The Use of Women's Speech By The Main Female Characters in 'Miss Congeniality 2' and 'Taking Lives'.

(1)

ABSTRACT

Dalam penulisan tugas akhir ini, saya memilih dua buah film yang berjudul Miss Congeniality 2 dan Taking Lives sebagai sumber data penelitian saya. Pada kedua film ini, saya menemukan ada persamaan pada tokoh utama wanitanya, misalnya mereka sama-sama berprofesi sebagai polisi. Saya menganalisis bahasa kedua tokoh utama wanita tersebut yang biasanya dipakai oleh kaum wanita yang sesuai dengan teori yang dikemukakan oleh Robin Lakoff (1975). Selain itu saya juga menganalisis bahasa yang digunakan tokoh utama wanita dalam film Miss Congeniality 2 dan Taking Lives yang menyimpang dari teori tersebut.

Saya menganalisis ujaran-ujaran kedua tokoh utama wanita dalam kedua film tersebut. Saya juga menjelaskan alasan apa yang menyebabkan kedua tokoh utama wanita ini melakukan penyimpangan atau menggunakan bahasa yang sesuai dengan teori Lakoff berdasarkan teori faktor sosial yang dikemukakan oleh Janet Holmes dengan menggunakan pendekatan Sosiolinguistik

(3)

bahasa yang digunakan oleh para pria di lingkungan kerja mereka sebagai polisi. Oleh sebab itu, mereka bisa saja melakukan penyimpangan dari teori Lakoff.

(4)

APPENDICES

Miss Congeniality 2

Hart’s utterances conforming to Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech:

No Utterance Type of Women’s

Language

Social Factor(s) 1. Hart: Clonsky, where are you hit?

Clonsky: In the vest. I’m… Hart: Where?

Clonsky: I’m all alright. I’m all alright.

2. Reporter: What a great suit.

Hart: Thank you and you look

fabulous.

‘Empty’ adjectives

The setting: On a TV show

3. Cheryl: So, what happened?

(5)

No Utterance Type of Women’s Language

Social Factor(s) 4. Fuller: Ida, you can walk!

Hart:Praise Jesus. Fuller: Moses!

Hart:Moses, I am walking again.

Avoidance of

Hart’s utterances violating Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech:

No Utterance Violation of Type

of Women’s

could’ve seen me standing there.

Fuller: Sorry.

McDonald: You were saying? Hart: Hey!Yo!

How about a real “sorry,”

huh?

7. Hart: Keep the receptionist busy. We’re gonna ask some questions, assuming we can find anyone that can hear.

Hold my purse.

‘Superpolite’ forms

The function: Hart is the leader

of the investigation

(6)

No Utterance Violation of Type of Women’s

Language

Social Factor(s)

8. Fuller: You can do Tina Hart: Just take it. Fuller: I am not singing. Hart: Just take it.

‘Superpolite’ forms

The function: Hart wants Fuller

not to refuse her order singing on

the stage

Taking Lives

Scott’s utterances conforming to Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech:

No Utterance Type of

Women’s Language

Social Factor(s)

9. Scott: Ithinkit was premeditated. Paquette: What?

Scott: Ithinkit was premeditated. Ithinkthe killer chose this site, specifically, and dug it in advance.

9. 10. Scott: That’s agreatone. Mrs Asher: Oh, yes. Summer

vacation, Fort Rupert. Scott: And this?

Mrs Asher: Oh, that was our first symphony. The magic flute.

Scott: Of course. He’scute.

‘Empty’ Mrs Asher to tell more about her

(7)

No Utterance Type of Women’s Language

Social Factor(s)

11. Scott: It is averydangerous thing to do, but it is probably our best shot at catching this guy. All right?

Costa: All right. All right.

Intensifiers The function: Scott emphasizes the

danger

12. Costa: I wasn’t helping anybody. Scott: You’ve been great.

Costa: You’re making me sound nicer than I am.

Scott: You areNICE.

Emphatic stress The function: Scott emphasizes her

exaggerated emotion

Scott’s utterances violating Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech:

No Utterance Violation of Type

of Women’s Language

Social Factor(s)

13. Scott: I’m gonna handle this one on my own. 14. Scott: This is Agent Scott. Officer

(8)

No Utterance Violation of Type of Women’s

Language

Social Factor(s)

15.

