|
Article Excerpt
Abstract: Recent studies have shown that the gender-swearing relationship is more complex and context-specific than has been supposed. We adopted a 'communities of practice' framework to contextualize the linguistic practice of swearing and to explore the meanings of this practice for one particular 'community, ' a group of undergraduate drinking friends. Through members' accounts, we can observe their negotiation of specific linguistic categories, and their ongoing (re)definition of 'bad language' as a resource for identity construction. These findings provide insights into the ways in which gender itself becomes redefined and contextualized within particular frames of reference. Both female and male participants reported habitually deploying strong language in the context of shared group enterprises, although a number of subtle, yet persistent gender differences reflect the respondents' location within the wider sociocultural context(s).
Introduction
Recent feminist approaches to language and gender research (LGR) have consistently challenged folklinguistic perceptions of 'women's language' (see e.g. collections by Hall and Bucholtz, 1995; Bergvall, Bing and Freed, 1996; Bucholtz, Liang and Sutton, 1999). In particular, work undertaken from a social constructionist perspective has consistently demonstrated the complexity of the language-gender relationship, and hence, the futility of searching for specifically gendered styles of speaking (Crawford, 1995). Nonetheless, dichotomized notions of gender remain salient, in both expectations and perceptions of everyday communication (Cameron, 1996, 1997a). A particularly robust example of this can be found in attitudes towards women's use of 'obscenity' or 'bad language'. While researchers have identified an increasing knowledge and use of expletives among female respondents (e.g. de Klerk, 1992, 1997; M. Gordon, 1993; Sutton, 1995), the evaluation of such practices continues to be filtered through sociocultural conceptions of femininity/masculinity (see e.g. Risch, 1987; de Klerk, 1992, 1997; Hughes, 1992).
Gender And Swearing: Social And Cultural Factors
Cultural processes and expectations have traditionally mitigated against women's use of obscenity, on (at least) two counts. Firstly, swearing, or the use of expletives, is perceived as an intrinsically forceful or aggressive activity (Coates, 1993; de Klerk, 1991, 1997). Thus, women who engage in such behavior may be seen as transgressing cultural stereotypes and expectations of femininity, wherein they are positioned variously as deferent, polite, nurturing, and oriented towards the needs/feelings of others. To this extent then, the use of 'swear-words' represents an accepted social means of constructing a masculine identity (cf. de Klerk, 1997). Secondly, expletives constitute a linguistic taboo in Western society, thereby functioning to maintain behavioral compliance within particular communities (cf. Guerin, 1992). Given that taboos play an important role in maintaining the status quo of a society, women have traditionally been more fully subject to their effects than have men (Humphrey, 1993). While breaching a taboo inevitably entails certain consequences for the speaker, such consequences will be intensified by the speakers positioning within the prevailing (gender) hierarchy. This process is clearly exemplified in differential attitudes to female/male swearing (e.g. de Klerk, 1992, 1997), whereby women's use of obscenity is likely to be evaluated more negatively than that of their male counterparts.
Moreover, as part of the vernacular (Cheshire, 1982; Romaine 1999), expletives carry strong connotations of lower socioeconomic groupings and/or working-class' culture (see Hughes, 1992). Sociolinguistic research has traditionally characterized women as more keenly aware of the prestige value of linguistically dissociating from this culture, although a number of subsequent studies have demonstrated the overly simplistic nature of such claims. More tellingly, a recent study by Elizabeth Gordon has highlighted the gendered nature of social stereotypes, as accrued to 'non-standard' dialect speakers (E. Gordon, 1997). Here, in addition to the expected judgments of lower social status, female non-standard speakers were additionally perceived to be of lower moral standing, on the basis of their vernacular usage. Therefore, Gordon suggests that women's linguistic behavior is uniquely circumscribed by the imperative to escape such judgments; "the linguistic behavior associated with women is not so much a matter of self-promotion as a matter of avoidance" (48). Given the specific nature and content of linguistic taboo in Western society, this point is particularly relevant for women's use of expletives. A woman who uses 'bad language' is likely to invite not only negative social ascriptions, but also judgments regarding her moral standing and character. These potential consequences are likely to increase her conformity with prevailing taboo(s).
