Language, Gender and Power Relationships: the Enactment of Repressive Discourse in Staff Meetings of Two Subject Departments in a New Zealand Secondary School

Abstract

LANGUAGE, GENDER AND POWER RELATIONSHTPS: THE ENACTMENT OF REPRESSIVE DISCOURSE IN STAFF MEETTNGS OF TWO SUBJECT DEPARTMENTS IN A NEW ZEALAND SECONDARY SCHOOL LYNNETTE DAWN LILLIAN SOLLITT-MORRIS This thesis investigates the interaction of three factors, language, gender and power relationships, in a particular type of asymmetrical talk context: the school departmental meeting. The analysis focuses in particular on the way the discourse processes of meetings provide opportunities for people to enact power relationships. The thesis contextualises the question of how power is enacted through language within a particular theoretical framework: the enactment of repressive discourse. Repressive discourse (a term of Pateman's) is a discourse of unequal power and functions to gain willing compliance, to retain goodwill, to promote solidarity, and to reduce asymmetry (at least superficially). Repressive discourse is discourse that disguises the status of a message from one person to another, and disguises the nature of the social relationships between one person and another. Meetings from two different core subject departments at a medium sized New Zealand co-educational secondary school were audio- and video-taped. Six recorded meetings from each department form the data base for the thesis. A structural framework based on the work of conversational analysts was employed for the analysis of the opening and closing structures of meetings. For the critical analysis of the meeting data, a f framework based on the work of discourse analysts was used. Data was analysed both quantitatively and qualitativety. Two major methods are analysed for nanifesting power in the meeting: firstly, through control of the topic and secondly, through controlling other peoples' behaviour. Topic can be controlled through topic selection; the giving of directions, the making of suggestions, the summarising of a topic, interrupting, and the asking of questions. Controlling topic selection includes such actions as setting the agenda, directing the meeting processes, speaking to or introducing a topic, opening and closing topics, and, making the first suggestion. Controlling others' contributions can be achieved by summonsing, evaluating, silencing, humour, and subject pronoun use. The control of the topic processes was largely the prerogative of the Head of Department but other participants also employ topic controlling devices. Controlling others' contributions is a means open to all meeting participants. Status seems to be the most important variable contributing to the linguistic style of interaction typical of each department in the meeting data because the style of the department is strongly influenced by the style of the Head of Department. Gender was another significant factor and interacted with status. The analysis suggests that Heads of Department are the prime controllers of meeting processes. By controlling the meeting processes they can, and do, enact the greatest amount of power within the meeting, influencing others' behaviour and the direction of talk. Heads of Department are also able to greatly influence the style of the linguistic and social interaction within the meeting as a direct consequence of their personal linguistic styles. Heads of Department's personal linguistic styles are, in turn, influenced by the sex-preferred linguistic features typical of their respective genders, and by the ratio of genders within the department. It was hypothesized that the more participants there were with the same gender as the Head of Department, the stronger was the display of typical sex-preferred linguistic features. The results of this thesis have implications for a wide range of groups including linguists, educationists, feminists, business interests and those interested in small group behaviour.