Boyao Liprofessor Erineng 0711 Coursedecember 3 2015sex Difference ✓ Solved
Boyao Li Professor Erin ENG 0711 course December 3, 2015 “Sex Difference†is more convincing than “women talk too much†Janet Holmes is a professor of sociolinguistics at the Victoria University of Wellington. She wrote an essay “women talk too much†tries to prove that man actually talk much than woman, men always want to dominate the talking time in many situations. She wants to against the widespread belief that women talk much than man. Another author, Ronald Macaulay is a professor of linguistics at Pitzer College. He wrote an essay “Sex differencesâ€.
He thinks man and woman speak isn’t in different way. It is actually similar. He tries to convince people that in fact are fiction and novels created the man and women speak in different ways. That’s actually not true. Comparing the “Women Talk Too Much†and “Sex Differenceâ€.
I think Ronald Macaulay’s essay “Sex Difference†is more convincing to me by his claims, evidence, and organization of essay. After compared these two essays, I recognized that Ronald Macaulay’s most obvious advantage is organization of the essay. In the first place, Janet Holmes uses some old proverb from different culture like “ When both husband and wife wear pants it is not difficult to tell them apart----he is the one who is listening----Americanâ€(Holmes 299). She tries to use some proverbs to makes her essay more convincing and more attractive. But that isn’t a good choice.
Because generally proverbs from some old and not academic source. It cannot make people trust that author’s point. And some of proverbs are a little bit obscure, not clear enough .It’s may make reader feel confuse. By contrast, Ronald Macaulay obviously has a better beginning. He points that at beginning “Jespersen has a chapter entitled ‘The Woman’ in which he manages to include every stereotype about women that was current at the time.†(Macaulay 308).It shows us directly what the author tries to tell the reader.
He tries to say something about women is stereotype. It is pretty clear to make reader understand what he will trying to say. Even if he doesn’t tell us the main point clearly, but it is still a better beginning organization than Janet Holmes. Ronald Macaulay also has better evidence than Janet Holmes. He uses two groups of vocabulary that often used in novel to introduce men’s or women’s speech like “ MEN: said firmly, said bluntly, said coldly, said smugly.
WOMEN: said quietly, asked innocently echoed obediently…….â€(Macaulay 309). It is generally in novels. It just a vocabulary list but because of we usually read about it, it can make reader feel surprised immediately. Than he points this “the surprising part is that the two lists are totally distinct. No doubt the novelists intended to be realistic in describing two very different styles of speech†(Macaulay 309).
It is stronger evidence, he use common things from normal novel to make reader feel surprise and start to thinking. Then he just writes his point out that man and woman speech in different way actually is novelist write it deliberately. It’s not true. He is really good at convincing reader and his evidence is pretty strong. in comparison, Janet Holmes’ evidence are pretty weakness. For example. in her essay “women talk too muchâ€.
She points that “Evidence collected by American, British, and New Zealand researchers shows that men dominate the talking time in committee meetings, staff meetings, seminars and task-oriented decision-making groupsâ€(Holmes 302). She tries to use this evidence to prove that men actually want to dominate the talking time in most meetings. Even if she said “Evidence collected by American, British, and New Zealand researchers†but it is still not persuasive evidence. She isn’t telling us how they did this research. who is the object of research? What the exactly identity of these researchers .She just put the result here.
It cannot convince anyone with this kind of evidence. So Ronald Macaulay has many better evidence than Janet Holmes. Even though Macaulay has better essay organization and evidence than Janet Holmes .But Janet Holmes have a persuasive tone just like Macaulay. Holmes uses fair and neutral tone in her essay , for example “We have now reached the conclusion that the question ‘ Do Women talk more than man?’ can’t be answered with a straight ‘yes’ or ‘no’. The answer is ratherâ€(Holmes 304).
She isn’t uses definitely words or sentence to support her own point that man actually talk much than women. Those kinds of tone give reader some space to think about the author’s point. It’s make her essay more persuasive. In the same way , Macaulay also has a neutral and gentle tone for his essay “I am not sure whether the writer considered himself a scientist, but if his writing is an example of intellectual rigor, then give me the subtlety of the humanities any dayâ€(Macaulay 311).Macaulay’s tone also makes his essay more persuasive. To sum up, Although Janet Holmes also have a persuasive tone just like Ronald Macaulay.
But her essay “women talk to much†organization and evidence is not good. Macaulay’s essay “Sex Difference†obviously is a more persuasive and more convinced essay. Therefore, Ronald Macaulay does a better job to write the essay making reader convincing than Janet Holmes . Work cited Holmes, Janet. “Women Talk Too Much.†Exploring Language.
Ed. Gary Goshgarian. 11th ed. New York: Longman, 2007. . Print.
Boyao Li Professor Erin ENG 0711 course December 3 2015 Should English be the official language of United States? Bilingualism is a popular topic in recent years. More and more people try to against it or argue for it. Generally, Bilingualism means the regular use of two languages in everyday communication. Objectively speaking, bilingualism creates many negative effects.
Like Mauro E. Mujica who is chairman and CEO of U.S English Inc., said, bilingualism can makes financial burden, divisions of national unity and even some seriously human injury events. Base on these kinds of issues, some people support that English should be the only official language of United States. But even if these negative effects are truly exits, I still think bilingualism is necessary. English shouldn’t be the only official language of United States.
Set up English be the official language obliviously bad for people learning second language. Study and use of second language is beneficial to people. Firstly, Childhood bilingual teaching can develop human brain. “Last December, Petitto, a world-renowned cognitive neuroscientist and a developmental cognitive neuroscientist..…..how children learn to read, and the effects of early bilingual language exposure on the developing brain and its functionsâ€(Allison Polk). The result of this research shows us benefits of bilingualism.
“The findings resulting from the use of technology like that at BL2 also indicate that biologically, the human brain performs better with early exposure to multiple languagesâ€(Allison Polk). Dr Petitto’s research proves that bilingualism is very useful and helpful for human brain. Childhood bilingual teaching is very important for United State, but if English be the official language, it is bound to affect the bilingual teaching. It’s not good for develop human brain. In the same way, thinking in bilingualism way is also benefits for American’s brain.
James Fallow is the Washington editor of Atlantic. He give us this “Ninety-nine percent of all Americans’ can happily live their lives speaking and thinking about no language but English. Foreign- language education has been falling off, and except in unusual circumstances ----wars, mainly----it has never had much practical reinforcement anyway.â€(James Fallows). It shows us how bad to people’s mind if United States give up bilingualism. People who live in America will give up thinking in other ways except English.
It will be a huge loss for United States. Set English be the only official language obviously will make this kind of result. On the other hand, language is a tool for human communication. Set English be the official language and limited bilingualism is contrary to the nature of language. First time when I was arrived United State, Everyone speak English or Spanish.
It makes me feel nervous. One day I went to a Chinese restaurant. Everyone there was speaking Chinese. That was the first time I felt relaxed and safety in the United States. So actually language is a tool of social recognition which brings a sense of safety and belonging to immigrants who are not English speaker.
Setting English is the official language; it is also deprived of a part of the American sense of belonging and a sense of safety. In the same way, in areas where loads of people speak other languages, that non-English language is of more universal application and higher productivity. Force use of language may bring an inefficiency and inconvenience to people. For example, some kinds of job need high language skills like teacher and lawyer. It will be really hard to speak second language in this kind of job.
That will extremely unfriendly for a worker who comes from Non-English-speaking country if set English be the official language. It’s also bad for attractive talented person from other Non-English-speaking country to United States. We all know talented person is the most valuable precious in the world now. Set English be the official language of United States just like set up a barrier for blocking the talent into United States. United States should create a wide environment for talent.
Create an unfriendly language environment to block people who didn’t speak English is totally bad for United States. Susana C. Schultz who comes from Strictly Spanish LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio also points that “Employers always want to train employees in their native languages. When employees understand the tasks they are required to do without the language barriers, they do a better job and are more profitable for the employer, safety and morale are improved. Employers want their employees to fully understand the terms of their employment.
Employee manuals are offered in the native language of the employees. Companies do business in other countries and all materials and labeling must be offered in the native language.†(Susana C. Schultz).So a wide language environment is not an only wish from workers who works United States. Companies in United States generally believe bilingualism is benefits for the company. It’s no reason to against most of company in America to make English be official language.
Some people believe that set English is official language is helpful for unity United States But it’s not true. Unified of languages actually is not the best way to solving the unity issues of a country. S.I.Hayakawa points that, “While it is certainly true that our love of freedom and devotion to democratic principles help to unite and give us mutual purpose, it is English, our common language, that enables us to discuss our views and allows us to maintain a well-informed electorate, the cornerstone of democratic governmentâ€(S.I.Hayakawa). He tries to prove that is English connected people together. It’s English build United States government.
So United States needs English to be the official language. But it’s not true. As we all know .There are many kinds of country and language in Europe. Some of them have their own and only official languages, like France set French be their official language, British set English be their official language. It’s still many countries have at least two kinds of language be their official language.
The most typical example of these countries is Switzerland. Switzerland has four different languages for the country. They are German, French, Italian and Romansch. Diversity official language really helps Switzerland keep different culture and different nation in Switzerland. It also balanced many conflicts from different people who speak different languages.
That successfully makes Switzerland become a politically neutral country. Because of Switzerland is a neutral country, Switzerland avoids any damage from World War II ,saved at least four million people’s life during the horrible war and avoid being destroyed or split by the Nazis. Many country split after the World War II because Nazi’s invasion. But Switzerland never split and still is the one of most peaceful country in the world. So it’s not English or only one official language cans unity a country.
Diversity official language and Bilingualism can unity United States in a better way. Bilingualism is Benefits to United States to have ability to deal with the rest of the world; learning a second language is also a way of knowing about that countries. Nowadays, The world increasingly globalization. There are over 500 kinds of languages in the world. Bilingualism is the better way to connect the world.
Set up English be the official language actually close some ways to communicate to the world. In addition set English is official language of United States will blocking some talented people and workers into United States. It also have disadvantage for economic development of United States. Banks in Switzerland are the most famous and richest banks in the world. One of reason is Switzerland have many kind of official languages.
Bilingualism actually developed Switzerland‘s bank. Different official languages attractive different kind of funds in to Switzerland’s bank. Bilingualism service can also make customers who are from any country to feel comfortable. Some Customers believes that use different kinds of language to sign the agreement and send message is more safety than use only one language. The reason bank in Switzerland can do these kinds of things all thanks to a variety of official language.
All in all, bilingualism is necessary in United States. In terms of macro, it can help United States make better communication to other country and help develop economic. Attractive more talented people come into United States. It also Unify United States in a better way. For personal, bilingualism can help people develop their brain, open people’s mind.
It also helps company recruiting more staff and give staff or workers more wide language environment. Language actually is a tool for human communication, set any limit to influence human communication is contrary to common sense. So, should English be the only official language of United States? The answer is no. Set English be the only official language obviously bad for bilingualism in United States.
Basis on many kinds of benefits in bilingualism. There is no reason to set English be the only official language. Even if today it’s still many people argue for this, I still firmly deem that English shouldn’t be the only official language of United States. Work cited S.I.Hyakawa “Bilingualism In America: English Should Be The Only Language.†Mauro E.Mujica “Why The U.S. Needs an Official language†James Fallows “Viva Bilingualism†Allison Polk “Bilingualism and The Brain†Susana C. Schultz “Official Language of the United States and its Impact on the Translation Industryâ€
Paper for above instructions
Sex Differences in Communication: An Analytical Perspective on Janet Holmes and Ronald Macaulay's EssaysThe ongoing debate about communication styles between men and women has sparked multiple sociolinguistic discussions, two of which are represented by Janet Holmes's essay, "Women Talk Too Much," and Ronald Macaulay's "Sex Differences." This assignment critically compares the two authors’ perspectives regarding sex differences in language usage, elaborating on the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments focusing on organization, evidential support, and persuasive tone.
Janet Holmes, a prominent figure in sociolinguistics, aims to challenge the pervasive stereotype that women are more verbose than men. Through various cultural proverbs, Holmes underscores her claim that men, in truth, tend to dominate conversations across numerous contexts, including professional settings. For instance, she cites evidence from research conducted by American, British, and New Zealand scholars indicating that men often monopolize talking time during committee meetings (Holmes, 2007). However, Holmes's reliance on proverbs as a method of argumentation potentially undermines her credibility. While proverbs can possess cultural wisdom, they generally lack academic rigor, since many originate from non-academic sources. Thus, this choice may confuse readers rather than clarify the author's positions.
In stark contrast, Ronald Macaulay presents a more structured approach in his essay "Sex Differences." Macaulay contends that differences in communication styles attributed to gender are representative of myths propagated by authors in fiction rather than reflecting actual linguistic realities (Macaulay, 2001). His essay opens with a pointed critique of stereotypical portrayals of women in language, referencing Jespersen's outdated views on female communication. Not only does this direct approach clarify his intent, but it also effectively engages readers by challenging conventional beliefs about gendered communication.
The organization of Macaulay’s essay stands out, revealing a well-thought-out structure that guides readers through his arguments seamlessly. He effectively introduces his analysis by distilling the contrasting speech descriptions of men and women found in typical novels, categorizing them as follows: 'MEN: said firmly, said coldly,' and 'WOMEN: asked innocently, echoed obediently' (Macaulay, 2001). This juxtaposition allows readers to recognize not just the differences portrayed within fictional contexts but also the deliberate fabrication of these distinctions by male authors. Macaulay thus employs this framework to argue that communication norms are less about inherent differences between sexes and more about social constructs perpetuated through media representations.
When it comes to evidential support, Macaulay again excels. His analysis derives evidence from literary works, which not only resonate with readers familiar with popular culture but also humanize his argument against stereotypical biases about gender communication. However, Holmes’s claim that men dominate conversations in various formal scenarios lacks sufficient detail regarding the methodologies and demographic information of the studies referenced (Holmes, 2007). Without clarity on how these conclusions were reached, readers may find it challenging to fully embrace her assertions. It raises significant questions: Who were the researchers conducting these studies? What criteria were used? As such, the weakness of Holmes's evidential support contrasts sharply with Macaulay’s well-evidenced assertions that provoke reflection regarding the origins of these stereotypes.
Nonetheless, both authors manage to maintain persuasive tones throughout their essays. Holmes's neutral, inclusive tone allows her to advocate for women's communication patterns without sounding confrontational. For instance, she emphasizes that "Do women talk more than men?" cannot be answered in a simple binary response (Holmes, 2007). This approach encourages readers to engage with the nuances of the argument, even if the structure and evidential support may not be as rigorous as necessary.
Macaulay employs a similar, albeit subtly ironic tone, critiquing past notions without alienating his audience. His assertion that "if his writing is an example of intellectual rigor, then give me the subtlety of the humanities any day” critiques the rigidity of his subjects while simultaneously acknowledging the importance of linguistic artistry (Macaulay, 2001). Such a balance fosters a connection between Macaulay and his reader, encouraging them to question societal norms surrounding gendered communication patterns.
Nevertheless, while both authors present valuable insights on the subject, Macaulay's structured organization, robust evidential framework, and engaging tone culminate in a more persuasive argument than Holmes's essay. Thus, Macaulay's "Sex Differences" stands out as a clearer and more academically credible exploration of communication differences between men and women in contemporary discourse. Furthermore, it urges readers to consider how societal constructs shape their understanding of gender communication, advocating for a more nuanced interpretation of the dynamics of dialogue.
In conclusion, while Holmes effectively seeks to dispel the myth that women talk excessively, Macaulay's work intersects with broader sociolinguistic contexts, challenging readers' perceptions and beliefs about the inherent differences in male and female communication. By recognizing the importance of structural and contextual factors in shaping communicative practices, readers will become more discerning, ultimately cultivating a richer understanding of the complexities surrounding gender in the realm of language.
References
1. Holmes, J. (2007). Women Talk Too Much. In Goshgarian, G. (Ed.), Exploring Language (11th ed.). New York: Longman.
2. Macaulay, R. (2001). Sex Differences. Language and Gender Research: A Reader.
3. Eckert, P. & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2003). Language and Gender. Cambridge University Press.
4. Tannen, D. (1990). You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: William Morrow.
5. Meyerhoff, M. (2006). Introducing Sociolinguistics. New York: Routledge.
6. Cameron, D. (2007). The Myth of Mars and Venus. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Borker, R. & Chorre, J. (1979). Language and Gender. New York: Academic Press.
8. Coates, J. (1993). Women, Men, and Language. London: Longman.
9. Jespersen, O. (1922). Language: Its Nature, Development, and Origin. H. Holt and Company.
10. Hayakawa, S.I. (1990). Bilingualism in America: English Should Be the Only Language. Conservative Review.
This analytical perspective presents both essays in a constructive light while arguing for the overall strength of Macaulay's arguments. Through a careful examination of organization, evidence, and tone, the focus remains on the necessity for further exploration of gendered communication patterns.