5.  PENNY ECKERT, Institute for Research on Learning, and
    SALLY MCCONNELL-GINET, Cornell University


1991 Linguistic Institute
Course 208 - Gender and Language Use
Penelope Eckert and Sally McConnell-Ginet

This course will explore an approach to gender and language 
use that emphasizes the grounding in social practice of both. 
We will examine some of the basic theoretical notions 
available for thinking about language and about gender in 
social as well as psychological terms, drawing out our 
analytical tools not only from linguistics but also from recent 
theorizing about cognition, about society, and about gender. 
Our aim will be to integrate social and cognitive approaches 
to the interaction of language and gender and of language 
and society in general.  Not only gender and linguistic 
conventions but most beliefs, knowledge, values and desires, 
we propose, emerge in and are transformed by people 
collectively engaged in practices that constitute them as 
members of a common community of practice.  Stereotypes 
and biases about the sexes, heterosexist privilege and 
homophobia, standard and vernacular norms (and other 
ethnic and class-based norms for speaking and doing), 
epistemic authority, readily available presuppositions and 
metaphors:  communities of practice are the locus of the 
activities that produce, reproduce, and sometimes challenge 
or transform such sociocultural and psychological 
phenomena.  From this perspective we will discuss earlier 
research and theorizing about the significance of gender as 
social practice.  We will close by looking at our own linguistic 
profession as a community of practice and thinking about 
how to improve the status of women in linguistics (in all 
areas) and how to involve talented linguists of both sexes in 
language-gender research.

Readings:  The coursepack includes all the assigned readings, 
and will be available on reserve.  The optional readings are 
also on reserve and can be ordered by the numbers 
following the titles on the syllabus.

Written work:  Those registered for a grade will develop 
speculative papers or research proposals that reflect this 
course's approach to gender and language use.  You are 
encouraged to work on joint projects in groups of up to four 
people.  We will organize groups and topics during the first 
week of the course.  Final projects will be due on July 29.

Office hours:  Our (shared) office is 236 Kresge, phone 459-
3532.  We will hold joint office hours there on Monday 4:00-
5:30.  To make appointments for other times, use e-mail, or 
leave information on how to contact you.  Our e-mail 
addresses are mcginet@ling.ucsc.edu and 
eckert@ling.ucsc.edu (also copy to Penny_Eckert@irl.com).

COURSE SCHEDULE

Monday, July 8:  Introduction
Linguistics and the individual/social distinction
Communities of practice
Overview of course

Reading
   Bourdieu, P.  (1977).  The economics of linguistic 
exchanges.  Social science information  16(6):  645-668.
   Gal, S.  (1990).  Between speech and silence:  the 
problematics of research on language and gender.  In M. 
DiLeonardo ed., Toward a new anthropology of gender. 
Berkeley:  University of California Press.
   McConnell-Ginet, S.  (1988).  Language and gender.  In F. J. 
Newmeyer ed.,  Linguistics : The Cambridge survey 4. 
Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press, 75-99.

Optional Reading:
   Wenger, E.  (1990).  Toward a theory of cultural 
transparency.  Palo Alto:  Institute for Research on Learning, 
Chapter 7.  [23].

Thursday, July 11:  Language and Gender as Social Practice
Theoretical constructs for studying language, society and 
action
   social categories
   social networks
   speech communities
   linguistic marketplaces
   speech acts
   interaction strategies

Gender Theory
   power/hierarchy:  Stratification and status
   polarization:  "roles" and domain
   desire/affection/aversion

Reading
   Connell, R. W. (1987).  Gender and power.  Stanford, CA: 
Stanford University Press, Chapter 4.

   Goffman, E. (1977). The arrangement between the sexes. 
Theory and society 4:  301-332.

   Scales-Trent, J.  (1990).  Commonalities:  on being black 
and white:  different and the same.  Yale J. of Law and 
Feminism 2(2):  305-327.

Optional Reading
   Bordo, S. (1990).  Feminism , postmodernism, and 
genderscepticism.  In L.J. Hicholson ed., 
Feminism/postmodernism.  New York and London: 
Routledge, 133-156.  [1]

   Flax, J.  (1990).  Postmodernism and gender relations in 
feminist theory.  In L.J. Hicholson ed., 
Feminism/postmodernism.  New York and London: 
Routledge, 39-62.  [7] 

   Green, G.M.  (1989).  Pragmatics and natural language 
understanding.  Hillsdale, NJ:  Lawrence Erlbaum associates, 
Chapters 1,4,5.  [10]

  Gumperz, J.J.  and J. Cook-Gumperz.  (1982).  Introduction: 
language and the communication of social identity.  In J.J. 
Gumperz ed., Language and social identity.  Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press, 1-21.  [11]

   Milroy, L.  (1980).  Language and Social Networks.  Oxford: 
Blackwell, Chapter 1.  [18]

