Cover not available
Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 22:2 (1999) ► pp.1–17

Women at work

Analysing women’a talk in New Zealand workplaces

| Victoria University of Wellington
Over the last ten years, evidence of gender difference in the use of language has been re-examined from a social constructionist perspective. This approach emphasises the extent to which we actively “perform” or construct aspects of our social identity in interaction with others. Drawing on an extensive database of workplace interactions recorded in a wide range of New Zealand workplaces, this paper uses a social constructionist framework to examine the strategies used by women managers to perform their professional identities at work. The analysis examines the ways in which these women draw on a range of discourse strategies to effectively manage meetings and achieve their workplace objectives.
Published online: 1 January 1999
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.22.2.01hol
References (58)
Ainsworth-Vaughn, N. (1992) Topic transitions in physician-patient interviews: power, gender and discourse change. Language in Society 21, 3: 409–426. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aries, E. (1996). Men and Women in Interaction. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Atkinson, J.M. (1979) Sequencing and shared attentiveness to court proceedings. In George Psathas (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodol-ogy. New York, Irvington Press.Google Scholar
Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and S.J. Harris (1997) Managing Language: the Discourse of Corporate Meetings. Amsterdam, John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bunker, B.B. (1990) Appreciating diversity and modifying organisational cultures: men and women at work. In S. Srivastva and D.L. Cooperrider and Associates. Appreciative Management and Leadership: the Power of Positive Thought and Action in Organizations. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble. New York, Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (1992) Review of D. Tannen’s You Just Don’t Understand. Feminism and Psychology 21: 465–468.Google Scholar
(1996) The language-gender interface: challenging co-optation. In V.L. Bergvall, J.M. Bing and A.F. Freed (eds) Rethinking Language and Gender Research: Theory and Practice. New York, Longman.Google Scholar
Case, S.S. (1991) Wide verbal repertoire speech: gender, language and managerial influence. Women’s Studies International Forum 16, 3: 271–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995) Gender, language and the professions: recognition of wide-verbal-repertoire speech. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 25, 2: 149–192.Google Scholar
(1988) Cultural differences, not deficiencies: an analysis of managerial women’s language. In S. Rose and L. Larwood (eds) Women’s Careers: Pathways and Pitfalls. New York, Praeger.Google Scholar
Chambers, J.C. (1992) Linguistic correlates of gender and sex. English World-Wide 131, 21: 173–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, J. (1988) Gossip revisited: language in all-female groups. In J. Coates and D. Cameron (eds) Women in their Speech Communities. London, Longman.Google Scholar
(ed.) (1998) Language and Gender: a Reader. Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
(1996) Women Talk. Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cooperrider, D.L. (1986) Appreciative Inquiry: a Methodology for Understanding and Enhancing Organizational Innovation. Ann Arbor, University Microfilms International.Google Scholar
Cox, J.A., J.L. Read and P.M. van Auken (1990) Male-female differences in communicating job-related humor: an exploratory study. Humor 3, 3: 287–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crawford, M. (1989) Humour in Conversational Context: Beyond biases in the study of gender and humour. In R.K. Unger (ed) Representations: Social Constructions of Gender. Baywood, Amityville, NY.Google Scholar
(1995) Talking Difference: On Gender and Language. London, Sage.Google Scholar
Crawford, M. and D. Gressley (1991) Creativity, caring, and context: women’s and men’s accounts of humor preferences and practices. Psychology of Women Quarterly 151: 217–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eakins, B.W. and R.G. Eakins (1979) Verbal turn-taking and exchanges in faculty dialogue. In B.L. Dubois and I. Crouch (eds) The Sociology of the Languages of American Women. San Antonio (Texas), Trinity University Press.Google Scholar
Edelsky, C. (1981) Who’s got the floor? Language in Society 101: 383–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elgin, S.H. (1993) Genderspeak, Men, Women and the Gentle Art of Self Defense. New York, Wiley.Google Scholar
Freed, A.F. (1992) We understand perfectly: a critique of Tannen’s view of cross-sex communication. In K. Hall, M. Bucholtz and B. Moonwomon (eds) Locating Power. Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference (April 4 and 5 1992), vol. 11. Berkeley, Berkeley Women and Language Group, University of California.Google Scholar
