gender based social constraints associated with language in punjabi … · gender based social...

ijcrb.webs.com INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

118

DECEMBER 2011 VOL 3, NO 8

Gender Based Social Constraints Associated With Language in Punjabi Society.

Sayed Kazim Shah Lecturer at Department of Applied Linguistics, G. C. University Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Rashid Mahmood Assistant Professor Department of Applied Linguistics G. C. University Faisalabad,

Pakistan. Muhammad Babar Qureshi

M.phil Scholar at Department of Applied Linguistics, G. C. University Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Abstract

This research explores the variations in language due to gender based social constraints in

Punjabi society (Pakistan). It explores the usage of language forms (assertive, apologetic,

declarative, requesting and imperative) on the basis of gender roles under economic status,

professional status, family roles, class status and in social dealings. The questionnaire is used

to find the differences in the usage of different forms of language of males and females. The

findings show that in Punjabi Society, women tend to use more polite language and standard

variety and they use more declarative forms and less use imperative and assertive forms and

social constraints affect the use of language. Males use more declarative form but they also

use assertive and imperative forms. This research would highlight the differences in language

of males and females in Punjabi Society. And it’s a new research in the area of

sociolinguistics in Punjabi Society and it’ll help the future researchers in the field and they

will get new dimensions from it for further researches.

Keywords: Gender Based Social Constraints ; Language ; Punjabi Society.

Literature Review:

Language is social phenomenon and it is set of signs and signals to communicate with fellow

beings. Language is taken, viewed and interpreted by different schools of thoughts

differently. Language is as old as is the humanity. Language is an interesting phenomenon



119


with which we create and establish and even abolish our social relations. With language

human beings express their feelings, emotions and ideas to other fellow beings. There are,

Many, definitions of languages given by linguists but I like Sapir’s definition the most,

according to him “language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating

ideas, emotions and desires by means of voluntarily produced symbols” (Sapir 1921). So, it is

not only the way to communicate with others, but also a tool to disclose the identity and

personality of the speaker. Language is the reflection of our personality. Language is “a

system of conventional, spoken or written symbols by means of which human beings, as

members of a social group and participants in its culture, communicate” (Encyclopedia

Britannica, vol 13).

So language is basically to communicate with the members within or outside the community.

It is in the nature of human beings that whatever they see, feel, experience, they want to share

it with others. That is possible only via language. Man is inquisitive in his nature and the

thirst to learn can only be quenched through language. Language is one of the tools to rule the

world. And this tool has been studied by many philosophers, psychologists, anthropologists,

sociologists and by linguists e.g. Chomsky, Sapir, Hall, Bloch & Trager. At present it is

being studied at a scientific level and it comes under the field of Linguistics. Though it is

relatively new field, but it is the most explored field. Linguistics is not concerned with one

particular language, but it studies the languages over-all. The word linguistics is derived from

the Latin ‘Lingua’ (tongue) and ‘istics’ (knowledge). The origin, nature, organization,

development of language through history and general rules of language ate studied in

linguistics. Though, Linguistics is relatively a new field of study but it’s very dynamic in its

nature and it’s rapidly growing field. R.L Trask defines the goals of linguistics, “the ultimate

goal of linguistics is the elucidation of the human language faculty. It is important to realize

that only natural languages (mother tongues) are truly part of the subject matter of linguistics.



120


The study of languages can be traced in ancient India, in ancient China, in ancient Greece and

Rome, among the medieval Arabs and Jews and elsewhere” (R. L. Trask 2005).

So, Linguistics is a vast area and it has many dimensions to see the language from different

angles and aspects. There are different branches of linguistics e.g. Applied Linguistics,

Descriptive Linguistics, Psycholinguistics, Neurolinguistics, Anthropological Linguistics,

Historical Linguistics and Sociolinguistics, and Sociolinguistics studies the relation of

language and society at scientific level. The relationship between language and society is of

pivotal importance. So, language gives identity to the members of society, and this social

identity is reflected by many aspects, but the most important aspect is language. Language is

a dynamic phenomenon. It grows, develops, expands and changes with the passage of time,

and it has many different forms/varieties present in the society. “Sociolinguistics may be

usually defined as the study of variation in language, or more precisely of variations within

speech communities” (R.L Trask 2005). For this regard, Sociolinguistics studies the

variations in language. Therefore, it is an interesting notion that a person belonging to any

community uses different varieties of language e.g. a man is able to speak and understand

different dialects of the language so he may use a particular ‘register’ while talking to his

colleagues at his working place. So, basically Sociolinguistics is the study of varieties in a

language and these varieties are on the basis of a person’s age, power, class, occupation,

community and of gender. Every one of us belongs to a certain age group, occupation,

community and gender. All these are the key factors in determining the use of language at

certain places while playing certain roles and gender is that aspect of a person’s personality

which seldom changes. The others keep on changing. For example, age is a progressive

phenomenon and every passing moment is changing our age, but gender remains the same

from birth till death. “Legislatively speaking, in most societies our age will influence what we

should and should not do to a greater extent than other global categories” (Cameron Llamas



121


2007). Our gender determines what to wear, what to eat even, what to speak and even

professions sometimes. That’s why it is a general perception of society that women are good

doctors, nurses and teachers.

Although gender is a social phenomenon and sex is a biological phenomenon but, gender and

sex are interrelated to each other. Our sex determines our gender. “Gender is not something

we are born with, and not something we have, but something we do” (West and Zimmerman

1987). Gender is “something we perform” (Butler 1990). In our societies women are made

women, they are not born women, in view of Simon de Beauvoir. The same is true of men.