   Rosaldo, M.Z.  (1980).  The use and abuse of anthropology: 
reflections on feminism and cross-cultural understanding. 
Signs 5(3):  389-417.  [22]

   Levinson, S.  (1983).  Pragmatics.  Cambridge:  Cambridge 
University Press, Chapter 6.  [17]


Monday, July 15:  Constructing Meaning, Knowledge, and 
Values in Communities of Practice
   Learning and legitimate peripheral participation
   The relation between knowing and genderized trajectories 
of community participation.
   Differentiation within and between communities of rights 
(and inclination) to define rather than (simply) understand, 
to make rather than (simply) consume knowledge, to 
evaluate rather than (simply) enforce established values.
   "standard" language, "vernacular," "propriety," interpretive 
and epistemic authority.

Reading
   Brown, P.  (1990).  Gender, politeness, and confrontation in 
Tenejapa.  Discourse processes 13(1):  123-141.

   Goodwin, M.H.  (1990).  Tactical uses of stories: 
participation frameworks within girls' and boys' disputes. 
Discourse processes 13(1):  33-72.

   Maltz, D.N.  and R.A. Borker.  (1982).  A cultural approach 
to male-female miscommunication.  In J.J. Gumperz ed., 
Language and social identity.  Cambridge: Cambridge 
University Press, 196-216.

   Thorne, B.  (1990).  Children and gender:  constructions of 
difference.  In Rhode, ed., Theoretical perspectives on sexual 
difference.  New Haven:  Yale University Press.

Optional Reading
   Harding, S.  (1975).  Women and words in a Spanish 
village.  In R.R. Reiter ed., Toward and anthropology of 
women.  New York:  Monthly Review Press, 283-308.  [12]

   Ochs, E.  (In press).  Indexing gender.  In A. Duranti and C. 
Goodwin ed., Rethinking context.  Cambridge:  Cambridge 
University Press.  [20]


Thursday, July 18:  Variation and Gender
   Categorization, continua and oppositions
   The construction of social meaning
   Global and local explanation

Reading
   Eckert, P.  (1989).  The whole woman:  Sex and gender 
differences in variation.  Language variation and change 1: 
245-267.

   Labov, W.  (1990).  The intersection of sex and social class 
in the course of linguistic change.  Language variation and 
change 2(2):  205-251.

Optional Reading
   Cameron, D. and J. Coates.  (1987).  Some problems in the 
sociolinguistic explanation of sex differences.  In J. Coates 
and D. Cameron eds., Women in their speech communities. 
London and New York:  Longman, 13-26.  [2]

   Deuchar, M.  (1987).  A pragmatic account of women's use 
of standard speech.  In J. Coates and D. Cameron ed., Women 
in their speech communities.  London and New York: 
Longman,  27-32.  [4]

   Nichols, P.C.  (1983).  Linguistic options and choices for 
black women in the rural south.  In B. Thorne, C. Kramerae 
and N. Henley eds., Language, gender and society.  Rowley, 
MA:  Newbury House, 54-68.  [19]


Monday, July 22:  Semantics/Pragmatics:  Meaning and 
Interpreting
   Presupposition
   Metaphor
   Indirection
   Semantic change/conflict
   Sexist language reform
   Expressing distinctive perspectives

Reading
   McConnell-Ginet, S.  (1989).  The sexual (re)production of 
meaning:  a discourse-based theory.  In F.W. Frank and P.A. 
Treichler eds., Language, Gender and Professional Writing: 
Theoretical Approaches and Guidelines for Nonsexist Usage. 
New York:  MLA, 35-50.

   Michell, G.  (1990).  Women and lying:  a pragmatic and 
semantic analysis of 'telling it slant'.  in A.Y. al-Hibri and 
M.A. Simons eds., Hypatia Reborn:  Essays in Feminist 
Philosophy.  Bloomington, IN:  Indiana University Press, 175-
191.

   Treichler, P.A.  (1989).  From discourse to dictionary:  how 
sexist meanings are authorized.  In F.W. Frank and P.A. 
Treichler eds., Language, Gender and Professional Writing: 
Theoretical Approaches and Guidelines for Nonsexist Usage. 
New York:  MLA, 51-79.

Optional Reading
   Graddol, D. and J. Swann. (1989).  Gender voices.  Oxford: 
Basil Blackwell, Chapter 6. [9]

   Penelope, J.  (1990).  Speaking Freely:  Unlearning the Lies 
of the Father's Tongues.  New York:  Pergamon Press, Chapter 
11.  [21]

   Winant, T.R.  (1990).  How ordinary (sexist) discourse 
resists radical (feminist) critique.  In A.Y. al-Hibri and M.A. 
Simons ed., Hypatia Reborn:  Essays in Feminist 
Philosophy.  Bloomington, IN:  Indiana University Press,  54-69.  [24]


Thursday, July 25:  Intonation, Bilingualism
   Intonation 
      Multiple funcitons
      Espressivity/control
      Iconicity and social symbolism

Reading
   McConnell-Ginet, S.  (1983).  Intonation in a man's world. 
In B. Thorne, C. Kramerae and N. Henley eds., Language, 
Gender and Society.  Rowley:  Newbury House, 69-88.

