Griffin Gamble, Shayan Karmaly, Rahul Reddy, and Michael Zhan
Our team was interested in looking at some speech features that were found primarily in women’s speech in a famous study by Robin Lakoff in 1973. We wanted to see if Lakoff’s findings were still prevalent in today’s media. In our study, we followed two characters, Robin Scherbatsky and Barney Stinson, in the TV show How I Met Your Mother. When analyzing their various conversations with friends throughout the show, we focused on two of the many speech features that Lakoff initially identified – tag questions and intensifiers. We separated their conversations into two social contexts – single-gender and mixed-gender conversations. We were curious to see if the frequency of the speech features would increase or decrease depending on the type of social situation that Robin and Barney were in. In addition, we were interested in the overall frequency of tag questions and intensifiers in Robin’s speech versus Barney’s speech because, according to Lakoff, these speech features should be more prominent in female speech (1973). We found that Barney had more tag questions and intensifiers per line than Robin, but in single-gender situations, Robin had significantly more intensifiers per line.
[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]
Introduction and Background
Our research hoped to answer the following questions: Are tag questions and intensifiers still predominantly found in women’s speech more than in men’s speech? Does the gender of the speaker’s conversation partners play a role in how often speakers will use tag questions and intensifiers? One of the reasons that we are interested in both these questions and revisiting Lakoff’s findings is that since 1973, there have been many changes to gender norms as well as the ways that people represent themselves. In general, people are a lot more tolerant and accepting of differences, so we predict it could be the case that the gender stereotypes in language have changed as well.
While we initially planned on getting live recordings of UCLA students in different social contexts, we quickly realized that this would be difficult to accomplish within the ten weeks allotted for this study. It would also be placing a large burden on the participant as they would need to record themselves as they went about their already busy day. Because of this difficulty, we shifted gears toward analyzing TV show characters. It ended up working out because one of the research methods that Lakoff (1973) used in her initial study was observing the media, so we decided to do the same with the show How I Met Your Mother.
The show is a rom-com about five friends who live their lives and navigate the social setting of New York. We chose this show because it’s only been eight years since the show finished and the main cast all exhibit male and female gender stereotypes. Specifically, the two characters we followed are Robin and Barney because while they both exhibit typical stereotypes for their gender, they also often portray stereotypical gender norms of the opposite gender.
Methods
We analyzed six episodes of How I Met Your Mother which totaled two hours of footage and 559 lines from our two characters combined. We specifically picked episodes that Robin and Barney were featured in so they would have more lines and we could collect more data from them. When watching the episodes and reading the transcripts, we noted each time Robin or Barney used either of the two speech features. We wrote down the speech feature that was used, the character that said it, and whether it was a single-gender or mixed-gender situation. For each episode, we created a separate section on our spreadsheet for inputting the data and an area sectioned off for calculating the total counts.
It is important to note that not all tag questions are equal and they may not share the same function to portray the speaker as having less authority or power (Cameron 76). While you can use a tag question as a self-lowering device by giving your interlocutor the floor to respond to your statement, you can also use a tag question as an aggressive tool. For example, “You aren’t all that great, are you?” That said, all the tag questions in our data were of the hedging type. Here is an example from Robin, “If you’re going to be this disgusting, we’re not watching this, okay?”
Results/Analysis
So what exactly were our findings? Overall, we analyzed six episodes totaling two hours of footage and our findings were different from what we expected to find based on existing research. In (Seigler & Seigler, 1976, p. 169) and (Kramer, 1977, p. 159) both studies found that gender stereotypes in speech aligned with Lakoff’s theory. Keep in mind, these studies were focused on the perceptions of speech, not what each gender actually says in real life. We expected to find that the speech characteristics that were once associated primarily with women’s speech can now be found equally in both male and female speech, and are no longer strong indicators of the gender of the speaker. This was our hypothesis. Below, I will go into details including visualizations that display what we ended up analyzing.
Our data consisted of two different social contexts for analysis. Specifically, we looked at mixed-gender situations (where there was at least one male and one female in a social setting) and at single-gender situations (where there was only one gender in a social setting). For the purposes of the experiment, the genders will refer to non-trans males and females who identify as the gender that they were born with. Now, let’s look at the data:
As we can see in Table 1, we examined situations in which Robin and Barney are in mixed-gender and single-gender lines for the purposes of the tag questions. For this, we tried to choose episodes where we thought the two characters would have an equal number of lines in this context and to our convenience, they did for the mixed-gender situations, but NOT for the single-gender ones. So, while Robin and Barney have nearly the same number of total mixed-gender lines, Barney had 31.5% more tag questions. On the other hand, Robin led this category in single-gender situations!