When a baby is born then he/she is attributed certain roles and he/she is called by different

nicknames, which are totally dependent upon the sex of the baby. So the sex of baby becomes

the cause for his/her gender specification. Moreover, the process of socialization is stressed

by Lewontin: the development of gender identity ‘depends on what label was attached to him

or her as a child”. People and society determine and specify the roles for the new born baby.

So, we may say that “gender is a social phenomenon and society is responsible for the

determination of gender”.

As we have said earlier that gender is assigned by the society due to the sex. “Sex is a

biological phenomenon referring to the biological differences based on chromosome,

hormonal changes, internal and external body structure”. The word sex has been defined as

“biological or anatomical differences between men and women”, whereas “gender” “concerns

the psychological, social and cultural differences between males and females” (Anthony

Giddens 1989:155). Ruth Wodak and Gertraud Bunked raise several questions; for example:

“Do all biologically female persons develop female gender?” How are differences between

women to be explained? Which other social categories intervene? “It is important to realize

that grammatical gender has nothing to do with sex. In English we don’t have any gender, but



122


we have a few sex-marked nouns like duke and duchess, but we have no grammatical gender”

(R.L Trask 2005).

So, gender is present everywhere in conversation, humor and conflict. Gender determines the

speech habits and choices of vocabulary, R.P and vernaculars are chosen mainly due to the

gender. Every language has different varieties basing on age, class, religion, social status,

ethnicity, education, race and gender.

We human beings are dependant on language to perform certain activities and social actions

and even to create and maintain social relations. As it is said earlier that language is a social

as well as individual phenomenon and an individual can use the language according to his

free will. It is a famous proverb “Man is born free but everywhere in chains”. So is the case

with the use of language according to the free will of speaker. There are some social

constraints associated with language which create redundancy and put checks on the usage of

language in the society for the individuals. Every one of us born into a social context of some

particular kind and there are certain social conditions which determine the life opportunities

for that particulars group of people to which that person belongs to. The life of a child is very

much affected by the family he grows up in, the institutions he attended for education, the

friends, the teachers, the neighbors, the economic background of his parents and the

economic conditions of the society and even the country. He inherits many traits from his

parents not only the language. So, language spoken by people in society is affected by the

social constraints. And females have to face many social constraints while using the

language.

Different conditions and circumstances put some kinds of limitations on speech or on

language. Age, social or economic class, power, politeness, religion, occupation, education,

levels of formality, and gender all these are the factors that put constraints on the use of

language of its speakers. In the presence of these constraints people speak consciously and



123


selection of words becomes more specific due to these constraints. Due to social constraints,

females use standard, polite and formal language. These social constraints bind them to use

language consciously and particularly.

Language and gender research was neglected because the researchers were males and they

did not take any notice for the gender differences in the use of language (Coates 2007). The

other variations were studied and researched. Males were dominating and they did not take

the gender based differences in language seriously. Robbin Lakof in 1975 was able to draw

the attention of researchers towards gender based differences in language, when she wrote an

article “Language and Women’s Place”. She “drew attention to a wide range of gender

differences in language and argued that these differences were directly related to the relative

social power of males’ speakers and relative powerlessness of female speakers”. “Gender and

sex were the same for researchers till 1970s” (Jennifer Coates 2007).

Robbin Lakoff, who was professor in University of California and she is among the pioneers

in the field of gender and language. She wanted to know the “What are the gender differences

in language? How gender differences affect the use of language? Why females’ language is

powerless? What are the characteristics of women’s language? She proposed the idea of

“Women’s Language” (W.L). And her research findings tell that W.L is “weak”, “tentative”

and “unassertive”. And the characteristics of women’s language given by Lakoff in 1975,

were “based largely on her intuitions and informed observations of friends rather than on

systematically gathered evidences” (Projects in Linguistics). Her objectives were to

investigate the language of women and its characteristics. Lakoff’s work comes under the

Deficit Approach. She found that women’s language was powerless because they were

powerless relatively to the male speakers in the society. And later on there came different

approaches to approach the field of language and gender. And four different approaches have

been used to study language and gender. Jennifer Coates also mentions four approaches to



124


study language and gender. These four are, The Deficit Approach, The Dominance Approach,

The Difference Approach and The Social Constructionist Approach. The most widely

accepted and the famous is the social constructionist approach. In some researches different

approaches are used as per the requirements and according to the nature of research.

Then, comes the name of Peter Trudgill (1974) in the research area of language and gender.

He was a British sociolinguist. He conducted his research on “quantitative sociolinguistic

approach” (Coates 2007). He wanted to know “How social class plays its role in choosing

and using the vernaculars or Standard English by the men of different classes. He used the

methods of observations to collect the data. He observed the subjects in his native city

Norwich, and he said on the basis of his research findings that “men belonged to whatever

social class they tended to choose the local vernacular and less close to standard English”

(Coates 2007).

It was 1982, when Jenny Cheshire conducted a research. She wanted to investigate “Who use

more non-grammatical forms in their speech; males or females? Her basic objective was to

know the speech differences between adult males and females. She applied the technique of

observation to collect the data and she made friendly relations with football players. This

made easy for her to collect the data and found ultimately that “adolescent males were more

likely to use non-standard grammatical forms than adolescent females” (Coates 2007).

Then, Suzanne Romaine conducted a research in 1982 to know “What are the impacts of

education on women of high class’ language of written texts? Her objectives in carrying out

the research was to know the written language’s form used by women who were less

educated. Because in the past women were not having equal opportunities to get education so

to know the answer of her research question she used quantitative methods. She examined the

letters of men and women written to Mary Queens of Scotland, in sixteenth century. She



125


found out that women used non-standard forms in written language that were identical to the

language of persons of law status.