Gray, J. (1992) Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus. New York, Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J.J. (1992) Interviewing in intercultural situations. In P. Drew and J. Heritage (eds) Talk at Work. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hay, J. (1994) Jocular abuse in mixed gender interaction. Wellington Working Papers in Linguistics 61: 26–55.Google Scholar
(1995) Gender and Humour: Beyond a Joke. Wellington, New Zealand, MA thesis, Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. (1992) Women’s talk in public contexts. Discourse and Society 3, 2: 131–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995) Women, Men and Politeness. London, Longman.Google Scholar
(forthcoming a) Politeness, power and provocation: how humour functions in the workplace. To appear in Discourse Studies.
(forthcoming b) Sharing a laugh: pragmatic aspects of humour and gender in the workplace. Paper to be presented at 13th New Zealand Linguistics Society Conference, Palmerston North, November 1999.
Holmes, J. and M. Marra (1999) Over the edge? Subversive humour between colleagues and friends. Paper presented at International Humour Conference, Oaklands, San Francisco, July 1999.
Holmes, J., M. Stubbe and B. Vine (1999a) Constructing professional identity: “doing power” in policy units. In S. Sarangi and C. Roberts (eds) Talk, Work and Institutional Order. Discourse in Medical, Mediation and Management Settings. Berlin/New York, Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1999b) Analysing New Zealand English in the workplace. New Zealand English Journal 131: 8–12.Google Scholar
James, D. and J. Drakich (1993) Understanding gender differences in amount of talk. In D. Tannen (ed.) Gender and Conversational Interaction. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kendall, S. and D. Tannen (1997) Gender and language in the workplace. In R. Wodak (ed.) Gender and Discourse. London, Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kotthoff, H. (1997) The interactional achievement of expert status: creating asymmetries by “teaching conversational lecture” in TV discussion. In H. Kotthoff and R. Wodak (eds) Communicating Gender in Context. Amsterdam, Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leet-Pellegrini, H.M. (1980) Conversational dominance as a function of gender and expertise. In H. Giles, P. Robinson and P. Smith (eds) Language: Social Psychological Perspectives. Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Meyerhoff, M. (1996) Dealing with gender identity as a sociolinguistic variable. In V.L. Bergvall, J.M. Bing and A.F. Freed (eds) Rethinking Language and Gender Research: Theory and Practice. New York, Longman.Google Scholar
(1991) Review of Tannen 1990. Australian Journal of Linguistics 111: 236–41.Google Scholar
Morrison, A., R.P. White and E. van Velsor (1987) Breaking the Glass Ceiling: Can Women Reach the Top of America’s Largest Corporations? New York, Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Mott, H. and H. Petrie (1995) Workplace interactions: Women’s linguistic behaviour. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 14, 3: 324–336. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rearden, K.K. (1995) They Don’t Get it Do They? Boston, Little Brown.Google Scholar
Romaine, S. (1999) Communicating Gender. Mahwah (New Jersey), Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smith-Hefner, N.J. (1988) Women and politeness: the Javanese example. Language in Society 17, 4: 535–554. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sollitt-Morris, L. (1996) Language, Gender and Power Relationships: the enactment of repressive discourse in staff meetings of two subject departments in a New Zealand secondary school. PhD thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Srivastva, S., R.E. Fry and D.L. Cooperrider (1990) Introduction: the call for executive appreciation. In S. Srivastva and D. L. Cooperrider and Associates. Appreciative Management and Leadership: the Power of Positive Thought and Action in Organizations. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Stubbe, M. (1998) Researching language in the workplace: a participatory model. Proceedings of the Australian Linguistics Society Conference (University of Queensland, July 1998). [URL].
Talbot, M.M. (1998) Language and Gender: an Introduction. Oxford, Polity Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, D. (1990) You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York, William Morrow.Google Scholar
(ed.) (1993) Gender and Conversational Interaction. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(1994a) Gender and Discourse. London, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(1994b) Talking from 9 to 5. London, Virago Press.Google Scholar
Troemel-Ploetz, S. (1991) Review essay: selling the apolitical. Discourse and Society 2, 4: 489–502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turner, R. (1972) Some formal properties of therapy talk. In D. Sudnow (ed.) Studies in Social Interaction. New York, Free Press.Google Scholar
West, C. (1984) When the doctor is a lady. Symbolic Interaction 7, 1: 87–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wodak, R. (ed.) (1997) Gender and Discourse. London, Sage.Google Scholar
Cited by (27)

