Ok, so I am doing a huge project/paper on this book I read -- You Just Don't Understand - Women and Men in Conversation by Deborah Tannen. The book basically describes the differences in women and men's conversational style -- genderlects.
Women's Style:
Communication is a way to cultivate, nurture and maintain relationships
Use a lot of "I" and "We" language. ie ( "I" appreciate that.. , "We" should do something...)
Tends towards "feeling" language rather than "thinking" language
Uses a lot of narratives and Stories
Overlapping (point out where your story overlaps with another person. often making a stretch to create an overlap)
Talks about relationships even when there is nothing wrong with them (ie "Isn't our relationship so amazing?")
Men's Style:
Communication is a way to create position, power and status
Talk is designed to serve a functional purpose
Use conversations to prove themselves and negotiate position
"You" and "I want" language (ie. "You" are why..., "I want" to do this...)
Agonisms are frequent - non-literal war-like fighting
No need to discuss relationships as long as they are OK.
As I research more and more into the idea of genderlects, I am becoming extremely confused on its foundation. I don't see a "genderlect" as a mere conversational style.
Men talk the way they do because of the way they think, and the same goes for women.
Women try to create "Intimacy" in their talk because that's what they feel, not just because that is the way they talk.
The idea of genderlects seems to be based on the difference in conversational style, when I think that it should dig deeper into the psychologies of both men and women and why they speak this way.
Maybe there is stuff like what I am saying out there, but so far I have just found conversational style in my research on genderlects.
What do you guys think?