It was 1983, when Nicholas wanted to know “How many people of southeastern united states,

who spoke Gullah, use standard forms of English according to their age, and due to the nature

of job? He had the implicit objective to know the impacts of age and occupation in using the

standard form at gender level. He used the techniques of observations, meetings and

recordings to find the answer to the question. He found “that older women were the heaviest

user of Gullah, because they worked in domestic and agricultural positions” (Romaine). Men

of that territory used to work mostly in construction “(Romaine). But the young people of

both sexes had better opportunities to do the white collar jobs and that young generation was

using the standard forms of English, and young women of that group were more inclined to

use standard forms, and women were in great number as compared to men to use the

Standard English.

Larson in 1982 conducted research to know the importance of standard form of language both

for males and females. He conducted his research on the population of two villages and he

recorded the speeches of males and females, and then he analyzed the differences between

their speeches .i.e. males and females. His study mentioned clearly that women’s speech was

more standard on the whole as compared to that of men. And women used this standard

forms to persuade others or to make something understand others. Women were more using

the standard forms more effectively and efficiently but men never used standard forms to use

it effectively.

Caroline Smith (2003) of Indiana University conducted a research on gender and its relation

with the use of profane language. Her basic objectives were to find out that “whether men or

women use profanity more and what circumstances impact their use of profanity” (Caroline

Smith). Her research based on the “hypotheses the stereotypes that men use profanity more



126


than women in every circumstances, that both men and women, are more likely to use

profanity in the company of male friends than with females friends” (Caroline). She

examined “the use of f-word among 218 subjects age 18-25, in order to determine the

frequency of use among subjects”. She collected the data by giving them confidential

questionnaires. Her research revealed that “men were more likely to use the word in casual

settings than in formal settings” (Smith). Her research findings reveal than man use less

profanity in the presence of females in casual settings, but “women do not restrict their use of

profanity in casual settings”.

So, language and gender has been approached by different researchers at different times,

some found out the use of profanity between males and female speakers, and some tried to

find out the use of standard forms and use of grammatical forms by males and speakers in the

same society. And my research is new of its own kind, it is be conducted in Pakistan’s

Punjabi society, to know the differences in languages of males and females according to their

social roles in society e.g. being brother/sister, mother/father, husband/wife and as teachers or

officers. So this study is having a new dimension to know the differences in language on the

basis of social constraints in Punjabi Society.

Research Questions:

(1) Why the choice of vocabulary, being males and females brought up in the same

house, is different?

(2) Do females use the standard forms of language in Punjabi society?

(3) Do social constraints in the society create hindrances in using the certain language

forms for males and females in Punjabi society?

(4) Does social status of males and females play a role to use assertive language in

specific circumstances?



127


Research Objectives:

The objective of my research is to explore the applications of social constraints associated

with language in Punjabi Society, and to find out the difference between males and females

social interaction and in the using of different forms of language. My research is gender

based social constraints and to know the impacts of social constraints in the use of language

of opposite sex.

Research Tools and Methodology: This research is mixed methods research. To conduct the research I used questionnaire to find

out the answers of the research questions. Population is the males and females college

teachers and 24 questionnaires were distributed among the participants. Equal number of

males and females were given questionnaires and asked to fill the questionnaire. I selected

college and university teachers because they were easily accessible, educated and

independent. They can go to bazaars and for shopping and know social dealings well. I got

permission from the principals and chairmen of the concerned colleges and departments to

get questionnaires filled. I analysed the data by using Microsoft Excel and SPSS. Interviews

could be another option, but it would not be feasible for me to conduct and record interviews

because people would not allow me to record their interviews.

Data Tabulation:

q1 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q1 Assertive 3 2 5 Apologetic 2 4 6 Declarative 6 1 7 Requesting 1 4 5 Imperative 0 1 1Total 12 12 24



128


q2 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q2 Assertive 2 1 3 Apologetic 3 1 4 Declarative 4 7 11 Requesting 2 1 3 Imperative 1 1 2

- 0 1 1Total 12 12 24

q3 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q3 Assertive 1 0 1 Apologetic 0 1 1 Declarative 1 2 3 Requesting 2 1 3 Imperative 2 2 4 - 6 6 12Total 12 12 24




129



q6 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q6 Never 0 1 1 Sometimes 4 4 8 Most Often 6 4 10 Always 2 3 5Total 12 12 24





130


q9 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q9 Assertive 1 0 1 Apologetic 2 1 3 Declarative 8 7 15 Requestiing 0 1 1 Imperative 0 3 3 - 1 0 1Total 12 12 24

q10 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q10 Assertive 0 0 0 Apologetic 3 0 3 Declarative 1 5 6 Requestiing 8 7 15 Imperative 0 0 0Total 12 12 24

q11 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q11 Apologetic 2 1 3 Declarative 8 6 14 Requestiing 2 4 6 - 0 1 1Total 12 12 24

q12 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q12 Assertive 0 2 2 Apologetic 3 2 5 Declarative 9 6 15 Requestiing 0 2 2Total 12 12 24



131








132


q17 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q17 Apologetic 2 3 5 Declarative 8 9 17 Requesting 2 0 2Total 12 12 24

q18 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q18 Assertive 0 2 2 Apologetic 1 1 2 Declarative 8 9 17 Requesting 3 0 3Total 12 12 24

q19 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q19 Assertive 0 1 1 Apologetic 1 2 3 Declarative 11 9 20Total 12 12 24

q20 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q20 Apologetic 2 2 4 Declarative 10 10 20Total 12 12 24



133


q21 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q21 Apologetic 3 2 5 Declarative 9 10 19Total 12 12 24

q22 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q22 Apologetic 1 2 3 Declarative 10 10 20 Requesting 1 0 1Total 12 12 24

q23 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q23 Assertive 0 1 1 Apologetic 2 2 4 Declarative 9 9 18 Imperative 1 0 1Total 12 12 24

q24 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q24 Assertive 1 0 1 Apologetic 2 2 4 Declarative 9 10 19Total 12 12 24



