Cassie Keller and Dr. William Eggington, English Language Department
Abstract
This research extended the findings of Neal Norrick and Deborah Tannen in examining the poetical elements of conversation and gender differences in discourse. Related research suggests that the “poeticity” of conversational language among and between sexes has not been analyzed (Norrick). This project was conducted by recording and transcribing face to face discussions between three groups: females to females, males to males, females to males. Using poetic elements, these conversations were analyzed to show the different ways the genders utilize these devices and how they combine them when speaking together.
Introduction
This study replicated the research methodologies of Norrick (2000/2001) and Tannen (1994) in examining the poetical elements of conversation. In addition, the project extended their research by applying their methodologies to an examination of gender related similarities and differences in conversational poetics. Although gender differences in conversation have been studied in terms of broad and specific linguistic features, there has been an absence of research with respect to the poetics of conversation within gender studies.
Definitions
1. Imagery: descriptive language that creates evocative scenes for the listener (Tannen, 1994). These include simile and metaphor, the comparisons utilized to further expound thoughts and clearly communicate (Norrick, 2000/2001).
a. Detail Segments: segments of language thick with specific imagery. Most often used in narrative and explanations and well to paint an experience. This was measured in shifts of topic direction and flow.
b. Hypothetical Detail: specific imagery that has not occurred in reality or is unlikely to occur. Used in wishful language as well as word play to invent a scene.
c. Estimation: use of language to explain distances, direction, and age, such as “20 feet high” “South of the Y” or “In fifth grade…”
2. Parallelism: when a turn of conversation mirrors, or is closely related to, the previous discussion. The repeated similarities in syntax, often used unconsciously for rhetorical effect in common conversation (Anyidoho, 1993).
a. Competition: use of parallelism to challenge and define superiority.
3. Shared Conversation: pattern built by the conversation participants even if only one of the people was involved in the experience. When sentences are finished and/or expanded by both parties and the segment could be told by only one speaker. Shows verse structure in speech. Used in conversation to denote “intonational contours and verbal particles,” (Tannen, 1989:72).
4. Word Play: tweaking of language to create humor, irony, and puns. Used to engage an audience (Norrick, 2000/2001).
5. Repetition: used for emphasis and a state of reference for the speakers. (Norrick 2000/2001)
Research Methodology
Fifteen to twenty-one conversations between pairs were recorded consisting of five female to female, five male to male, and five male to female conversations. In order to control extraneous variables, the topics of conversation and allotted time were standardized; gender being the experimental variable. The choice of topics the subjects discussed were (1) a most exciting day, (2) the most dangerous thing ever done, and (3) a favorite childhood memory. Each conversation was exactly thirty minutes long.
The conversations were then analyzed using the conversational-poetic research instruments mentioned above to find the possibility of quantitative and qualitative differences and similarities within and between the three groups (i.e., (1) female to female (2) male to male (3) female to male) using the previous definitions.
Analysis
Imagery
Of all the poetical devices used by both sexes, imagery was used most. From the
given categories, male to males used imagery 56%, females to females used it 52%, and female to male used it 56%. Imagery provides detail. These percentages demonstrate how naturally it weaves into speech, and how difficult it would be to omit it from language patterns. Statements such as “…jumping off the roof with a manmade pulley system,” (male to male), “Once we saw an albino alligator…” (female to female), or “…we had to clear the leaves out that caught in the gutters, slimy and partially decayed” (female to male) show the variety of ways images paint a situation. This form of poetry is mostly used when relating stories.
Simile and metaphor are subtly employed. Examples of general metaphor between males arrived with a change of the question, “What is the most dangerous thing you’ve ever done?” to “What is the stupidest thing you’ve ever done?” Thus, equalizing the terms. Danger becomes stupid, but fun, as support by exclamations of “Awesome!” They use it specifically as well, “Oh, yeah some old lady just died…he blew it off like ‘some kid fell off a bike.’” Females quote friends to convey specific comparisons, “…he said, ‘You wouldn’t be just a tree, you’d be the whole forest,’ or something like that…” Together, males and females create similes and metaphors as shown by Kim and Jay:
Jay: And it (the rain) will actually dig a hole around the perimeter of your house.
Kim: A mote.
Males relate more with exact information. When unable to provide such facts, they estimate. The average use of estimation alone in each conversation was 6.8, while females to females used no estimation at all. While this varies from person to person and from a range of topics, this study indicates that males estimate distance, direction, and age more than females. An example of this is Reed, who, in one segment said, “It’s about five hours south of the border of Arizona and Mexico…I was like fourteen…{the cliff}was only like forty feet…” (italics added). These types of details scatter the stories they tell, the plans they make, and the way they visualize. From “…we were down in Moab, the eastern part…” to “…you have to be like 100 yards away…” estimation is a primary image that evokes scenes for a listener.
Hypothetical detail is the poetical device used least, but it is used. Of the 52% of imagery focused conversation between females, 11% of it is hypothetical detail. One female participant recreated an entire day. Females analyze their dreams with “…You got married!” They discuss alternative conclusions both real and hypothetical situations more than males.
Parallelism
Multiple studies (CITATIONS) have shown the male competitive use of language and behavior, but few have noted how parallel these challenges are. Within this study, competition falls under parallelism because each example of competition was parallel. Note that while 10% of the male conversations included parallelism females did not use any. Together, males and females used parallelism 8% of all the poetic devices. Within male to male conversations, for example, if one shares a time when he jumped off a cliff, the other will relate a similar story that is more dangerous. This process continues until neither have more to say on that topic. When Justin described a family Suburban he used to camp and trail blaze growing up, Aaron responded with the superiority of jeeps. This led to mild word play, as examined below, from Justin to affirm that his choice was better.