Similarly, when looking at Table 2, we can see that Barney had 34.5% more intensifiers and from the raw data, it would actually seem as if Barney is the winner in both categories, however, when we equalize the data (as shown in the graph), Robin has more intensifiers per line in the single-gender situations. The tricky part of this table is that it shows the analysis per line rather than the total amount. We decided not to go with raw numbers so that it is not confusing to look at the total speaking time, but rather easier to look at the date per line. This average is more precise since it allows us to equalize the data for both Barney and Robin. And if we look more specifically at the single-gender situations, Robin actually has roughly half of Barney’s lines. Overall though, the single-gender data is pretty sparse; therefore, we can conclude that it’s not super conclusive of anything.
Discussion and Conclusions
The conclusion that can be drawn from our analysis and findings is that Lakoff’s speech features that were stereotypically and data-backed as either higher for men or women no longer hold true in modern times. We can see from our data that speech features that were shown in Lakoff’s research as higher for women such as tag questions and intensifiers were actually around the same for Barney and Robin. In some cases, they were even higher for the male focus of the study, Barney. Although we were not able to find much data for single-gender situations, from the evidence that we do have we can conclude that modern-day society has moved into a third-wave sociolinguistics lens that puts much more emphasis on the individual when compared to the past. After taking into consideration the time gap between the gender stereotypes of 1973 and the stereotypes of today in 2022, we can see that our hypothesis did indeed hold true where these outdated assumptions on stereotypical speech features can no longer be linked to a single gender. This makes sense as we now live in a much more gender-fluid and accepting society than in the past where everyone was strictly grouped as masculine and feminine and deviating from the norm was shunned by most. Some high-quality TED talks that reinforce these ideas are “Language around Gender and Identity Evolves” presented by Archie Crowley and “How Language Shapes the Way We Think” presented by Lera Boroditsky. The first TED talk by Archie delves into how language is ever-changing and a powerful tool to allow people to identify themselves and find something that makes them feel comfortable. In the second TED talk, Lera uses scientifically backed data to prove that language does indeed shape the way we think and how we have over 7,000 cognitive universes, each linked with a language as each language gives the user a unique way of viewing the world and is very impactful in shaping the way we view the things around us without us even knowing. Both presentations talk about language being a powerful tool for self-expression and tie into our appeal that language should not be confined to preconceived notions of gender schema as it might have been in the past. Language should be something that brings people closer together instead of a weapon that further alienates people. If there were more time, we would have liked to expand upon our research by analyzing real people instead of just fictional TV characters and comparing the results. We also realize that analyzing real people would mean we would also need to account for external influencing factors such as race, occupation, geographical origin, etc.
While we began looking at how speaker agency can play a role in changing one’s speech through single and mixed-gender situations, it would be valuable in a future study to analyze different types of conversations. For example, an argumentative conversation may have significantly fewer self-lowering tag questions while it might have more intensifiers to help get the point across. Podesva’s (2011) study could be used as inspiration for a framework for how to conduct a study involving participants that move through discrete social contexts.
References
Cameron, D., McAlinden, F., & O’Leary, K. (1988). Lakoff in context: The social and linguistic functions of tag questions. Women in their speech communities, 74, 93.
How language shapes the way we think | Lera Boroditsky. (May 2, 2018). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKK7wGAYP6k
Kramer, C. (1977). Perceptions of Female and Male Speech. Language and Speech, 20(2), 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383097702000207
Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and Woman’s Place. Language in Society, 2(1), 45–80. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4166707
Language around gender and identity evolves (And always has) | Archie Crowley. (April 16, 2021). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XguYZXUChhY
Podesva, R. J. (2011). The California Vowel Shift and Gay Identity. American Speech, 86(1), 32–51. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-1277501
Siegler, D. M., & Siegler, R. S. (1976). Stereotypes of Males’ and Females’ Speech. Psychological Reports, 39(1), 167–170. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1976.39.1.167
[/expander_maker]