Gender Differences in the Use of Hedging devices in Students’ Conversations
Main Article Content
To minimize conflict that might happen during conversation, and one of the tools is hedging. In fact, there are some differences in using hedging between female and male students; therefore, this study is conducted with aims: first is to identify what types of hedging used by female and male students, and the second is to analyze gender differences in using hedging, and the third is to analyze the function of hedges used by students. This research uses a qualitative method and the data taken from 24 female students of the English department, and 24 students of Electrical engineering. Having been analyzed, it could be found out that hedges used by female English students are: plausibility shields (30%), rounders (15%), adaptors (7%) attribute (4%) including hedges taken from negative politeness strategy such as: question, hedge (10%), and the imposition, Rx is (7%). The last hedges often used as discourse markers are: ‘Hmm’ (10%), ‘Well’ (7%) and ‘Oh’ (6%). On contrast, male students mostly applied hedges: plausibility shields (12%), rounders (5%), adaptor (4%), attribute (4%). from negative politeness strategy, question, hedge to express politeness by using indirect question (7%), and the imposition, Rx to decrease the imposition of utterance (4%). Male students also apply some discourse markers as hedges such as: ‘well’ (12%), ‘Oh’ (6%) and ‘Hmm’ (5%). From the research it is also found that female students often show their hesitations, use long utterances while male students try to show their self-confidence, and they mostly utter to the point.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Dousti, M., & Rasekh, A. E. (2016). ELT students’ gender differences in the use of hedges in interpersonal interactions: A mixed method approach applied. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(1), 217–231.
Hardjanto, T. D. (2016). Hedging through the use of modal auxiliaries in English academic discourse. Jurnal Humaniora, 28(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.22146/jh.v28i1.11412
Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2(4), 458–508. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30226076
Ma, M., & Li, Y. (2016). Multidimensional Interpretation of Speech Indirectness. English Language and Literature Studies, 6(1), 133–138. https://doi.org/10.5539/ells.v6n1p133
Mohajer, L., & Jan, M. J. (2015). Preserving face and the use of hedges in masculine world of men. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 208(ICLLIC 2014), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.176
Namaziandost, E., & Shafiee, S. (2018). Gender differences in the use of lexical hedges in academic spoken language among Iranian EFL learners: A comparative study. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 3(4). https://doi.org/10.29252/ijree.3.4.63
Prince, E. F., Frader, J., & Bosk, C. (1980). On hedging in physician-physician discourse [Univeristy of California]. http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~prokofieva/CandidacyPapers/Prince_Hedging.pdf
Rosanti, D. E., & Jaelani, A. (2016). The use of lexical hedges in spoken language by female and male students. E-Journal UIKA Bogor, 16(1), 29–39. http://ejournal.uika-bogor.ac.id/index.php/ENGLISH/article/download/251/248
Tong, R. (2009). Feminist thought (3rd Ed.). Westview Press.
Vlasyan, G. R. (2019). Linguistic hedging in interpersonal communication. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences, 617–623. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.08.02.10
Wang, J. (2018). Qualitative Research in English Language Teaching and Learning. Indonesian EFL Journal: Journal of ELT, Linguistics, and Literature, 4(2), 116–132. http://ejournal.kopertais4.or.id/mataraman/index.php/efi
Wang, S.-P., & Tatiana, K. (2016). Corpus research on hedges in linguistics and EFL journal papers. International Journal of Education, 9(1), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.17509/ije.v9i1.3717
Wang, Y. (2010). Analyzing hedges in verbal communication: An adaptation-based approach. English Language Teaching, 3(3), 120–124. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n3p120
Yule, G. (2017). The Study of Language. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674331730
Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(1), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413616.194