In a number of ways then, social and cultural factors have worked to produce the general belief that women 'don't use bad language' (Coates, 1993; Crawford, 1995; Romaine, 1999). This belief has been reinforced by a number of influential linguists, from Jesperson (1922), to Trudgill (1974) and Lakoff (1975), who have presented a dichotomized picture of the relationship between gender and swearing, in which women are depicted as consistent 'eschewers' of expletives. For example, when Lakoff (55) wrote that "'women don't use off-color or indelicate expressions", there was little attempt to interrogate either the category 'women', or these women's various contexts of speaking (cf Bohan, 1993; Unger and Crawford, 1992). For this reason, as pointed out by Coates (1993), much (socio)linguistic writing on 'gender and swearing' has relied on folklinguistic beliefs and conceptions with little reference to empirical data. In particular, such research has overlooked both the inherent heterogeneity of gender categories, and the influence of context on linguistic form and function.
In contrast, more recent studies have begun to explore the complex and situation-specific nature of 'women's swearing'. These studies have, by and large, revealed that women do show familiarity with obscene language, and further, that many women routinely use such language. Other studies have shown that speech context, and in particular levels of formality/structure affect gendered swearing patterns. For example, Bayard and Krishnayya's (2001) study of New Zealand University students' use of expletives in unstructured and structured dialogue concludes that the function of swearing varies according to gender and context. This study, based on actual conversational data, found an overall tendency for males to swear slightly more frequently than females, but detected little difference in the strength of expletives used by women and men. Interestingly, Bayard and Krishnayya's male participants reduced their levels of swearing in structured contexts to a greater extent than did female participants. This finding is in direct contrast to the results of the present study in which males reported swearing more indiscriminately than females (see Avoiding Obscenity, below). Once again, this points up the necessity of examining all aspects of the situation (e.g. immediate context, conversational partners, cultural norms and expectations) and fully integrating these within any analysis of 'gender and swearing'. Moreover, the 'popular myth' surrounding linguistic taboo (de Klerk, 1992: 280) means that swearing inevitably acquires different meanings, and therefore functions differently, for female users.
Women's Swearing: Meanings, Functions and Identity Work
A particularly salient finding in research on women's swearing is the degree of 'guilt' experienced by the speakers (Risch, 1987), and the general feeling that such terms are somehow more 'appropriate' for boys/men than they are for girls/women (de Klerk, 1992). Consequently, women's swearing is contextually constrained to a greater extent than is men's; for example, occurring only in the private realm (Risch, 1987), or in the company of certain conversational partners (of. Hughes, 1992). This contextual circumscription means that swearing frequently signals intimacy or trust between female speakers. In certain situations, it may be read as an act of solidarity, or even affection, between women friends (see Sutton, 1995). In addition, Risch (1987) demonstrates the way in which swearing may be used to denigrate outgroups (in this case, men), thereby strengthening both the internal bonds and the external boundaries of the ingroup.
In all of these studies, women's swearing is shown to function in a range of subtle and context-specific ways, which, against the backdrop of prevailing sociocultural norms and expectations, can provide a powerful identity resource for female speakers (see also Forsskahl's [2001] study of slang usage in Finland). In addition to contesting social norms of femininity, the use of 'bad language' may also function to construct and enact new modes and versions of 'being a woman'. With reference to her work on undergraduate use of sexual slang, Sutton (1995) suggests that (rather than 'talking like men'), these young women may be seen as "imitating other women whom they want to be like and who are different from the stereotypical image of woman" (289). In this sense, swearing functions not only as a marker of (group) identity, but also as a means of negotiating and actively constituting that identity.
However, as social constructionist-informed analyses have demonstrated, identity itself is a fluid and openended category (see Hall and Bucholtz, 1995). Therefore, the identity effects of swearing must ultimately be grounded in analyses of the particular context(s) in which it is deployed. In the present study, I suggest that such analyses may be fruitfully approached via the concept of the 'community of practice' (outlined below). From this perspective, swearing may be seen as a context-specific mode of self-constitution, the meanings of which emerge from mutual negotiation among community members. Thus, we can begin to explore the contingent versions of femininity enacted through swearing, in situated contexts of interaction.
Communities of Practice
In an influential article Eckert and...
|