Cited by 27 other publications

de Latte, Fien
2024. (Im)polite uses of vocatives in present-day Madrilenian Spanish. Spanish in Context DOI logo
Fuchs, Robert
2017. Do women (still) use more intensifiers than men?. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22:3 ► pp. 345 ff. DOI logo
Fuchs, Robert
2020. Sociolinguistic Variation in Intensifier Usage in Indian and British English. In Gender in World Englishes, ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo
Choi, Seongsook & Stephanie Schnurr
2014. Exploring distributed leadership: Solving disagreements and negotiating consensus in a ‘leaderless’ team. Discourse Studies 16:1 ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Marsden, Sharon & Janet Holmes
2014. Talking to the elderly in New Zealand residential care settings. Journal of Pragmatics 64 ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Mak, Bernie Chun Nam & Hin Leung Chui
2013. A cultural approach to small talk: a double-edged sword of sociocultural reality during socialization into the workplace. Journal of Multicultural Discourses 8:2 ► pp. 118 ff. DOI logo
Schnurr, Stephanie & Olga Zayts
2011. Be(com)ing a Leader: A Case Study of Co-Constructing Professional Identities at Work. In Constructing Identities at Work, ► pp. 40 ff. DOI logo
Schnurr, Stephanie & Olga Zayts
2022. ‘you have to be adaptable, obviously’. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 279 ff. DOI logo
Collier, Shartriya
2010. Getting Things Done in the L1 and L2: Bilingual Immigrant Women's Use of Communication Strategies in Entrepreneurial Contexts. Bilingual Research Journal 33:1 ► pp. 61 ff. DOI logo
Drescher, Nancy L.
2008. Janet Holmes, Gendered talk at work. Oxford: Blackwell, 2006. Pp. viii, 251. Pb $35.00.. Language in Society 37:3 ► pp. 465 ff. DOI logo
Holmes, Janet
2008. Gendered Discourse at Work. Language and Linguistics Compass 2:3 ► pp. 478 ff. DOI logo
Holmes, Janet
2009. Men, Masculinities and Leadership: Different Discourse Styles at Work. In Gender and Spoken Interaction, ► pp. 186 ff. DOI logo
Holmes, Janet
2014. Language and Gender in the Workplace. In The Handbook of Language, Gender, and Sexuality, ► pp. 431 ff. DOI logo
Schnurr, Stephanie
2008. Surviving in a Man's World with a Sense of Humour: An Analysis of Women Leaders' Use of Humour at Work. Leadership 4:3 ► pp. 299 ff. DOI logo
Kell, Susan, Meredith Marra, Janet Holmes & Bernadette Vine
2007. Ethnic differences in the dynamics of women's work meetings. mult 26:4 ► pp. 309 ff. DOI logo
Wilson, John & Karyn Stapleton
2007. Authority. In Handbook of Pragmatics, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Holmes, Janet & Stephanie Schnurr
2006. ‘Doing femininity’ at work: More than just relational practice1. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10:1 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
Marra, Meredith, Stephanie Schnurr & Janet Holmes
2006. Effective Leadership in New Zealand Workplaces: Balancing Gender and Role. In Speaking Out, ► pp. 240 ff. DOI logo
Mullany, Louise
2006. “Girls on tour”: Politeness, small talk, and gender in managerial business meetings. Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 2:1 DOI logo
HOLMES, JANET & MEREDITH MARRA
2004. Relational practice in the workplace: Women's talk or gendered discourse?. Language in Society 33:03 DOI logo
Holmes, Janet & Meredith Marra
2022. Leadership and managing conflict in meetings. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 439 ff. DOI logo
Tracy, Karen & Aaron Dimock
2004. Chapter 4: Meetings: Discursive Sites for Building and Fragmenting Community. Communication Yearbook 28:1 ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Holmes, Janet, Louise Burns, Meredith Marra, Maria Stubbe & Bernadette Vine
2003. Women managing discourse in the workplace. Women in Management Review 18:8 ► pp. 414 ff. DOI logo
Holmes, Janet & Maria Stubbe
2003. “Feminine” Workplaces: Stereotype and Reality. In The Handbook of Language and Gender, ► pp. 572 ff. DOI logo
Stubbe, Maria, Chris Lane, Jo Hilder, Elaine Vine, Bernadette Vine, Meredith Marra, Janet Holmes & Ann Weatherall
2003. Multiple Discourse Analyses of a Workplace Interaction. Discourse Studies 5:3 ► pp. 351 ff. DOI logo
Stubbe, Maria, Chris Lane, Jo Hilder, Elaine Vine, Bernadette Vine, Meredith Marra, Janet Holmes & Ann Weatherall
2013. Interakcja w miejscu pracy z perspektywy kilku podejść dyskursywnych. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej 9:1 ► pp. 112 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2006. References. In Gendered Talk at Work, ► pp. 224 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.