The Objective of the Study The Scope of the Study
65 the contestants.
However, “conflict” as male charactiristics and
“compromise” as female characteristics were not found in this findings.
3. The reason why male commentators of Indonesian Idol used report talk
whereas female commentators used rapport talk was because male treated the language as a way to give factual information, whereas females did it as a way
to negotitate closeness and intimacy. 1.2
Suggestions
Due to the above conclusions, it is necessary to give suggestions as the following:
a. It is suggested to the readers to increase their understanding of how males and
females communicate in their interaction to other people since gender differences in communication potentially create misunderstanding.
b. It is suggested to other researchers especially the researchers majoring in
English Applied Linguistics to conduct further research in other field of making communications, such as in daily conversation, debate, speech and so
on to develop the theory of gender differences in communication and also to enrich the researchers and the readers’ knowledge on gender differences
theories.
c.
It is suggested to the lecturers of language to introduce the theory of gender differences in communication to their students so that it can be an additional
references in teaching and learning process.
66
REFERENCES
Azhar, S. and Mohindra, V. 2012. Gender Communication: A Comparative Analysis of Communicational Approaches of Men and Women at Workplaces. IQSR
Journal of Humanities and Social Science JHSS. Volume 2, Issue 1 Sep- Oct, 2012, PP 18-27
Climate, C. 1997. Men and Women Talking: The Differential Use of Speech and Language by Gender.
Eckert, Penelope and Sally McConnell-Ginet. 2003. Language and Gender. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Haas, A. 1979. Male and Female Spoken Language Differences: Stereotypes and Evidence. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 86, No. 3, 615-626
Holmes, J. 1992. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York: Longman. Holmes, J. 2001. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson
Education Limited. Keith, G and Shuttleworth, J. 2000. Living Language. London: Hodder Stoughton
Educational. Lakoff, Robin. 1975. Language and
Woman’s Place. Language and society, 2, 45-79.
Lincoln, Yuonnas Guba Egon G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry, London: Sage Publication.
Merriam, S.B. 1998. Qualitative Research and Case Studies Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publications.
Miles, M, Huberman. A.M. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis. Beverly Hills: California Sage Publication.
Mayring, P. 2000. Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research
Maltz, D. and Borker, R. 1982. A Cultural Approach to Male-Female Miscommunication. In Marry 2003, pp.122