ВАРИАТИВНОСТЬ ПРЕДСТАВЛЕНИЙ О ВЕЖЛИВОМ РЕЧЕВОМ ПОВЕДЕНИИ ЖЕНЩИН В ЯЗЫКОВОМ СОЗНАНИИ НОСИТЕЛЕЙ РУССКОГО ЯЗЫКА

Marina V. Garanovich

Marina V. Garanovich Пермский государственный национальный исследовательский университет, Пермь, Россия

Sažetak

Variability of gender stereotypes of the speech behavior existing in language awareness is caused by social parameters of native speakers. By results of research it appeared that in language awareness of each of the social groups investigated in work united on factors "gender", "age", "specialty" and "education", there is "option" or "interpretation" of stereotype about polite speech behavior of women. Allocated in result of the analysis of experimental data signs of speech behavior of women reflect specifics of the maintenance of gender stereotypes of speech behavior for Russian language awareness which consists not so much in the set of these signs, but in their unique, particular combination for Russian lingvoculture, in their quantitative correlation, in their assessment given by carriers of this lingvoculture – by representatives of various social groups. Research of social conditionality of a stereotype of polite speech behavior of women showed, thus, need of complex studying of gender stereotypes for language awareness and impossibility of their consideration for a separation from all contexts of social human life.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

##submission.citations##

Беляева, Анна. Ю. 2002. Особенности речевого поведения мужчин и женщин
(на материале русской разговорной речи): дис. ... канд. филол. наук.
Саратов, 2002. 177 с.
Гётте, Елена. Ю. 2009. Гендерное коммуникативное поведение. Воронеж:
Истоки. 211 с.
Жельвис, Владимир. И. 1997. Поле брани: сквернословие как социальная
проблема. Москва: Ладомир. 330 с.
Земская, Елена. А.; Китайгородская, М.В.; Розанова, Н.Н. 1993. Особенности
мужской и женской речи. В: Русский язык в его функционировании:
коммуникативно-прагматический аспект. Ин-т рус. яз. РАН; отв. ред.
Е.А. Земская, Д.Н. Шмелев. М.: Наука. С. 90-157.
Коноваленко, Ирина. В. 2003. Коммуникативные тактики русской речи в
аспекте их гендерной специфики (на материале исследования колкости). В:
Гендер. Язык. Коммуникация: м-лы III междунар. конф. Москва: МГЛУ.
С. 62–63.
Купина, Наталья А.; Шалина, Ирина В. 1998. Отражение русского типа в
мужской речи горожан-провинциалов. В: Теоретический и прикладной
аспект речевого общения: науч.-метод. Бюллетень. Красноярский гос. унт. Красноярск – Ачинск. Вып. 6. С. 48–56.
Мартынюк, Алла П. 1992. Речь и пол. В: Язык. Человек. Время. Харьков:
Основа. С. 40–50.
Пермякова, Оксана В., Гаранович, Марина В. 2009. Гендерная стилистика:
монография. Пермь: Изд-во Перм. гос. ун-та. 159 с.
Пиз, Алан. 2000. Язык взаимоотношений мужчина – женщина. Москва: Издво ЭКСМО-ПРЕСС, ЭКСМО-МАРКЕТ. 400 с.
Стернин, Иосиф. А. 2001. Общение с мужчинами и женщинами. Воронеж.
35 с.
Brend, Ruth. M. 1975. Male – Female intonation patterns in American English. In:
Language and sex: difference and dominance. Rowley (Mass). P. 84–87.
Brown, Penelope, Levinson, Stephen C. 1987. Politeness: some universals of language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 345 p.
Cameron, Deborah. 1998. The feminist critique of language. A Reader. New York,
Routledge. Р. 323–347.
Coates, Jennifer, Cameron, Deborah. 1988. Gossip revisited language in all-female
groups. In: Women in their speech communities. Longman Inc. Р. 94–123.
Coates, Jennifer, Cameron, Deborah. 1989. Women in their speech communities.
New York. 392 p.
Coates, Jennifer. 1993. Women, men and language. London: Longman. № 4. 228 p.
Crouch, Isabel, Dubois, Betty L. 1975. The question of tag-questions in women’s
speech: they don’t really use more of them, don’t they? In: Language in Society.
№ 4. P. 289–294.
Deuchar, Margaret. 1989. A pragmatic account of women’s use of standard speech.
In: Women in their speech communities / J. Coates, D. Cameron (eds). London:
Longman. P. 27–32.
Hartman, Maryann. 1976. A descriptive study of the language of men and women
born in Maine around 1900 as it reflects the Lakoff hypotheses in «Language
and Woman’s Place». In: The Sociology of the Languages of American Women /
B. Dubois, E. Crouch. San Antonio, Texas: Trinity University. P. 81–90.
Fishman, Pamela. 1978. Interaction: the work women do. In: Social Problems.
№ 24. P. 397-406.
Fishman, Pamela. 1998. Conversational insecurity. In: The Feminist Critique of
Language: a reader / D. Cameron. London: Longman. P. 253-260.
Holmes, Janet. 1987. Hedging, fencing and other conversational gambits: an analysis of gender differences in New Zealand speech. In: Women and Language in
Australian and New Zealand Society / A. Pauwels. Sydney: Australian Professional Publications. P. 59–79.
Holmes, Janet. 1995. Women, men and politeness. London: Longman. 254 p.
Jespersen, Otto. 1922 (1975). Language: its nature, development and origin. London.
Jones, Deborah. 1980. Gossip: Notes on women’s oral culture. In: The Voices and
Words of Women and Men / Ch. Kramerae. Oxford: Pergamon Press. P. 193–
198.
Kendal, Shari, Tannen, Deborah. 1997. Language in the workplace. In: Gender and
Discourse / R. Wodak. Thousand Oaks, New Dehli: SAGE Publications. P. 81–
105.
Lakoff, Robin. 1975. Language and women’s place. New York: Harper and Row.
83 p.
Lapadat, Judy., Seesahai, Maurenn. 1977. Male versus female codes in informal
contexts. In: Sociolinguistics Newsletter. № 8. P. 7–8.
Okamoto, Shigeko. 1995. “Tasteless” Japanese: less “feminine” speech among
young japanese women. In: Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially
Constructed Self / K. Hall, M. Bucholtz. New York, London: Oxford University
Press. P. 297–328.
Thore, Barrie, Kramaree, Cheris, Henley, Nancy. 1983. Language, gender and society: opening second decade of research. In: Language, Gender and Society. London. P. 7-24.
Trudgill, Peter. 1974. The social differentiation in English of Norwich. Cambridge.
95 p.