Critical Analysis Of Men And Women In Conversation

999 Words4 Pages
Corinne LaLonde
Professor Creighton
CWP 102 8am
March 8th, 2018
Critical Analysis of Men and Women in Conversation is Cross-Cultural Communication

The issue of differences between men and women in conversation has been a subject of overreaching research, with various scholars in the subject of linguistics providing different views and conclusions. The current paper criticizes an excerpt of Deborah Tannen’s work, Men and Women in Conversation is Cross-Cultural Communication. In the exceprt of her work, Deborah Tannen, a professor of Linguistics, addresses linguistic differences as they relate to intimate male and female relations (Githens). While Tannen contributes significant literature to the study of linguistics, his work lacks clarity and
…show more content…
The fact that gender-differentiated socialization exists in society cannot be disputed. Equally, to find that differences do emerge with regard to speaking styles between men and women is not surprising. However, by failing to associate gender arrangements to the power arrangements that they promote and enforce is naïve in an intellectual way. Considering the highly integrated lives of the American men and women, to assign full-fledged cultural status to patterns that emerge out of socialization is of doubtful validity. Besides, Tannen moves from the initial premise that boys and girls grow up in two distinct cultures, which is a disputed fact, to the questionable claim that problems with communication between adult males and females are equivalent to other types of cross-cultural miscommunication. With this view, her final conclusion that the issue of miscommunication between men and women emerges from our lack of familiarity with gender specific styles of communication is founded on biased, fictional…show more content…
While this discussion could be accepted, Tannen does not provide the basis on which she ties her claims about women. She forgets that the American culture places a high value on directness and confrontation, and by referring to women as indirect speakers Tannen misses a major aspect. Besides, Tannen’s work does not address the role of ethnicity in shaping the verbal styles for men and women. In this regard, it would be imperative to consider the phenomenon of cross-communication in much detail. From a personal standpoint, miscommunication as Tannen defines it, could be interpreted as a smoke screen that allows individuals the leeway to emphasize the issues of difference over those of unequal power. Therefore, the view of continuously poor communication between either sexes is entirely pessimistic. What is evident, is that men know how to exactly communicate in the rapport-talk (which Tannen assign to women) and in sympathy building exchanges provided they are communicating with women that they wish to establish serious relationships with. When it suits their resolve, men experience no difficulty in speaking in a manner that women may find appealing and

More about Critical Analysis Of Men And Women In Conversation

Open Document