MALE AND FEMALE STUDENT’S LINGUISTIC POLITENESS IN SPEAKING CLASSROOM

Oktanika Wahyu Nurjanah

Abstract

Communicative competence emphasizes that the knowledge of grammatical rules is not sufficient to communicate comprehensively, therefore it needs pragmatic knowledge. Without pragmatic understanding, there will be many failures in communication for example is misunderstanding. Besides, one important aspect of pragmatic competence is politeness. Many researches have been conducted in this field, however only few that specifically revealed the differences between male and female linguistic politeness in speaking classroom, whereas its primary data are utterances. It becomes a consideration of this research to be conducted in the speaking classroom of university student, especially international relations major students. The observation is conducted based on the adaptation from DCT by Bacha, Bahous & Diab (2012). Furthermore, the data are analyzed using some politeness theories. The result showed that in general, female students are more polite compared to male students. At last, teachers should understand this fact by do not expecting male students to be as polite as female, basically they are unique their way.

 

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

 

References

Fraser B. (1983), “The Domain of Pragmatics”, in J. Richards J., Schmidt R. (Eds.), Language and Communication, Longman, New York, pp 29-59.

Mills, S. (2003). Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tannen, D. (1990). You just don't understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: William Morrow.

Climate, C. (1997). Men and Women Talking: the differential use of speech and language by gender. London: Routledge

Brown, P. (1980). How and Why are Women More Polite : Some Evidence From A Mayan Community. In S. McConnell-Ginnet, R. Borker, & F.F, Women and Language in Literature and Society (pp. 111-136). Oxford: Blackwell.

Lorenzo-Dus, N., & Bou-Franch, P. (2003). Gender and Politeness: Spanish and British Undergraduated Perceptions of Appropriate Request. In J. Santaemilia, Genero, lenguaje y traduccion (pp. 187-199). Valencia : Universitat de Valencia

Bacha, N. N., Bahous, R., & Diab, R. L. (2012). Gender and Politeness in a Foreign Language Academic Context. International Journal of English Linguistics, Vol 2, No.1, pp.79-96

Alavi, T., Moradi, S., & Taggaddomi, M. S. (2013). Difference(s) between Male and Female Speakers Turkish Regarding Politeness Norms. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol.4, No.6, pp. 1332-1337

Nemati, A., & Bayer, J. M. (2007). Gender Differences in the Use of Linguistic Forms in the Speech of Men and Women: A Comparative Study of Persian and English. International Journal of Appied Linguistic, Vol. 2, pp. 185-201.

Fauziati, E. (2016). Applied Linguistics Principles of Foreign Language Teaching, Learning, and Researching. Surakarta: Era Pustaka Utama.

Yule, G. (2006). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2013). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. New York: Routledge.

Keikhaie, Y., & Mozaffari, Z. (2013). A Socio-linguistic Survey on Females' Politeness Strategies in the Same Gender and in the Cross-Gender Relationship. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, Vol.5, No.2, pp. 51-82.

Abertova, A. (2012). Aspects of Politeness in a Clasroom of English as a Second Language. Prague: Charles University in Prague.

Garces-Conejos, P., & Sanchez-Macarro. (1998). Scientific Discourse as An Interaction: ScientificArticles vs Popularizations. Lingistics Choices Acroos Gender, Vol.5, No. 4, pp. 173-190.

Garces-Conejos, P., & Torbelanca-Lopez, M. (1997). Emphasis and mitigation strategies in the speech of non native English teacher. Grammar and Pragmatic, Vol.2, No. 2, pp. 1-13.

Kristina, D. (2014). Discourse Analysis and Language Teaching

Bou-Franch, P., & Garces-Conejos, P. (2003). Teaching linguistic politeness: A methodical proposal. IRAL, Vol.41, No.3, pp. 1-22.

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction. London: Longman.

Coulmas, F. (2005). Sociolinguistics The Study of Speakers Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K., Bell, R., Martin, S., McCulloch., O’Sullivan, C. . (2011). Research method in education. Oxon: Routledge.

Brown, P., & Lavinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/seeds.v1i1.20308

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.