134


q25 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q25 Apologetic 2 2 4 Declarative 9 9 18 Imperative 1 1 2Total 12 12 24

q26 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q26 Assertive 1 1 2 Apologetic 2 1 3 Declarative 7 6 13 Requestiing 0 1 1 Imperative 0 1 1 - 2 2 4Total 12 12 24

q27 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q27 Assertive 1 0 1 Apologetic 2 1 3 Declarative 8 9 17 Requesting 1 2 3Total 12 12 24




135


q29 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total

Females Male q29 Assertive 4 3 7 Apologetic 2 0 2 Declarative 5 6 11 Requesting 1 2 3 Imperative 0 1 1Total 12 12 24






136


q33 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q33 Never 0 1 1 Sometimes 4 4 8 Most Often 5 4 9 Always 2 3 5 1 0 1Total 12 12 24






137



q38 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q38 Sometimes 2 4 6 Most Often 6 3 9 Always 4 5 9Total 12 12 24

q39 * Gender Cross tabulation Count

q40 * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Females Male q40 Never 2 1 3 Sometimes 4 1 5 Most Often 4 5 9 Always 2 4 6 - 0 1 1Total 12 12 24

Gender Total Females Males q39 Never 1 2 3 Sometimes 7 4 11 Most Often 2 1 3 Always 2 4 6 - 0 1 1Total 12 12 24



138





The table 1 shows the response of males and females when talking to their sisters. 50%

females said that they talk in Declarative way with their sisters, 25% say that they talk in

assertive way, 16.6% said that they talk in apologetic way, and 8.3% said that they talk in

requesting way. 33% of males said that they use (requesting and apologetic) form of



139


language. 16.6% said that they use assertive form of language, 8.3% said that they use

(declarative and imperative) form of language while talking to their sisters.

The table 2 shows the response of males and females when talking to their brothers. 33%

females said that they talk in Declarative way with their brothers, 25% say that they talk in

apologetic way, 16.6% said that they talk in (requesting and assertive) way, and 8.3% said

that they talk in imperative way. 58.33% of males said that they use declarative form of

language. 8.3% said that they use (assertive, imperative, requesting and apologetic) forms of

language while talking to their brothers.

The table 3 shows the response of males and females when talking to their daughters. 16.6%

females said that they talk in (requesting and in imperative) way with their daughters, 8.3%

say that they talk in (assertive and declarative) way. 16.6% of males said that they use

(declarative and imperative) form of language. 8.3% said that they use (apologetic and

requesting) form of language while talking to their daughters.

The table 4 shows the response of males and females when talking to their sons. 25% females

said that they talk in declarative way with their sons, 16.6% say that they talk in requesting

way. 8.3% of females said that they use imperative form of language. 16.6% males said that

they use declarative form of language, and 8.3% said that they use (apologetic, imperative

and requesting) forms of language while talking to their sons.

The table 5 shows the response of males and females when talking to their spouses (husband

&wife). 33.3% females said that they talk in apologetic way with their husbands, 16.6% say

that they talk in declarative way. 8.3% of females said that they use requesting form of



140


language with their husbands. 33.3% males said that they use declarative form of language,

and 16.6% said that they use requesting form of language while talking to their wives.

The table 6 shows the response of males and females towards different familial roles allow

more restricted use of language. 50% females said that their different familial roles most

often allow more restricted use of language to woman in family, 33.3% females said that their

different familial roles sometimes allow more restricted use of language to woman in family

and 16.6% females said that their different familial roles always allow more restricted use of

language to woman in family. 33.3% males said that different familial roles allow (most often

and sometimes) restricted use of language to women in family and 25% said that different

familial roles always allow restricted use of language to women in family.

The table 7 shows the response of males and females towards different familial roles about

more restricted use of language. 33.3% females said that different familial roles (most often

and always) allow more liberal use of language to men in family, 16.6% females said that

different familial roles (never and sometimes) allow more liberal use of language to men in

family. 41.6% males said that different familial roles allow always liberal use of language to

men in family and 25% said that different familial roles sometimes allow liberal use of

language to men in family, and 16.6% said that different familial roles (never and most often)

allow liberal use of language to men in family.

The table 8 shows the response of males and females when talking to their male students.

50% females said that they talk in declarative way with male students, 25% say that they talk

in assertive way. 16.6% of females said that they use imperative form of language with their

male students. 8.3% said that they use apologetic way. 41.6% males said that they use



141


imperative and declarative form of language with their male students, and 8.3% said that they

use requesting and apologetic forms of language while talking to their male students.

The table 9 shows the response of males and females when talking to their female students.

66.6% females said that they talk in declarative way with female students, 16.6% say that

they talk in apologetic way. 8.3% of females said that they use assertive form of language

with their female students. 58.3% males said that they use declarative form of language with

their female students, and 25% said that they use imperative form of language while talking

to their female students, 8.3% said that they use requesting and apologetic forms of language

with their female students.

The table 10 shows the response of males and females when talking to their boss. 66.6%

females said that they talk in requesting way with their boss, 25% say that they talk in

apologetic way. 8.3% of females said that they use declarative form of language with their

boss. 58.3% males said that they use requesting form of language with their boss, and 41.6%

said that they use declarative form of language while talking to their boss.

The table 11 shows the response of males and females when talking to their female

colleagues. 66.6% females said that they talk in declarative way with their female colleagues,

16.6% say that they talk in apologetic and in requesting way with their female colleagues.

50% males said that they use declarative form of language with female colleagues, 33.3%

said that they use requesting form of language while talking to their female colleagues and

8.3% said that they use apologetic form of language with their female colleagues.

The table 12 shows the response of males and females when talking to their male colleagues.



142


75% females said that they talk in declarative way with their male colleagues, 25% say that

they talk in apologetic way with their male colleagues. 50% males said that they use

declarative form of language with male colleagues, 16.6% said that they use requesting,

assertive and apologetic forms of language while talking to their male colleagues.

The table 13 shows the response of males and females about the effects of profession on the

choice of vocabulary and tone. 41.6% females said that most often their profession affects the

choice of vocabulary and tone, 33.3% females said that their profession always affects the

choice of vocabulary and tone, 16.6% females said that their profession never affects the

choice of vocabulary and tone and 8.3% females said that their profession sometimes affects

the choice of vocabulary and tone. 33.3% males said that their profession always affects the

choice of vocabulary and tone, 25% males said that their profession (never and most often)

affects the choice of vocabulary and tone and 16.6% males said that their profession

sometimes affects the choice of vocabulary and tone,

The table 14 shows the response of males and females about language change when talking to

the opposite gender in class. 41.6% females said that most often their language changes while

talking to the opposite gender in class, 33.3% say that sometimes their language changes

while talking to the opposite gender in class, 25% said that their language never changes

while talking to the opposite gender in class. 50% males said that sometimes their language

changes while talking to the opposite gender in class, 41.6% males said that their language

never changes while talking to the opposite gender in class, 8.3% males said that their

language always changes while talking to the opposite gender in class.

The table 15 shows the adaptation of forms of language by males and females when talking to



143


their male subordinates. 33.3% females said that they talk in declarative way when talking to

their male subordinates, 25% say that they talk in apologetic way when talking to their male

subordinates. 16.6% of females said that they use requesting and imperative forms of

language when talking to their male subordinates. 66.6% males said that they use declarative

form of language when talking to their male subordinates, 16.6% said that they use assertive

form of language while talking to their male subordinates, 8.3% said that they use requesting

and imperative forms of language with their male subordinates.


their female subordinates. 41.6% females said that they talk in declarative way when talking

to their female subordinates, 33.3% say that they talk in requesting way when talking to their

female subordinates. 16.6% of females said that they use apologetic form of language when

talking to their female subordinates. 8.3% said that they use imperative form of language with

their female subordinates. 58.3% males said that they use declarative form of language when

talking to their female subordinates, 8.3% males said that they use assertive, apologetic and

requesting forms of language while talking to their female subordinates.


the landlord parents of their students. 66.6% females said that they talk in declarative way

when talking to the landlord parents of their students, 16.6% say that they talk in apologetic

and in requesting ways when talking to the landlord parents of their students. 75% males said

that they use declarative form of language when talking to the landlord parents of their

students, 25% males said that they use apologetic form of language while talking to the

landlord parents of their students.



144



the police-officer parents of their students. 66.6% females said that they talk in declarative

way when talking to the police-officer parents of their students, 25% say that they talk in

requesting way when talking to the police-officer parents of their students. 8.3% females said

that they talk in apologetic way while talking to the police-officer parents of their students.

75% males said that they use declarative form of language when talking to the police-officer

parents of their students, 16.6% males said that they use assertive form of language while

talking to the police-officer parents of their students and 8.3% said that they use apologetic

way when talking to the police-officer parents of their students.


the army-officer parents of their students. 91.6% females said that they talk in declarative

way when talking to the army-officer parents of their students, 8.3% females said that they

talk in apologetic way while talking to the army-officer parents of their students. 75% males

said that they use declarative form of language when talking to the army-officer parents of

their students, 16.6% males said that they use apologetic form of language while talking to

the army-officer parents of their students and 8.3% said that they use assertive way when

talking to the army-officer parents of their students.


the rickshaw-driver parents of their students. 83.3% females said that they talk in declarative

way when talking to the rickshaw-driver parents of their students, 16.6% females said that

they talk in apologetic way while talking to the rickshaw-driver parents of their students.

83.3% males said that they use declarative form of language when talking to the rickshaw-

driver parents of their students, 16.6% males said that they use apologetic form of language



145


while talking to the rickshaw-driver parents of their students.


the laborer parents of their students. 75% females said that they talk in declarative way when

talking to the laborer parents of their students, 25% females said that they talk in apologetic

way while talking to the labourer parents of their students. 83.3% males said that they use

declarative form of language when talking to the labourer parents of their students, 16.6%

males said that they use apologetic form of language while talking to the labourer parents of

their students.


the class four grade parents of their students. 83.3% females said that they talk in declarative

way when talking to the class four grade parents of their students, 8.3% females said that they

talk in apologetic and requesting ways while talking to the class four grade parents of their

students. 83.3% males said that they use declarative form of language when talking to the

class four grade parents of their students, 16.6% males said that they use apologetic form of

language while talking to class four grade parents of their students.


the sweeper parents of their students. 75% females said that they talk in declarative way when

talking to the sweeper parents of their students, 16.6% say that they talk in apologetic way

when talking to the sweeper parents of their students. 8.3% females said that they talk in

imperative way while talking to the sweeper parents of their students. 75% males said that

they use declarative form of language when talking to the sweeper parents of their students,

16.6% males said that they use apologetic form of language while talking to the sweeper



146


parents of their students and 8.3% said that they use assertive way when talking to the

sweeper parents of their students.


the clerk parents of their students. 75% females said that they talk in declarative way when

talking to the clerk parents of their students, 16.6% say that they talk in apologetic way when

talking to the clerk parents of their students. 8.3% females said that they talk in assertive way

while talking to the clerk parents of their students. 83.3% males said that they use declarative

form of language when talking to the clerk parents of their students, 16.6% males said that

they use apologetic form of language while talking to the clerk parents of their students.


the shopkeeper parents of their students. 75% females said that they talk in declarative way

when talking to the shopkeeper parents of their students, 16.6% say that they talk in

apologetic way when talking to the shopkeeper parents of their students. 8.3% females said

that they talk in imperative way while talking to the shopkeeper parents of their students.

75% males said that they talk in declarative way when talking to the shopkeeper parents of

their students, 16.6% say that they talk in apologetic way when talking to the shopkeeper

parents of their students. 8.3% males said that they talk in imperative way while talking to the

shopkeeper parents of their students.


the people of lower economic status. 58.3% females said that they talk in declarative way

when talking to the people of lower economic status, 16.6% say that they talk in apologetic

way when talking to the people of lower economic status. 8.3% females said that they talk in



147


assertive way while talking to the people of lower economic status. 50% males said that they

talk in declarative way when talking to the people of lower economic status, 8.3% say that

they talk in apologetic, assertive, requesting and imperative ways when talking to the people

of lower economic status.


the people of higher economic status. 66.6% females said that they talk in declarative way

when talking to the people of higher economic status, 16.6% say that they talk in apologetic

way when talking to the people of higher economic status. 8.3% females said that they talk in

assertive and requesting ways while talking to the people of higher economic status. 75%

males said that they talk in declarative way when talking to the people of higher economic

status, 8.3% say that they talk in apologetic, and 16.6%said that use requesting way when

talking to the people of higher economic status.


the female-sales representatives. 50% females said that they talk in declarative way when

talking to the female-sales representatives, 25% say that they talk in apologetic way when

talking to the female-sales representatives. 16.6% females said that they talk in requesting

ways while talking to the female-sales representatives, 8.3% said that they talk in assertive

way while talking to the female-sales representatives. 33.3% males said that they talk in

declarative way when talking to the female-sales representatives, 25% say that they talk in

assertive and requesting ways, and 8.3% said that use apologetic and imperative ways when

talking to the female-sales representatives.




148


the male-sales representatives. 41.6% females said that they talk in declarative way when

talking to the male-sales representatives, 33.3% say that they talk in assertive way when

talking to the male-sales representatives. 16.6% females said that they talk in apologetic way

while talking to the male-sales representatives, 8.3% said that they talk in requesting way

while talking to the male-sales representatives. 50% males said that they talk in declarative

way when talking to the male-sales representatives, 25% say that they talk in assertive way,

and 16.6% said that use requesting way when talking to the male-sales representatives, 8.3%

said that use imperative way when talking to the male-sales representatives.

The table 30 shows the response of males and females about the direct/commanding way of

communication of men. 41.6% females said that sometimes males use direct/commanding

way of communication. 25% females said that males most often and always use

direct/commanding way of communication, and 8.3% said that males never use

direct/commanding way of communication. 66.6% males said that males sometimes use

direct/commanding way of communication, 25% males said that males most often use

direct/commanding way of communication, and 8.3% said that males always use

direct/commanding way of communication.

The table 31 shows the response of males and females about the indirect (polite and

submissive) way of communication of women. 41.6% females said that females sometimes

and most often use indirect (polite and submissive) way of communication. 16.6% said that

females always use indirect (polite and submissive) way of communication. 41.6% males said

that females sometimes and most often use indirect (polite and submissive) way of

communication. 8.3% said that females always and never use indirect (polite and submissive)

way of communication.



149


The table 32 shows the response of males and females about the communication of females in

formal way with male strangers. 50% females said that females most often formally

communicate with stranger males. 25% said that females always and sometimes formally

communicate with stranger males. 33.3% males said that females sometimes formally

communicate with stranger males, 25% males said that females always and most often

formally communicate with stranger males and 16.6% males said that they never

communicate formally with male strangers.

The table 33 shows the response of males and females about the formal communication of

males with female strangers. 41.6% females said that males most often formally

communicate with stranger females. 33.3% said that males sometimes formally communicate

with stranger females. 16.6% females said that males always formally communicate with

stranger females. 33.3s% males said that males sometimes and most often formally

communicate with stranger females and 25% males said that males always communicate

formally with female strangers.

The table 34 shows the response of males and females about the same use of language with

each other. 41.6% females said that they sometimes use same form of language with each

other. 33.3% said that they most often use same language with each others. 25% females said

that they never use the same language with each other. 33.3% males said that they sometimes

and most often sue the same form of language with males and females. 25% males said that

they never use the same form of language and 8.3% said that they always use the same form

of language in their communication with males and females.



150


The table 35 shows the response of males and females about the use of standard (polite,

formal, good vocabulary and pronunciation) language by females. 41.6% females said that

females most often use formal language. 33.3% said that females sometimes use formal

language. 16.6%said that females never use formal language. 8.3% females said that females

always use formal language. 66.6% males said that females sometimes use formal language,

25% males said that females most often use formal language and 8.3% males said that

females always use formal language.

The table 36 shows the response of males and females about the use of standard (polite,

formal, good vocabulary and pronunciation) language by males. 58.3% females said that

males sometimes use formal language. 25% said that males most often use formal language.

8.3% females said that males never and always use formal language. 75% males said that

they sometime use formal language. 25% males said that males most often use formal

language.

The table 37 shows the response of males and females about the use of assertive language by

male boss. 41.6% females said that male boss uses most often assertive language. 25% said

that male boss uses sometimes and never uses assertive language. 8.3% females said that

male boss always uses assertive language. 58.3% males said that male boss uses sometimes

assertive language, 33.3% males said that male boss uses always assertive language and 8.3%

males said that male boss never uses assertive language.

The table 38 shows the response of males and females about the use of language by females

as a tool in maintaining social distance. 50% females said that females most often use

language as a tool in maintaining social distances, 33.3% females said that females always



151


use language as a tool in maintaining social distance and 16.6% females said that females

sometimes use language as a tool in maintaining social distance. 41.6% males said that

females always use language as a tool in maintaining social distances, 33.3% males said that

females sometimes use language as a tool in maintaining social distance and 25% males said

that females most often use language as a tool in maintaining social distance.

The table 39 shows the response of males and females about the difference in use of language

by educated men and educated women. 58.3% females said that sometimes there is a

difference in the language of educated men and women. 16.2% females said that there is

always and most often, a difference in the language of educated men and women. 8.3%

females said that there is never any difference in the language of educated men and women.

33.3% males said that sometimes and always there is a difference in the language of educated

men and women. 16.6% males said that there is never any difference in the language of

educated men and women and 8.3% males said that there is most often a difference in the

language of educated men and women.

The table 40 shows the response of males and females about the effects of situation or

occasion in the choice of language by males and females in the same way. 33.3% females

said that sometimes and most often there are effects of situation or occasion in the choice of

language by males and females. 16.6% females said that are (never and always) effects of

situation or occasion in the choice of language by males and females. 41.6% males said that

most often there are effects of situation or occasion in the choice of language by males and

females. 8.3% males said that there are never, always and sometimes effects of situation or

occasion in the choice of language by males and females.



152


The table 41 shows the response of males and females about the use of more exclamatory

expressions by males. 50% females said that sometimes males are not expected to use more

exclamatory expressions. 33.3% females said that males are most often not expected to use

exclamatory expressions. 8.3% females said that males are always and never expected to use

exclamatory expressions. 41.6% males said that they are sometimes and most often not

expected to use exclamatory expressions and 8.3% males said that they are always not

expected to use exclamatory expressions.

The table 42 shows the response of males and females about the use of crude (abusive) form

of language by females than that of used by males. 50%women said that females are most

often not expected to use the crude form of language than that of used by males. 33.3%

females said that women are always not expected to use the crude form of language than that

of used by males. 8.3% females said that women are (never and sometimes) not expected to

use the crude form of language than that of used by males. While 41.6%males said that

women are most often not expected to use the crude form of language than that of used by

males, 33.3% males said that women are sometimes not expected to use the crude form of

language than that of used by males and 16.6% males said that women are always not

expected to use the crude form of language than that of used by males.

The table 43 shows the response of males and females about the talk of females on

intellectual issues in the public. 33.3%females said that women are (sometimes and most

often) not expected to talk on intellectual issues in the public. 16.6% females said that women

are (always and never) not expected to talk on intellectual issues in the public. 41.6%males

said that women are most often not expected to talk on intellectual issues in the public,

33.3%males said that women are sometimes not expected to talk on intellectual issues in the



153


public and 16.6%females said that women are always not expected to talk on intellectual

issues in the public.

Research findings

I collected the data from educated men and women who had Master’s degree at least and they

were teaching at university and college levels. And mutual respect is seen for each other on

the basis of gender, while observing social constraints.

The research results show that most of the females generally talk in family in declarative

way, while talking to their brothers, sisters, sons, daughters. Females mostly use apologetic

form of language when talking to their husbands because in Pakistani society the males are

dominating and females are submissive and that’s why they use apologetic form of language

with their husbands although they are educated and working ladies.

Males use apologetic and requesting ways while talking to their sister(s), because they know

that their sisters are with them for a limited period of time because they get married soon and

in Pakistani society males respect their sisters more. Some said that they talk in assertive way

while talking to their sisters but only a few said that they talk in imperative way with their

sisters. And males mostly talk in declarative way with their daughters, brothers and with their

sons. And males talk in declarative way with their wives, but no one said that he uses

assertive form of language.

50% population of females said that different familial roles of women most often allow more

restricted use of language and 33.3% said different familial roles allow always and most often

liberal use of language to males. And 33.3% males said that different familial roles most

often and some times allow more restricted use of language and 41.6% males said that

different familial roles always allow more liberal use of language to males.

More that 50% of females said that they use declarative form of language with their male and

female students.



154


While more than 50% males said that they use declarative form of language with their female

students and less than 50 but more than forty percent males said that they use imperative form

of language with their male students. So it is inferred that females usually use declarative

form of language with their male and female students. But males usually use more declarative

form of language with female students but use more imperative form of language with male

students.

More than 50% of male and female respondents said that use requesting form of language

while talking to their boss, but more than 40% males use declarative form of language with

their boss.

More than 65% females said that they use declarative form of language with their male and

female colleagues. And 50% males said that they use declarative forms of language while

talking to their male and female colleagues. Equal percentage of females use apologetic and

requesting forms of language with their female colleagues. Males use more assertive,

apologetic and requesting forms of language while talking to their male colleagues but

females don’t use assertive language with female colleagues. This depends upon the mutual

respect and the change in behavior due to the education.

More than 40% of females said that most often their language changes due to their

profession. But 33.3% of males and females said that their language always changes due to

their profession. The change in language is due to the profession is very prominent and

profession always changes the language, and profession helps people to adopt a particular

register in their daily usage of language.

More than 40% of females said that most often their language changes while talking to the

opposite gender in class. And 50% males said that their language changes sometimes while

talking to the opposite gender in class. This happens due to the social constraints in the



155


society due to the gender. But 25% of females and 40% of males said that their language

never changes while talking to the opposite gender in class.

Most of the males and females said that they use declarative form of language while talking

to their male and female subordinates. Equal percentage of males and females said that they

use imperative form of language while talking to their male and female subordinates.

