Extract from HR Magazine with commentary:

 

PRAGMATIC ASPECTS OF HUMOUR AND GENDER IN THE WORKPLACE

 

People are very creative in their use of language. This observation was made convincingly by Chomsky in the 1950s. One of the key ways to form a relationship and bond with fellow workers is to have humour in your choice of language towards other colleauges. The way people use a variety of pragmatics to portray sequences of humour and construct collegial relations differs depending on the gender of that person. To begin with, the pragmatic force of contributions and attitudes is relevant: a distinction between supportive humour as opposed to contestive humour sequences proved apparent. Work is an important source of an individual's identity, and workplace interaction is a crucial means of securing that identity. As one component of workplace discourse, humour can provide insights into the distinctive culture which develops in different workplaces. Wodak and Benke, 1996 and Holmes 1996 determined theoretical development between genders in feminist linguistics. Eckert and McConnell-Ginet stated that studies of gender-specific language appears contradictory in the way that people in the workplace view the opposite sex, what are their attitudes towards the opposite sex? Could this relate to their upbringing or social identity?

 

Research shows that having the 'manager' status is socioculturally associated with a particular opposite sex. This position comes with ways to speak to other collegue's from a 'head's' perspective which creates gender-related expectations in the workplace. Gender ideologies are then created in how men and women should then speak and behave towards that person, is there a difference between the language used by men and women towards someone holding that status in the workplace? This could then relate to instrumental power, holding authority in speech may come across as patronising or intimidating to others. Lakoff questions whether that 'mythic golden mean' between aggression and deference is possible for women or whether 'too often, assertive behaviour is misidentified as aggression'? If someone in the workplace was holding the title of 'manager' and speaking to their fellow colleagues with authority, women may consider this as a personal attitude towards women in general, as an instruction to do something because they are simply female. The male sex on the other hand may just accept this as a simple instruction to do something and respond in a friendly manner. There is a lack of humour when communicating with someone of a higher level and formality in the workplace simply because you feel the need to impress and hold a professional role.

 

 

 

Commentary

 

The extract above shows how and when humour may be used in the workplace and how it is less common when interacting with someone of a higher level. The responses towards instructions given by a manager my differ depending on the gender. Below is a conversation between colleagues showing how language is different:

 

 

 

This relates to the article extract and shows the use of 'small talk' in the office between several women. The compliment ritual is used by Tina who is the office manager, with the higher status. The object of complimenting someone on their clothing (June) relates to the language used by females, the manager may be using these language types to maintain a friendly bond and relationship between the women in that workplace.