Between the two genders, parallelism is used primarily to build conversations. Courtney and John begin talking about the danger of paper-cuts on cereal boxes, which leads to a story from John about taking his roommate’s cereal. This is followed by a story from Courtney about her dad taking her grandpa’s favorite cereal bowl. While the stories do not correlate exactly, both include cereal (the initial topic) and taking a cereal related item from someone else. Others exchanged parallel childhood memories about teasing siblings or pets.
Parallel structure is not always challenging, as shown by the combination of males and females. While it provides friendship and status building for males, it is often the beginning of experience exchange.
Shared Conversation
Shared conversation creates a rhythm of speech between speakers. More obviously, a pattern is formed by both participants contributing to the segment of conversation. This structure is more generally between females, it being 16% of their poetic devices. Yet, as with parallelism, this devise is apparent when the conversation occurs between the two genders.
This aspect of poetics is exemplified by Jordie and Kate. Kate mentions Jordie’s most embarrassing moment, which grows into how many people they have told it to before. The speech is balanced, each contributing a sentence or two before the other adds her own. Sometimes they overlap. This is not interruption, but rather, joint creation. Even though Kate was not present at her friend’s embarrassing moment, she adds details and quips as the story unfolds. They conclude by finishing each other’s sentences:
Jordie: And so I told it. And there was no laughing. It was like…complete-
Kate: Complete destruction!
(Jordie nods).
Shared conversation between males and females is usually smaller segments of time than strictly female to female, but it is present. One example is Bill telling Nikki of his first attempt to kiss a girl. Nikki repeats and invents the girl’s possible comments. In the drama of the story, they state:
Bill:And I got her germs or something. I was horrified.
Nikki: Scarred for life.
Among many topics, fears and vacation events are also retold in this pattern. If an image is powerful enough or a person has had a similar experience these patterns expand. It should be noted that the relationships that were closer often included more shared sections, showing that this is a pattern of intimacy and understanding.
Word Play
Language, particularly among these groups of research subjects, is most often manipulated to be humorous. Word play is truly a play of words. It ranges from bantering to experimenting with language possibilities. Word play can combine new associations. In a male to male conversation, one person laughs, “The library? That’s a dangerous place! Some of those paper-cuts, man!” Because the library is not generally considered a threatening place, or paper-cuts to be dangerous, this comment is amusing.
It can be simple connections such as Michael and Jenna’s:
Michael: My mom said she used to worry about us.
Jenna: I’d worry about you, too.
Michael: I’d worry about you.
Jenna: (but) I never had invisible friends…
Or it can be more complicated:
LeNita: Why was it dangerous?
Christina: Because he tried
LeNita: Did he hold your hand? He tried?
Christina: He succeeded… And we’re like waking along this path and I’m with this strange boy…
LeNita: Blake’s not strange.
Christina: He’s strange!…He’s a stranger.
The two main shifts in this conversation segment are the male who “tried” but actually “succeeded” in holding her hand and the lexical change of “strange” to “stranger.” In the change of verbs, more of the story is revealed as mysterious and secretive, thus intriguing the listener. The lexical change was humorous because of Christina’s wider perspective on the male.
Word play is a twist and pull of language to fully engage the audience.
Repetition
Repetition is used as a point of reference, to clarify, and to emphasize. Next to imagery, repetition is the second most used poetic device between females. In one such segment a female describes, “…my brother was walking along and stepped on a crab. He stepped on his head. So it became flat. It walked away flat. Flat little crab…” Although the listener can assume that once stepped on, the small crab would be flat, but with repetition, it is emphasized for a more complete picture. The female was also beginning a story and determining what to say. In this way, the image of the “flat little crab” is a point of reference before she has organized her thoughts.
Males often repeat the question for the same reason. As they gather their ideas, they repeat the purpose for it, for example:
Milne: How about a favorite childhood memory?
Reed: Favorite childhood memory…
Milne: Yeah.
Reed: Favorite childhood memory…probably Christmas…
Males have a tendency to repeat ideas throughout a conversation, referring back to the start of their discussion, or a personal interest, like cliff jumping. Females, who do not speak with as much parallelism when together, share more expansive themes, including food, movies, and dating.
Together the genders use repetition in the same way. As a clarifier, repetition ensures details and comprehension. As a point of reference, repetition determines the direction of a segment. As emphasis, repetition insists upon the given information.
Conclusion
The results of this analysis present evidence of the use of poetic devices in conversation. Males and females, within their gender, emphasize different devices. Females, for example, used the process of sharing conversation more while males use parallelism. Yet when a male and a female converse together they combine the tactics of each gender, as evident in the management of repetition. Although this research is limited, it exposes the evident “poeticity” within males and males, or females and females, and also between females and males.
References
- Anyidoho, Love Akosua. (1993). Gender and Language Use: The Case of Two Akan Verbal Art Forms. Austin: University of Texas Press.
- Buder, Eugene H. (1986). Coherence of speech rhythms in conversations: Autocorrelation analysis of fundamental voice frequency. Toronto Semiotic Circle Monograph. Toronto: Toronto Semiotic Circle.
- Norrick, Neal R. (2000/2001).Poetics and Conversation. Connotations, 10.2-3, 243-267.
- Tannen, Deborah. (1989). Talking Voices. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Tannen, Deborah. (1994). Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.