   McLemore, C.  (forthcoming).  The interpretation of L*H in 
English.  In C. McLemore ed., Linguistic Forum 32.  Austin: 
University of Texas Department of Linguistics and the Center 
for Cognitive Science.

Optional Reading
   Graddol, D. and J. Swann. (1989).  Gender voices.  Oxford: 
Basil Blackwell, Chapter 2.  [8]

   Bilingualism
      Domains/activities/access
      Bilingual practice
      stability and change

Reading
   Gal, S.  (1978).  Peasant men can't get wives:  language 
change and sex roles in a bilingual community.  Language in 
Society 7:  1-16.

Optional Reading
   Hill, J.H.  (1987).  Women's speech in modern Mexicano.  In 
S.U. Philips, S. Steele and C. Tanz eds., Language, Gender, and 
Sex in Comparative Perspective.  Cambridge:  Cambridge 
University Press, 50-70.  [13]

   Zentella, A.C.  (1987).  Language and female identity in the 
Puerto Rican community.  In J. Penfield ed., Women and 
language in transition.  Albany:  SUNY Press, 167-179.  [25]


Monday, July 29:  Conversational Interaction
   We will try to orchestrate this session more as a discussion 
than a lecture, drawing on participant's reading, observation 
and thinking about gender and conversational interaction.

Reading
   Cameron, D., F. McAlinden and K. O'Leary.  (1988).  Lakoff 
in context:  the social and linguistic function of tag questions. 
In J. Coates and D. Cameron ed., Women in their Speech 
Communities:  New Perspectives on Language and Sex. 
London and New York:  Longman, 74-93.

   Goodwin, M.H.  and C. Goodwin.  (1987).  Children's arguing. 
In S.U. Philips, S. Steele and C. Tanz eds., Language, Gender 
and Sex in Comparative Perspective.  Cambridge:  Cambridge 
University Press, 200-248.

   Tannen, D.  (1989).  Interpreting interruption in 
conversation.  Papers from the 25th annual meeting of the 
Chicago Linguistics Society.  Part 2:  Parasession on language 
and context, 266-287.

Optional Reading
   Coates, J.  (1988).  Gossip revisited:  language in all-female 
groups.  In J. Coates and D. Cameron eds., Women in their Speech 
Communities:  New Perspectives on Language and Sex. 
London and New York:  Longman, 94-122.  [3]

   Eckert, P.  (1990).  Cooperative competition in adolescent 
girl talk.  Discourse Processes 13:  92-122.  [5]

   Edelsky, C.  (1981).  Who's got the floor?  Language in 
Society  10:  383-421.  [6]

   James, D. and S. Clarke.  (forthcoming).  Women, men and 
interruptions; a critical review.  In D. Tannen ed., Gender and 
Conversational Interaction.  [14]

   James, D.  and J. Drakich.  (forthcoming).  Understanding 
gender differences in amount of talk:  a critical review of 
research.  [15]

   Keenan, E.  (1974).  Norm-makers, norm-breakers:  uses of 
speech by men and women in a Malagasy community.  In R. 
Bauman and J. Sherzer eds., Explorations in the Ethnography 
of Speaking.  Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press, 125-
143.  [16]


Thursday, August 1:  Linguistics and its Communities of 
Practice:  Prospects for Women and for Gender Studies in 
Linguistics.

Membership in the field
   verbal style/demeanor
   networks
   mentors/colleagues
   identity/learning, and the negotiation of knowledge

Constructing linguistics as a discipline
   genderizing science
   theory/description
   mathematics and formalism/imaginative "leading ideas"
   cross-disciplinary nature of gender/language research

Reading
   Eckert, P.  (1990).  Personal and professional networks.  In 
A. Davison and P. Eckert ed., The Cornell Lectures:  Women in 
the Linguistics Profession.  Washington DC:  Committee on the 
Status of Women of the Linguistic Society of America, 142-
154.

   Fox Keller, E.  (1990).  The gender/science system:  or is 
sex to gender as nature is to science?  In N. Tuana ed., 
Feminism and Science.  Bloomington IN:  Indiana University 
Press, 33-44.

   Longino, H.  (1990).  Can there be a feminist science?   In 
N. Tuana ed., Feminism and Science.  Bloomington IN: 
Indiana University Press,  45-57.

   Moulton, J.  (1983).  The adversary paradigm in 
philosophy.  In S. Harding and M.B. Hintikka eds., Discovering 
reality.  Boston and Dordrecht:  D. Reidel.