with lower status. Male with lower status argued by conjunction to female with higher status, female who has lower status argued by conjunction and conditional to female with higher status. Male with equal status argued by conjunction, to female and female with equal status argued by negation and conditional to female. It indicates that males are wiser and more aware with their social status than females because females are likely more considerate with with their interlocutor.