Tag Question Women’s Language Features
56
many traditionally workplace e.g., nursing, secretarial work, social work, as might be expec
ted; rather they appropriate a masculine identity in dealing with the public” p.317. Moreover, McElhiny argues that women in the police force adopted a
“bureaucratic” interactional style, a rational, emotionless, and efficient interactional style associated with masculinity. The police women draws upon an emotionless and
hyper-rational interaction style associated with male and masculine workplace. Hart as an FBI agent tried not to show her feminine side. She always showed
her masculine side when she behaved and delivered a speech. According to Sankoff and Laberge 1978, the linguistic market refers to how a person’s job in the speech
community influences language use. Freed 1996 points o
ut “an experimental setting puts women and men in symmetrical social relations, performing identical tasks, elicited in the women and
men the same kind of talk” p.317. This shows that women who are being a part with men in the same social relations motivate women to show their same language. They
believe that they could face discrimination in the workplace. As shown in this example [24],
[24] Mr. Melling: Are you hungry? Hart: Yeah.
Based on this case, Hart responds to Mr. Melling’s question with yeah instead of yes.
For women, it would be always yes, never yeah. Tannen 1990 states that women are always well-spoken and polite. Yeah is a response that is usually used by
men but here Hart also adopts it.
57
Moreover, women tend to use Standard English forms compared to men. Since Hart was accustomed to interact with men in her workplace, she applied non-
standard English forms, for instance, gonna, kinda, and wearin’ in which those
standard forms are going to, kind of, and wearing. Those nonstandard languages can be found in standardized English dictionary but they are considered as nonstandard
English. Cameron 1998 claims that women’s speech is regularly more standard than
men’s. Trudgill 1972 also adds that men are more likely to use nonstandard language because of its association with working-class masculinity. As stated in this
theory, Hart sometimes used nonstandard language because she was in a masculine workplace.
Hart’s speech reflected her social aspirations. Holmes 2001 states that where women work in jobs which favor the development of multiplex networks for
example, at jobs which involve their interaction with their friends, kin, and neighbors, then they develop strong solidarity ties with those people and will be
reflected in their speech patterns. Many linguists believe that linguistic changes spread through the social network of individuals. It means workplace introduced
changes in the way Hart delivered speech. Finally, women changed their speech through their work where they have some roles in public social life.