Costa: Is he dead? Help! Is he dead?

Scott: Drop your weapon!

Costa: It’s him. It’s Asher!

Scott: Drop your weapon!

Costa: He shot Duval.

Scott:Drop your weapon, now! Drop it!

16. Scott: If you have something to say,say it to me.

Paquette: What? What did you say? saw you and you are beautiful. And we are the same.

Scott: No.

Costa: I’m right, aren’t I? Scott: No.

Costa: No, I’m right. Scott:Fuck you.

(9)

(10)

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

In daily life, people use language to communicate. Language is “…considered to be an exclusively human mode of communication…” (Language). That is why, language has become one of the basic needs for people.

(11)

There are some linguists who are interested in analyzing women’s language. Some of them are Janet Holmes, Deborah Tannen and Dell Hymes. Robin Lakoff is one of the linguists who are interested in and focuses on women’s language. She is a professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley. In her book, Language and Woman’s Place, Lakoff introduces ten features of women’s language, namely, “lexical hedges or fillers, tag questions, rising intonation on declaratives, ‘empty’ adjectives, precise colour terms, intensifiers, ‘hypercorrect’ grammar, ‘superpolite’ forms, avoidance of strong swear words, and emphatic stress” (Holmes 286). Lakoff’s theory portrays the characteristics of women’s language and from the theory above; women are expected to conform to Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s language.

Men are expected to speak like men and women speak like women. But men may use a feminine style in speaking and women may use a masculine style. “The participants, setting, function, and topic” (Holmes 8) are the social factors for men and women to choose their speech style. The social factors play an important role in using different speech style.

In analyzing the data, I focus on showing the violations and conformations of Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech in two films. I choose to discuss “The Use of Women’s Speech by the Main Female Characters in Miss Congeniality 2 and Taking Lives” as the topic of my thesis.

(12)

I use the films Miss Congeniality 2 and Taking Lives because the main characters in these films have the same profession. They are FBI agents. Most of the time, they are surrounded by male. In the first movie, Miss Congeniality 2, Gracie Hart is an FBI agent who is also the runner-up of Miss United States pageant. The story is about her investigation with her team in Las Vegas to rescue her best friend, Cheryl Frazier, who is kidnapped. In the second film, Taking Lives, Illeana Scott is a successful FBI agent who goes to Montreal to help out the case of a serial killer named Martin Asher.

In their speeches, the two main female characters of the films, Hart and Scott, conform to Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech. However, the police environments force them to violate the characteristics of female’s speech because they are surrounded by male colleagues who usually use rude language.

For my analysis, I use Sociolinguistics as an approach. “Sociolinguistics is the study of the effect of any and all aspects of society, including cultural norms, expectations, and context, on the way language is used” (Sociolinguistics). I use Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s language to analyze the data and this theory will be presented in detail in Chapter Two.

The result of this analysis is expected to be beneficial for English learners in realizing the different practice of language use by different speakers in different contexts. There are social factors which make women speak differently. They may conform to or violate Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s language.

(13)

1.2 Statement of the Problem

The problems that I want to analyze in my research are: 1. Does the utterance conform to or violate women’s speech?

2. What kind of women’s speech is involved in the characters’ utterances? 3. What social factors influence the characters to use a particular type of

women’s speech?

1.3 Purpose of the Study

Following the statement of the problems, the purposes of the study are: 1. To find out if the characters’ utterance conforms to or violates women’s

speech.

2. To show which characteristic of women’s speech is involved in the utterance.

3. To show which social factors influence the characters to use that type of women’s speech.

1.4 Methods of Research

(14)

1.5 Organization of the Thesis

(15)

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, I would like to present some concluding remarks based on my findings in the previous chapter. I have three main problems for my thesis as I have already stated in the first chapter. I use two films, Miss Congeniality 2 and Taking Lives, as the sources of my data.

I use sociolinguistic approach to analyze the data. I focus on Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech that women are indicated to have different ways of talking from those of men. I realize that the way people use language indicates their social identity.

