Negotiating the Classroom Floor: Negotiating Ideologies of Gender and Sexuality

  • Kathryn A. Remlinger


The school, more specifically the classroom, is a popular site of investigation for researchers of language and gender. Language and gender studies in general, and especially early studies, have often focused on the differences between men and women’s speaking strategies, positing these differences as natural expressions of being men and women (for example, Maltz and Borker 1982, Tannen 1990). Studies of classroom talk have typically taken a more critical stance to language and gender by examining power and how it is enacted through speakers’ domination of the conversational floor (for example, Spender 1980, 1992; Sadker and Sadker 1990; Swann 1992). In general, these studies find that it is the male students who tend to dominate both whole class and small group discussions through interruption, asides and laughter, among other speaking strategies. More recent studies of classroom discourse approach language and gender as social practices: ways in which people construct gendered identities and practise these identities through their language (for example, Eckert 1989; 2000; Eckert and McConnell-Ginet 1995; Bergvall and Remlinger 1996; Stokoe 1998).


Female Student Linguistic Feature Gender Ideology Extended Development Gender Category 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bergvall, V. (1996) ‘Constructing and enacting gender through discourse: negotiating multiple roles as female engineering students’, in V. Bergvall and J. Bing and A. Freed (eds), Language and Gender Research: Theory and Practice. London: Longman Press, pp. 173–201.Google Scholar
  2. Bergvall, V. and Remlinger, K. (1996). ‘Reproduction, resistance, and gender in educational discourse: The role of critical discourse analysis’, Discourse & Society, 7 (4): 453–79.Google Scholar
  3. Bing, J. and Bergvall, V. (1996) ‘The question of questions: beyond binary thinking’, in V. Bergvall, J. Bing and A. Freed (eds), Language and Gender Research: Theory and Practice. London: Longman Press, pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
  4. Butler, J. (1993) Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits ofSex’. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Chadwick, W. (1990) Women, Art, and Society. New York: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  6. Eckert, P. (1989) Jocks and Burnouts: Social Categories and Identity in the High School. New York: Teacher’s College Press.Google Scholar
  7. Eckert, P. (2000) Linguistic Variation as Social Practice. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Eckert, P. and McConnell-Ginet, S. (1995) ‘Constructing meaning, constructing selves: snapshots of language, gender, and class from Belton High’, in K. Hall and M. Bucholtz (eds), Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self. New York: Routledge, pp. 470–507.Google Scholar
  9. Epstein, J. (1990) ‘Either/or-neither/both: sexual ambiguity and the ideology of gender’, Genders, 7: 99–142.Google Scholar
  10. Fairclough, N. (1992) ‘Discourse and text: linguistic and intertextual analysis within discourse analysis’, Discourse & Society, 3 (2): 193–217.Google Scholar
  11. Graddol, D. and Swann, J. (1989) Gender Voices. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Gumperz, J. (1971) Language in Social Groups: Essays by J. Gumperz (ed. A. Dil), Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hacker, S. (1989) Pleasure, Power and Technology: Some Tales of Gender, Engineering, and the Cooperative Workplace. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  14. Holland, D. and Skinner, D. (1987) ‘Prestige and intimacy: the cultural models behind Americans’ talk about gender types’, in D. Holland and N. Quinn (eds), Cultural Models in Language and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 78–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holland, D. and Eisenhart, M. (1990) Educated in Romance: Women, Achievement, and College Culture. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hymes, D. (1968) ‘The ethnography of speaking’, in J. Fishman (ed.), Readings in the Sociology of Language. London: Longman, pp. 99–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. James, D. and Clarke, S. (1993) ‘Women, men, and interruptions: a critical review’, in D. Tannen (ed.), Gender and Conversational Interaction. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 78–111.Google Scholar
  18. Kramarae, C. and Treichler, P. (1992) Amazons, Bluestockings, and Crones: A Feminist Dictionary, 2nd edn. London: Pandora Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kress, G. (1990) ‘Critical discourse analysis’, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 11: 84–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maltz, D. and Borker, R. (1982) ‘A cross-cultural approach to male—female miscommunication’, in J. Gumperz (ed.), Language and Social Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 195–216.Google Scholar
  21. Mcllwee, J. and Robinson, J. (1992) Women in Engineering: Gender, Power and Workplace Culture. Albany: State of University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  22. Nicholson, L. (1994) ‘Interpreting gender: signs’, Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 20 (11): 79–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Penelope, J. (1990) Speaking Freely: Unlearning the Lies of Our Fathers’ Tongues. New York: Athene Series, Teachers’ College Press, Teachers’ College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  24. Remlinger, K. (1999) ‘Widening the lens of language and gender research: integrating critical discourse analysis and cultural practice theory’, Linguistik Online.
  25. Remlinger, K. (1997) ‘Keeping it straight: the negotiation of meanings in the constitution of gender and sexuality’, Women and Language, 20 (1): 47–53.Google Scholar
  26. Sadker, M. and Sadker, D. (1990) ‘Confronting sexism in the college classroom’, in S. Gabriel and I. Smithson (eds), Gender in the Classroom: Power and Pedagogy. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, pp. 176–87.Google Scholar
  27. Spender, D. (1980) ‘Talking in class’, in D. Spender and E. Sarah (eds), Learning to Lose: Sexism and Education. London: The Women’s Press, pp. 148–55.Google Scholar
  28. Spender, D. (1992) ‘The entry of women into the education of men’, in C. Kramarae and D. Spender (eds), The Knowledge Explosion: Generations of Feminist Scholarship. New York: Teacher’s College Press, Athene Series, pp. 235–53.Google Scholar
  29. Stokoe, E. (1998) ‘Talking about gender: the conversational construction of gender categories in academic discourse’, Discourse & Society, 9 (2): 217–40.Google Scholar
  30. Sutton, L. (1995) ‘Bitches and skanky hobags’, in K. Hall and M. Buckholtz (eds), Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self. New York: Routledge, pp. 280–96.Google Scholar
  31. Swann, J. (1988) ‘Talk control: an illustration from the classroom of problems in analyzing male dominance of conversation’, in J. Coates and D. Cameron (eds), Women in their Speech Communities. London: Longman, pp. 122–40.Google Scholar
  32. Swann, J. (1992) Girls, Boys & Language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  33. Tannen, D. (1990) You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Morrow.Google Scholar
  34. Tannen, D. (1993) ‘The relativity of linguistic strategies: rethinking power and solidarity in gender and dominance’, in D. Tannen (ed.), Gender and Conversational Interactional. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. van Dijk, T. (1993a) ‘Editor’s forward to critical discourse analysis’, Discourse & Society, 4 (2): 131–2.Google Scholar
  36. van Dijk, T. (1993b) ‘Principles of critical discourse analysis’, Discourse & Society, 4 (2): 249–83.Google Scholar
  37. van Dijk, T. (1996) ‘Discourse, power, and access’, in C. Rosa Caldas-Coulthard and M. Coulthard (eds), Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge, pp. 84–104.Google Scholar
  38. West, C. and Zimmerman, D. (1983) ‘Small insults: a study of interruptions in cross-sex conversation between unacquainted persons’, in B. Thorne and N. Henley (eds), Language, Gender and Society. Rowley: MA: Newbury, pp 102–17.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathryn A. Remlinger

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations