APA格式文献综述写作模板

Runninghead:LANGUAGEANDGENDERLanguageandgenderName:张三(inChinese)StudentID:20103456EnglishClass:102Department:ForeignlanguagesandLiteratures,SchoolofHumanities2LANGUAGEANDGENDERAbstractDifferentapproachestotheissueoflanguageandgendercanleadtodifferentunderstandingsofit.Researchontheissuecanfocusoneitherdominanceordifference,butnotnecessarilymutuallyexclusive.Understandinghowmenandwomenuselanguagedifferentlyinvolvesgatheringempiricaldataofbothmen’sandwomen’sspeech,acomplexunderstandingofpowerandgenderrelationshipsandotherrelatedissues.Keywords:language,gender,difference,relationship3LANGUAGEANDGENDERLanguageandGenderIntroductionWiththegeneralgrowthoffeministworkinmanyacademicfields,itishardlysurprisingthattherelationshipbetweenlanguageandgenderhasattractedconsiderableattentioninrecentyears.Inanattempttogobeyondfolklinguisticassumptionsabouthowmenandwomenuselanguage(theassumptionthatwomenaretalkative,forexample),studieshavefocusedonanythingfromdifferentsyntactical,phonologicalorlexicalusesoflanguagetoaspectsofconversationanalysis,suchastopicnominationandcontrol,interruptionsandotherinteractionalfeatures.Whilesomeresearchhasfocusedonlyonthedescriptionofdifferences,otherworkhassoughttoshowhowlinguisticdifferencesbothreflectandreproducesocialdifference.Accordingly,Coates(1988)suggeststhatresearchonlanguageandgendercanbedividedintostudiesthatfocusondominanceandthosethatfocusondifference.LiteratureReviewMuchoftheearlierworkemphasizeddominance.Lakoff’s(1975)pioneeringworksuggestedithatwomen’sspeechtypicallydisplayedarangeoffeatures,suchastagquestions,whichmarkeditasinferiorandweak.Thus,shearguedthatthetypeofsubordinatespeechlearnedbyayounggirlwilllaterbeanexcuseothersusetokeepherinademeaningposition,torefusetotreatherseriouslyasahumanbeing(1975,p.5).WhilethereareclearlysomeproblemswithLakoff’swork-heranalysiswasnot4LANGUAGEANDGENDERbasedonempiricalresearch,forexample,andtheautomaticequationofsubordinatewith`weak’isproblematic-theemphasisondominancehasunderstandablyremainedattheCentreofmuchofthiswork.Researchhasshownhowmennominatedtopicsmore,interruptedmoreoften,heldthefloorforlonger,andsoon(see,forexample,ZimmermanandWest,1975).Thechieffocusofthisapproach,then,hasbeentoshowhowpatternsofinteractionbetweenmenandwomenreflectthedominantpositionofmeninsociety.Somestudies,however,havetakenadifferentapproachbylookingnotsomuchatpowerinmixed-sexinteractionsasathowsame-sexgroupsproducecertaintypesofinteraction.Inatypicalstudyofthistype,MaltzandBorker(1982)developedlistsofwhattheydescribedasmen’sandwomen’sfeaturesoflanguage.Theyarguedthatthesenormsofinteractionwereacquiredinsame-sexgroupsratherthanmixed-sexgroupsandthattheissueisthereforeoneof(sub-)culturalmiscommunicationratherthansocialinequality.Muchofthisresearchhasfocusedoncomparisonsbetween,forexample,thecompetitiveconversationalstyleofmenandthecooperativeconversationalstyleofwomen.Whilesomeofthemorepopularworkofthistype,suchasTannen(1987),lacksacriticaldimension,theemphasisondifferencehasneverthelessbeenvaluableinfosteringresearchintogendersubgroupinteractionsandinemphasizingtheneedtoseewomen’slanguageusenotonlyas‘subordinate’butalsoasasignificant5LANGUAGEANDGENDERsubculturaldomain.AlthoughCoates’(1988)distinctionisclearlyausefulone,italsoseemsevidentthatthesetwoapproachesarebynomeansmutuallyexclusive.Whileitisimportantontheonehand,therefore,nottooperatewithasimplisticversionofpowerandtoconsiderlanguageandgenderonlyinmixed-groupdynamics,itisalsoimportantnottotreatwomen’slinguisticbehaviourasifitexistedoutsidesocialrelationsofpower.ConclusionandFutureStudyAsCameron,McAlindenandO’Leary(1988)ask,Canitbecoincidencethatmenareaggressiveandhierarchically-organizedconversationalists,whereaswomenareexpectedtoprovideconversationalsupport?(p.80).Clearly,thereisscopehereforagreatdealmoreresearchthatisbasedonempiricaldataofmen’sandwomen’sspeech;operateswithacomplexunderstandingofpowerandgenderrelationships(sothatwomen’ssilence,forexample,canbeseenbothasasiteofoppressionandasasiteofpossibleresistance);looksspecificallyatthecontextsoflanguageuse,ratherthanassumingbroadgendereddifferences;involvesmoreworkbymenonlanguageandgender,sinceattemptstounderstandmaleusesoflanguageintermsofdifferencehavebeenfew(thus6LANGUAGEANDGENDERrunningthedangerofconstructingmen’sspeechasthe‘norm’andwomen’sspeechas‘different’);aimsnotonlytodescribeandexplainbutalsotochangelanguageandsocialrelationships.7LANGUAGEANDGENDERReferencesCameron,D.,McAlindenF.andO’LearyK.(1988).Lakoffincontext:thesocialandlinguisticfunctionoftagquestions.InJ.CoatesandD.Cameron(op.cit.).pp.74-93.Coates,J.&CameronD.(Eds.)(1988).Womenintheirspeechcommunities.Harlow:Longman.Coates,J.(1988).Chapter6:Introduction.InJ.CoatesandD.Cameron(op.cit.)pp.63-73.Lakoff,R.(1975).LanguageandWoman’sPlace.NewYork:HarperandRowMaltz,D.N.&BorkerR.A.(1982).Aculturalapproachtomale-femalemiscommunication.InJ.Gumperz(Ed.),Languageandsocialidentity.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Tannen,D.(1987).That’snotwhatImeant.London:Dent.Zimmerman,D.&WestC.(1975)