Response to: Talking Like a Lady

“Language and Woman’s Place” thoroughly discusses about the prejudice of woman’s language. The writer, Robin Lakoff, proposes that some of the woman’s speeches are different from the man’s that it discriminates the women.

Lakoff not only explains the fact that men and women put emphasis on different words, but also cites neutral and commonly used examples as a tool of comparison. For instance, she clarifies the proper usage of tag sentence. In turn, it helps the reader to better understand the difference when a woman uses it.

In addition, Lakoff realizes that as the era changes, man-woman discrepancies are becoming obsolete. In her article, she argues that “many self-respecting women are becoming able to use sentence like ...”, although she also mentions that most people still disagree with woman using ‘harsh’ language. This provides evidence that Lakoff acknowledges the recent development of equalization between female and male.

However, upon reading the article further, it is inferable that Lakoff represents her idea by putting men’s language as the ‘better’ language. Rather than describing woman’s language as polite and friendly, Lakoff merely portrays those traits as results of woman’s powerlessness. This approach makes woman’s language seem inferior, and thus implying that woman has to reduce the usage of such language.

In another argument presented in the passage, Lakoff’s assumption on the superiority of man’s language ignores the advantages of woman’s language. Woman’s language is indeed considered more respectful and well-mannered in comparison with the neutral’s or man’s language. For instance, the uses of compound request (for example, “Will you please close the door?”), or the use of “Oh dear!” instead of “Shit!”. A man’s use of the exclamation “Shit!” in his conversation is assumed to be acceptable as it shows a stronger emphasis.

Moreover, Lakoff herself also notes that “little girls are indeed taught to talk like little ladies, in that their speech is in many ways more polite...”. Such statement should be used to balance a woman’s position. Still, Lakoff seems to keep reinforcing the fact that a polite request is, in actuality, weak.

In summary, Lakoff does not agree with the discrepancies between man and woman in speech. Yet, she gives no concrete solutions on how to deal with it. She states that woman’s language is too ‘weak’. On the other hand, she also proposes that women are supposed to be polite and that they should be more careful in choosing their vocabulary. This implication results from Lakoff’s bias against woman’s language. Without the assumption that woman’s speech is inferior to man’s, its uses could be considered more respectful and polite.