Journal of Academic Research for Humanities (JARH) is a double-blind peer-review, Open Free Access, online Multidisciplinary Research Journal
Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 4 No. 3 (2024)
The International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities"

Research Articles

Fight for Individuality: A Comparative Analysis of Male and Female Language Politeness Strategies on Facebook

Published 24-09-2024

  • Fatima Farooq
    • ,
  • Farzana Khan
    • ,
  • Azeem Alphonce

Fatima Farooq
PhD Scholar, Department of English Bahauddin Zakaria University Multan

Farzana Khan
Lecturer, Department of English, National University of Modern Languages, Multan, Pakistan.

Azeem Alphonce
Assistant Professor, Department of English, Forman Christian College (A Chartered University) Lahore, Pakistan

Abstract

It is commonly argued that women use polite language as compared to men. Robin Lakoff (1975) argued that women use polite strategies due to their weak position in society, so this study aims to investigate Lakoff’s argument in this age of digital media. By employing Brown and Levinson (1987) Politeness theory. The data was collected from the Facebook comments of male and female users. The nature of this study was Descriptive. Data was collected from Facebook users' (male and female) comments using a purposive sampling technique. A mixed-method research design has been employed. For Qualitative analysis, the framework of politeness theory (Brown & Levinson, 1987) has been applied and Quantitative analysis has been conducted to check the percentages of the use of politeness strategies by males and females. The findings of the study verified the argument of Robin Lakoff (1975), as findings revealed females employed a higher frequency of positive politeness strategies as compared to males. Female become more indulged in saving face to show their involvement and independence in society. The study recommends exploring cross-cultural contexts to verify the use of politeness strategies by males and females.

Keywords

Individuality, Strategies, Discourse, Employed, Politeness

PDF

References

  1. Batool, R., Dr. Faqir M. Aslam Rana, & Dr. Hafiz Muhammad Qasim. (2024). Investigating Gender Perceptions on Technology Use in Pakistan ELT Classrooms: A Survey-Based Study. International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities", 4(1), 58–63. Retrieved from https://jar.bwo-researches.com/index.php/jarh/article/view/385
  2. Brown, B. R. (1970). Face-saving following experimentally induced embarrassment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6(3), 255-271. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0022103170900612
  3. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage (No. 4). Cambridge University Press.
  4. Cameron, D. (2007). The myth of Mars and Venus. Oxford University Press, USA.
  5. Cherifa, B. (2021). Gender and Politeness Negotiation on the Net: A Case Study of the Facebook (Doctoral dissertation). https://dspace.univ-sba.dz/items/41b238da-f573-4ecd-8a00-8960ec350b51
  6. Ferguson, C. A. (1968). Language problems of developing nations. New York: Wiley.
  7. Fishman, J. A., Ferguson, C. A., & Dasgupta, J. (1968). Language problems of developing nations (p. 146). New York: Wiley.
  8. Fraser, B. (1990). Perspectives on politeness. Journal of pragmatics, 14(2), 219-236. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/037821669090081N
  9. Fraser, B., & Nolen, W. (1981). The association of deference with linguistic form. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/ijsl.1981.27.93/html
  10. Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In S. Barab, R. Kling, & J. Gray (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning (pp. 338 – 376). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Hussain, D. M. S., Rubab, D. I., & Ms Sheeza Tufail. (2023). Use of Social Networking Applications in English Language Teaching (ELT): Adult Learners’ Perceptions In Pakistani ESL Context. International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities", 3(4), 13–24. Retrieved from https://jar.bwo-researches.com/index.php/jarh/article/view/336
  12. Khan, F., & Aadil, M. (2022). Pragmatic Approach: A Study of Politeness Strategies in Pakistani Morning Shows. sjesr, 5(3), 9-21. https://www.sjesr.org.pk/ojs/index.php/ojs/article/view/860
  13. Khokhar I.(2017), Testing Major Linguistic Politeness Theories against the Marital Relationships of Bilingual (Urdu and Punjabi) Speaking Pakistani Couples. Linguistics and Literature Review (LLR), 3(2) 29-46.
  14. Kousar S. (2015), Politeness Orientation in Social Hierarchies in Urdu, International Journal of Science, Culture, and Language,6(2) 86-96.
  15. Laghari, D. M. A., Chachar, D. Z. A., & Saima Bachal. (2023). An overview of the influence of teachers` subject matter knowledge on students’ academic achievement. International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities", 3(3), 252–258A. Retrieved from https://jar.bwo-researches.com/index.php/jarh/article/view/327
  16. Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and woman's place. Language in society, 2(1), 45-79.
  17. Leech, G. (1983). Principal of Pragmatics. Terjemahan MDD Oka. 1993. Prinsip-prinsip Pragmatik. Jakarta.
  18. Ravi K. (2014) Social Media and Women: A Critical Evaluation of the Behavioural Disconnect, Academic Research International,5(2) 358-376.
  19. Sarwar, N., Khurram, F., & Fayyaz, Sana. (2023). Impact of Practicing Gratitude on Focus and Resilience in Classroom Learning among University Students: A Qualitative Analysis. International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities", 3(3), 65–73. Retrieved from https://jar.bwo-researches.com/index.php/jarh/article/view/294
  20. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2001). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell
  21. Segal, L. (2004). Why feminism? Gender, psychology, politics. Polity Press.
  22. Shahzaib, & Datoo, A. K. (2023). Pedagogical Utility of Funds of Knowledge for Education for Pluralism: A Case Exploring Prospective Teachers’ Perceptions. International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities", 3(4), 25–36A. Retrieved from https://jar.bwo-researches.com/index.php/jarh/article/view/338
  23. Sulistyani, H. D. (2017). "Face Work" on Social Media - Implementing the Theory of Face Work in the Context of Women’s Personal Conflict on Social Media. KnE Social Sciences, 2(4), 177-184.
  24. Syafrizal, S., & Putri, F. S. B. (2020). Linguistic politeness: an analysis of gender differences in speaking classroom. English Education: Journal of English Teaching and Research, 5(2), 169-178. https://ojs.unpkediri.ac.id/index.php/inggris/article/view/14436
  25. Tannen, D. (1990). You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men. Conversation. New York: Ballantine books.
  26. Tahira Asgher, Muhammad Saleem, & Dr. Asma Kashif Shahzad. (2023). Eco Linguistics-Infused Procedural Text Learning for ESL Students’ Success. International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities", 3(4), 01–12. Retrieved from https://jar.bwo-researches.com/index.php/jarh/article/view/337
  27. Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge University Press.
  28. Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
  29. Zamzani, Z. (2011). Pengembangan alat ukur kesantunan bahasa Indonesia dalam interaksi sosial bersemuka. LITERA, 10(1). https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/litera/article/view/1171