More than 60% of females said that they use declarative form of language while talking to

the land-lord, police-officer, army-officer, rickshaw-driver, laborers, class four grade

servants, sweepers, clerks and shopkeeper parents of their students. This is mainly because

the respondent females are educated and they respect the parents of their student on equal

basis. More than 75% of male respondents said that they use declarative form of language

while talking to the land-lord, police-officer, army-officer, rickshaw-driver, laborers, class

four grade servants, sweepers, clerks and shopkeeper parents of their students.

58.3% females said that they use declarative form of language while talking to the people of

lower economic status. And 66.6% females said that they use declarative form of language

while talking to the people of higher status. And 50% and 75% males said that they use

declarative form of language while talking to the people of lower and higher economic status.

The results show the general tendency of males and females towards the use of declarative

form of language with people of lower and higher economic status.

50% & 41.6% females said that they use declarative form of language while talking to female

and male sale representatives. 33.3% & 50% males said that they use declarative form of

language while talking to the female and male sales representatives.

41.6% females said that males sometimes use direct/commanding way of communication and

females sometimes use indirect way of communication. And 66.6% males said that

sometimes they use direct/commanding way of communication. 41.6% males were of the

view that females sometimes and most often use indirect way of communication.



156


50% females said that females most often formally communicate with stranger males. And

25% males said that females always formally communicate with stranger males. 41.6%

females said that males most often formally communicate with stranger females and 33.3%

males said that they sometimes and often communicate formally with stranger females.

Mostly females tend to talk in formal ways with unknown persons.

41.6% females and 33.3% males said that sometimes they use the same language with males

and females. And 25% both males and females said that they never use the same language

with males and females.

41.6% of females said that they most often use standard form of language and 66.6% males

said that females sometimes use formal language. 58.3% females said that males sometimes

use standard form of language and 75% males said that they sometimes use formal language.

It is a general notion that females most often use standard form of language while males use

rarely formal language.

41.6% females said that male boss most often uses assertive form of language and 58.3%

males said that male boss uses sometimes assertive language. In the work place boss often

uses assertive language to get things done and to control the subordinates at work place.

41.6% males said that females always use language as a tool to maintaining social distance

while 50% females said that women most often use language as a tool to maintaining social

distance.

58.3% females and 33.3% males said that sometimes there is difference in the language

spoken by educated men and women. Education brings mental maturity and thus brings

maturity in the use of language.

33.3% females and 41.6% males said that most often the situation or occasion affects the

choice of vocabulary in the language of males and females. Sometimes, rather most of the

times situation also determines the use of vocabulary in the language of males and females.



157


50% females and 41.6% males said that sometimes males are usually not expected to use

exclamatory expressions. Because males are not expected to use exclamatory expressions in

public and they are not considered expressive.

50% females and 41.6% males said that most often females are not expected to use more

crude (abusive) language than that of used by males. In Punjabi society women are not

expected at all to use abusive language and it is considered socially unethical if women use

crude language.

33.3% females and 41.6% males said that women are most often not expected to talk on

intellectual issues in public, because women don’t get the chance to talk in public and if they

come to talk publically they are not expected to talk on intellectual issues in the public.

Significance:

This research would open new vistas for the up coming researchers in the area of

sociolinguistics regarding language and gender in Punjabi society and they can conduct

research on gender based code-mixing and code switching in Punjabi society, and further

more they can conduct research on the use of certain vocabulary items by opposite genders in

the same situations in Punjabi society.

Conclusion:

In this research we have found out the effects of gender based communication on the basis of

social constraints associated with language in the educated class of Punjabi society. In the

past, a few decades ago women were not expected to use declarative and assertive forms of

language with their husbands, but now with the education this trend has been changed, and it

has been common phenomenon that females use more declarative forms of language with

their husbands. And males were expected to use imperative form of language with their

sister(s) and wives, but now this trend has also been changed with the education and educated



158


class in Punjabi society uses declarative and sometimes requesting forms of language with

their sister(s) and wives. Still in Punjabi society females’ familial roles allow restricted use of

language in family but more liberal use of language in family. Females at their work place

usually use declarative form of language but sometimes they adopt other forms of language

such as requesting and apologetic forms while talking to their boss, students, colleagues and

subordinates. Males use more declarative with their boss, frequently use imperative with

students and declarative with their colleagues and subordinates. Both males and females use

more declarative form of language while talking to the parents of their students irrespective

of their socio-economic status. In their social and economic roles males use more direct way

of communication as compared to females because of the social constraints. And females use

more declarative form of language with females and males use different forms of language

depending upon the situations. And males and females use different forms of language

depending upon the situation and the nature of their job. And females use more formal and

standard forms of language in Punjabi society as compared to males. Lastly women are not

expected to use crude form of language in Punjabi society as compared to males. Social

constraints hinder the adaptation of different forms of language to males and females in

Punjabi society although they are educated and on job but still social constraints play

significant role in the use of certain forms of language in Punjabi society.



159


References

Gerhard Jäger · Robert van Rooij (2006), Language structure: psychological and social

constraints

Hudson R. A. Sociolinguistics (1980)

Janet Holmes and Miriam Meyerhoff (2003) THE HANDBOOK OF LANGUAGE AND

GENDER. Blackwell Handbooks

Meyerhoff Miriam (2006) Introducing Sociolinguistics Routledge, London and New

York.

Lyons, John (1983) Language and Linguistics An Introduction. Cambridge University

Press. United Kingdoms.

Trask R .L. (1999), Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics. ROUTLEDGE, London

and New York.

Wardhaugh Ronald (2006), An Introduction to Sociolinguistics Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Johanna Björkenheim, Synnove Karvinen-Niinikoski Social Constraints and the Free

Will – Life

gender based social constraints associated with language in punjabi … · gender based social...

Documents