Abstract
Many studies have explored differences in the use of intensifiers by people of different genders, but few have focused on additional compounding variables that may affect gendered intensifier use. This study thus explored the effects of academics’ gender and subject area on intensifier use in their lectures, as well as the interactions between these two variables. Significant differences were found in the use of intensifiers between genders and between academic disciplines, with male lecturers using significantly more intensifiers than female ones did, and significantly fewer intensifiers occurring in the hard sciences than the soft ones. Of the two variables, discipline was more influential on intensifier variation than gender was. The interaction data, meanwhile, indicated that although male lecturers in both disciplinary groups used intensifiers frequently, their language behaviors were affected far more by the norms of the lecture genre than by discipline. The female lecturers’ intensifier usage, on the other hand, was substantially influenced by both gender and discipline. Taken as a whole, these findings reveal that, although gender is undeniably an important factor in it, intensifier variation is more likely to be explicated through research on the interactive effects of gender and other variables.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Becher, T. (1994). The significance of disciplinary differences. Studies in Higher Education, 19(2), 151–161.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E., & Quirk, R. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English (Vol. 2). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bloody. (2019a). In Cambridge English Dictionary. Retrieved February 12, 2019, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/zht/%E8%A9%9E%E5%85%B8/%E8%8B%B1%E8%AA%9E/bloody.
Bloody. (2019b). In Oxford American Dictionary. Retrieved February 12, 2019, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/bloody.
Bolinger, D. (1972). Degree words. The Hauge and Paris: Mouton.
Christie, C. (2002). Politeness and the linguistic construction of gender in parliament: An analysis of transgressions and apology behaviour. Working papers on the web: Linguistic politeness and context. Retrieved January 7, 2018, from http://www.shu.ac.uk/wpw/politeness/christie.htm.
Drescher, N. (2003). The relationships among gender, power, and register in the American academic community. Paper presented at the international conference of perception and realization in language and gender research, 19–20 July, Michigan State University.
Dyer, J., & Keller-Cohen, D. (2000). The discursive construction of professional self through narratives of personal experience. Discourse studies, 2(3), 283–304.
Erickson, B., Lind, E. A., Johnson, B. C., & O’Barr, W. M. (1978). Speech style and impression formation in a court setting: The effects of “powerful” and “powerless” speech. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(3), 266–279.
Fahy, P. J. (2002). Use of linguistic qualifiers and intensifiers in a computer conference. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(1), 5–22.
Fuchs, R. (2017). Do women (still) use more intensifiers than men? International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(3), 345–374.
Guiller, J., & Durndell, A. (2006). ‘I totally agree with you’: Gender interactions in educational online discussion groups. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 22(5), 368–381.
Hessner, T., & Gawlitzek, I. (2017). Totally or slightly different? International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(3), 403–428.
Hinkel, E. (2005). Hedging, inflating, and persuading in L2 academic writing. Applied Language Learning, 15, 29–53.
Holmes, J. (2001). An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
Hyland, K. (2011). 10 Disciplines and discourses: Social interactions in the construction of knowledge. In D. Starke-Meyerring, A. Paré, N. Artemeva, M. Horne, & L. Yousoubova (Eds.), Writing in knowledge societies. Perspectives on writing (pp. 193–214). West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.
Ito, R., & Tagliamonte, S. (2003). Well weird, right dodgy, very strange, really cool: Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in society, 32(2), 257–279.
Janssen, A., & Murachver, T. (2004). The relationship between gender and topic in gender-preferential language use. Written Communication, 21(4), 344–367.
Jolly. (2019a). In Cambridge English Dictionary. Retrieved February 12, 2019, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/zht/%E8%A9%9E%E5%85%B8/%E8%8B%B1%E8%AA%9E/jolly.
Jolly. (2019b). In Oxford American Dictionary. Retrieved February 12, 2019, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/jolly.
Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and woman’s place. Language in Society, 2(1), 45–79.
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York: Basic Books.
Lin, C. Y. (2010). ‘… that’s actually sort of you know trying to get consultants in…’: Functions and multifunctionality of modifiers in academic lectures. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(5), 1173–1183.
Mauranen, A. (2002). A good question”: Expressing evaluation in academic speech. In G. Cortese & P. Riley (Eds.), Domain-specific English: Textual practices across communities and classrooms (pp. 115–140). Bern: Peter Lang.
Peacock, M. (2006). A cross-disciplinary comparison of boosting in research articles. Corpora, 1(1), 61–84.
Pertejo, P. N., & Martínez, I. M. P. (2014). That’s absolutely crap, totally rubbish: The use of the intensifiers absolutely and totally in the spoken language of British adults and teenagers. Functions of Language, 21(2), 210–237.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London and New York: Longman.
Rayson, P. (2011). Log-likelihood and effect size calculator. Retrieved December 11, 2017, from http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/llwizard.html.
Scott, M. (2017). WordSmith Tools version 7. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.
Stenström, A. (1999). He was really gormless—She’s bloody crap: Girls, boys and intensifiers. In H. Hasselga’rd & S. Okesfjell (Eds.), Out of Corpora: Studies in honour of Stig Johansson (pp. 69–78). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Stenström, A. B., Andersen, G., & Hasund, I. K. (2002). Trends in teenage talk: Corpus compilation, analysis and findings (Vol. 8). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Su, Y. (2016). Corpus-based comparative study of intensifiers: Quite, pretty, rather and fairly. Journal of World Languages, 3(3), 224–236.
Swales, J., & Burke, A. (2003). “It’s really fascinating work”: Differences in evaluative adjectives across academic registers. In P. Leistyna & C. Meyer (Eds.), Corpus analysis. Language structure and language use (pp. 1–18). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Tagliamonte, S., & Roberts, C. (2005). So weird; so cool; so innovative: The use of intensifiers in the television series Friends. American speech, 80(3), 280–300.
Tse, P., & Hyland, K. (2009). Discipline and gender: Constructing rhetorical identity in book reviews. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation (pp. 105–121). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Vasilieva, I. (2004). Gender-specific use of boosting and hedging adverbs in English computer-related texts—A corpus-based study. Paper presented at the international conference on language, politeness and gender, 2–5 September, University of Helsinki.
Wachter, A. R. (2012). Semantic prosody and intensifier variation in academic speech. M.A Thesis, University of Michigan, Athens, Georgia.
Wiley, M. G., & Eskilson, A. (1985). Speech style, gender stereotypes, and corporate success: What if women talk more like men? Sex Roles, 12(9–10), 993–1007.
Xiao, R., & Tao, H. (2007). A corpus-based sociolinguistic study of intensifiers in British English. Sociolinguistic Studies, 1(2), 241–273.
Yaguchi, M., Iyeiri, Y., & Baba, Y. (2010). Speech style and gender distinctions in the use of very and real/really: An analysis of the Corpus of Spoken Professional American English. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(3), 585–597.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, CY. Gender and Discipline: Intensifier Variation in Academic Lectures. Corpus Pragmatics 3, 211–224 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-019-00057-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-019-00057-w