In analyzing the data, I find that the main female characters in both films show some evidences of using the utterances that conform to Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech. However, when doing their job as police officers, the critical situations force them to use utterances that violate Lakoff’s theory.

(16)

work as FBI agents. In their work place most of the officers are men. Naturally, their duties require them to speak clearly and briefly as men do.

From the two films, Miss Congeniality 2 and Taking Lives, I get seven-teen data: eight data from the first film and nine data from the second film. Some of the data that I have analyzed conform to Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech, others violate them. There are some data that are related to more than one characteristic, such as data three. In it, the speaker uses a lexical hedge, an intensifier, an ‘empty’ adjective, and an emphatic stress. So, I have twenty utterances that conform to and violate the theory.

From the first film, Miss Congeniality 2, I get eleven utterances. Seven of the utterances conform to Lakoff’s characteristics of women speech, while the other four utterances violate them. In Hart’s utterances which conform to women’s speech style, I get two which contain ‘empty’ adjectives, one containing lexical hedges, one dealing with emphatic stress, one related to intensifiers, and two reflecting avoidance of strong swear words. I get four utterances that violate Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech of ‘superpolite’ forms.

(17)

In analyzing the data, I avoid discussing the use of ‘hypercorrect’ grammar and ‘superpolite’ forms that conform to Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech. The reason is that there is not clear information about what it actually is. I have tried to search in the Internet, but they have different explanations.

Hart and Scott do not use Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech about women’s use of tag questions, rising intonation on declaratives, and precise color terms. Their profession as police officers always demands that they speak briefly, clearly, and straight to the point. This makes them look assertive and confident.

The main female character in Miss Congeniality 2, Gracie Hart, is an FBI agent and also the runner-up of Miss United States pageant. This situation causes her to change her masculine appearance and character to be feminine. She dresses like a woman and behave like a star. That is why I do not find her using swear words. She uses Oh my God to express her concern, Praise Jesus and Moses to express her feeling when she is shocked. While the main female character in Taking Lives, Scott, uses the swear words shit and fuck you to express her anger.

(18)

close with them. The function is the reason for Hart and Scott to show their feeling through the utterance.

In Miss Congeniality 2, there is only one data that is related to the setting in which the utterance takes place. It can be seen when Hart uses ‘empty’ adjectives to respond to the reporter’s statement on a TV show. The topic is the reason for Hart to use the utterance when she shares information about her ex-boyfriend and about her experience of skincare. In Taking Lives, setting and topic do not play an important role in Scott’s language choice.

In my opinion, Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech can reflect women’s speech style in general. It can be seen from my analysis that women’s speech style in Miss Congeniality 2 and Taking Lives, fits the theory. However, women can violate Lakoff’s theory when they are in a hurry or facing a critical situation. The social factors affect women to conform to or violate Lakoff’s characteristics of women’s speech.

I hope this thesis will be helpful to the other students who intend to take the same topic. However, they should really understand the theory. Besides, it is crucial to see that nowadays men and women more or less speak the same style of language. Therefore, there is not a clear-cut division between the so-called men’s and women’s languages.

(19)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

References

Holmes, Janet. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Essex: Longman Group UK Limited, 1994.

Hornby, A.S. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Internet Websites

Annotated Bibliography: Language, Gender, and Writing. 18 April 2008. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 16 April 2008

<http://course1.winona.edu/pjohnson/gender/lakoff.htm>.

Exploring Language: How Intonation Works 7 Mar 2002. English Online. 1 Apr 2008<http://english.unitecnology.ac.nz/resources/resources/ exp_ lang/how.html>.

Lakoff’s “Women Language” 18 April 2008.

<http://www.indiana.edu/~lggender/lakoff-women-language.html>. Language 18 April 2008. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 16 April 2008

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language>. Language and Gender 15 April 2008.

<http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/gender.htm>.

(20)

Women’s Language 18 April 2008.

<http://changingminds.org/explanations/gender/womens_language. htm>.

CD-ROM

The Use of Women's Speech By The Main Female Characters in 'Miss Congeniality 2' and 'Taking Lives'.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

APPENDICES

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY