12. Have a special lexicon: women use more words for things like colors e.g. magenta, aquamarine. , men for sports.
13. Use question intonation in declarative statements: women make declarative statements into questions by raising the pitch of their voice at the end of a statement, expressing uncertainty. For example, -“What school do you attend? -Eton College?”
14. Use “wh-” imperatives: (such as, “Why don’t you open the door?”)
15. Overuse qualifiers: (for example, “I think that…”)
16. Use modal constructions: (such as can, would, should, ought to – “Should we turnup the heat?”)
17. Use more intensifiers: especially “so” and “very” (for instance, “I am so glad you -came!”)
18. Lack a sense of humor: women do not tell jokes well and often don’t understand the punch line of jokes. Language and Women’s place (Lakoff 1975, p,45-80)
Wardaugh (2006, p.315-316) by distinguishing between “biological sex” and “socio-cultural gender” consider gender in language issue more cultural and context-oriented phenomenon. However, he considered both natural and grammatical gender system in languages (Ibid, p.320). In addition he mentioned the phonological differences, suprasegmental, lexical, syntactic, semantic, discourse, and the communication (Ibid, p.318-320).He refers to three dominant approaches to explaining gender differences in two sexes as follow: the biological differences between men and women, male dominance over women, and social differences between men and women. With regarding to social differences between men and women he notes to tendency of both genders to different issues for speaking and he knows the cause of brevity and speech reduction from underlying interests. Then he studies the communication strategies such as controversy, react (asking questions, encouraging to speak, confirmation), interrupting speech, the different goals of it (empathy, control, etc.) and the difference between the sexes (Ibid, p.326). Anyway, he rejects decisively remarks and without regarding to context about any kind of comparison between the sexes. Another topic that Wardaugh discusses is the gender issues and the possibility of gender programming of languages. Wardaugh believed that with formal changes of languages cannot achieve a fundamental change in gender discrimination. In his opinion these discriminations resolved when the intellectual foundations of women and men have changed (Ibid, p.331).
Modarresi in explaining the linguistic differences between men and women are further distinguished by the social differences (Modarresi 1368, 1999 A.D. p.170-160). He says that because each one of both sexes in some areas is more active than the other gender, the terms related to that area is considered masculine or feminine. Modarresi also refers to the two genders specific language patterns and believes that when women and men in society do not follow these patterns, will lose their special social status, or at least ridiculed. Modarresi mentioned the amount of gender differences of various languages (ibid, p.162). From Lakoff quotation he knows more unstable and precarious social status of women than men considered and query the reflection of these social status in language (ibid. p.169-168). Differences between men and women in terms of discourse refers to the fact that women talk usually the focal questioning, skeptical and seek support while men talk from the aggressive stance, competitive and controller.
Paknahad Jabaruty on explaining the gender differences in languages more inclined to the hypothesis that male dominance on language and gender inequality (Paknahad Jabaruty, 1381, 2003 A.D. p. 36-35). However, he knows effective two different methods of socialization of boys and girls in societies in shaping inequalities. In his opinion confining the girls to home environment causes them to grow in a noncompetitive environment, but the boys could freely leave the house and be at the outside of the house causes them to have a controlling and competitive behavior. He mentioned the higher status of men than women in the home and outside the home and regarded lower social status of women a cultural heritage which is transferred to the children in both the home and outside the home environment. However Jabaruty point out the social status of men conflict in home and some social positions and also the mother’s personality contrasts ideal location (promoted by the community) and her real social status, she points out (ibid, p.25).with citing to his own research data Jabaruty concluded that in Farsi, language inequality is in favor of men.
Peter Trudgill “gender, social class and speech sounds” 1970s research into language and social class showed some interesting differences between men and women. Trudgill studied the effect of gender on variation in word-final –ing in words like running (runnin’) and swimming (swimmin’). He found that women tend to use more standard language features than men and men tend to use more vernacular forms in their speech.
Oana-Helena (2002) in his article “Gender issues in translation” states that the cultural turn in translation studies allows us to understand translation as being related to other aspects of communication. It defines translation as a process of mediation which moves through ideology and identity. Translation has traditionally been looked upon as a secondary reproductive activity. This is associated with misogynist stereotypes of women, and it can therefore be argued that translation is described in gendered terms, negatively related to women. It is a fact that, historically; women have been discouraged from participation in the public sphere. Some norm and make their voice heard.In feminist theory, translation is viewed as production, not reproduction. Language is a means of creating meaning, and meaning is created in order to reveal feminine identity. Feminist translation redefines the notion of fidelity, equivalence and the invisibility of the translator. These are directed not at the original but at the feminist project, i.e. the reworking of meaning so as to reverse the effects of male social and cultural domination.
Tannen examines gender linguistics from discourse perspective. He believes thatcommunication is not just intended to say the intention and objectives, but to fulfill the quality of objectives (regardless of its meaning) that is usually influenced by the culture in shaping a society’s ultimate purpose is very important (Tannen 1995, p.138) . He knows one of the durability factors of the particular style of speech of each sex tend to communicate more with his homosexuality (Ibid, p.139).
Kaushanskaya, Marianand Yoo (2011) in their article “Gender differences in adult word learning” state that in prior work, women were found to outperform men on short-term verbal memory tasks. The goal of the present work was to examine whether gender differences on short-term memory tasks are tied to the involvement of long-term memory in the learning process. In Experiment 1, men and women were compared on their ability to remember phonologically-familiar novel words and phonologically-unfamiliar novel words. Learning of phonologically-familiar novel words (but not of phonologically-unfamiliar novel words) can be supported by long-term phonological knowledge. Results revealed that women outperformed men on phonologically-familiar novel words, but not on phonologically-unfamiliar novel words. In Experiment 2, we replicated Experiment 1 using a within-subjects design, and confirmed gender differences on phonologically-familiar, but not on phonologically-unfamiliar stimuli. These findings are interpreted to suggest that women are more likely than men to recruit native-language phonological knowledge during novel word-learning.
In all-female discourse, it is common that two or more people speak at the same time (simultaneous speech) and this does not disturb their conversation (Coates 1995, p.23).Coates (1995, p.23) has examined that female speakers keep “a turn-taking model”, although “the rule of one-person-at-a-time” does not employ. The co-conversationalists may make comments or ask questions while another communicator is speaking; and in fact, asking questions and making comments elucidate that they are listening to their speakers; moreover, in their simultaneous speech, they use several topics and also overlapping speech is seen in their conversations. Studies have proved that men mostly apply a competitive style of discourse whereas women use a more cooperative style of speech (Coates 1995, p.13). Several studies have been conducted on all-female discourse to find out what are the significant linguistic features constructing females’ cooperative discourse. As Coates (1995, p.22) states, in conversations, some speakers may take the role of ‘expert’ whereas some others ask the expert their questions. She says through conducting several studies, it is found that women avoid taking the role of ‘expert’, for this might “disturb the symmetry of the group”; therefore, questions for seeking information are few in all-female discourse while interrogative forms are used frequently in order to determine the acceptability of the said information; moreover, in order to ensure that a conversation continues, females keep asking questions.
Tabitha W. Payne and Richard Lynn (2011) in their article “Sex differences in second language comprehension” report that females have higher average ability than males in second language learning in studies using children. We further investigated this issue by