25.2359, Review: Discourse Analysis; Sociolinguistics: Jones (2012)

The LINGUIST List linguist at linguistlist.org
Fri May 30 14:42:36 UTC 2014


LINGUIST List: Vol-25-2359. Fri May 30 2014. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 25.2359, Review: Discourse Analysis; Sociolinguistics: Jones (2012)

Moderators: Damir Cavar, Eastern Michigan U <damir at linguistlist.org>

Reviews: Monica Macaulay, U of Wisconsin Madison
Rajiv Rao, U of Wisconsin Madison
Joseph Salmons, U of Wisconsin Madison
Mateja Schuck, U of Wisconsin Madison
Anja Wanner, U of Wisconsin Madison
       <reviews at linguistlist.org>

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Do you want to donate to LINGUIST without spending an extra penny? Bookmark
the Amazon link for your country below; then use it whenever you buy from
Amazon!

USA: http://www.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-20
Britain: http://www.amazon.co.uk/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-21
Germany: http://www.amazon.de/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistd-21
Japan: http://www.amazon.co.jp/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-22
Canada: http://www.amazon.ca/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistc-20
France: http://www.amazon.fr/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistf-21

For more information on the LINGUIST Amazon store please visit our
FAQ at http://linguistlist.org/amazon-faq.cfm.

Editor for this issue: Rajiv Rao <rajiv at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  


Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 10:41:56
From: Heather Froehlich [heathergfroehlich at gmail.com]
Subject: Dyke/Girl: Language and Identities in a Lesbian Group

E-mail this message to a friend:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/emailmessage/verification.cfm?iss=25-2359.html&submissionid=29238856&topicid=9&msgnumber=1
 
Discuss this message: 
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=29238856


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/23/23-4235.html

AUTHOR: Lucy  Jones
TITLE: Dyke/Girl: Language and Identities in a Lesbian Group
PUBLISHER: Palgrave Macmillan
YEAR: 2012

REVIEWER: Heather Froehlich, University of Strathclyde

SUMMARY

Jones 2012’s monograph addresses the concept of lesbian-specific discourse
through the application of Eckert and McConnell-Ginet’s Theory of a Specific
Community of Practice (CoP) (2005) and Bucholtz and Hall’s (2005) framework
for sociocultural linguistic analysis. This study focuses on a group of
middle-class, self-identified lesbian women, who are largely in their late 50s
or early 60s, with a common interest in hiking. Jones inserts herself in their
community, gains acceptance, and conducts a sociolinguistic study on their use
of positioning as either a ‘Dyke’ or a ‘Girl’. Beginning with an overview of
sociolinguistic studies with a specific focus on social identities, Jones
moves into a discussion of queer and LGBT identities, where she highlights
samples of discussions among the ‘Sapphic Stompers’ to create the Dyke/Girl
dichotomy. This specific dichotomy mirrors a heteronormative structure of
‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ roles in the lesbian community. The members of
Jones’ hiking group posit themselves to be more Dyke than Girl through the
conversations analyzed in this book.

In her first four chapters, Jones outlines her specific methodology, which
bridges sociocultural linguistics, the relationship between language and
sexuality and their relationships to ethnographic studies. She connects the
sociolinguistic concept of CoP with queer linguistic studies, noting a
specific absence of studies on lesbian and female-bodied discourse. Jones
notes that much of the sociolinguistic work on queer discourses is centered on
gay men; her book joins the small ranks of lesbian-centric studies of social
identity construction in queer linguistics. Jones’s ethnographic concerns are
given an entire chapter to themselves, which addresses various criticisms of
sociolinguistics with aplomb.

The subsequent four chapters posit the social differences between the Dyke and
the Girl for the Sapphic Stompers through an analysis of several different
interactions that emphasize: discussions of style, stance and social practice
in Chapter 6; inclusion in a community through performative authenticity in
Chapter 7; and maintaining a shared identity when politics differ in Chapter
8. These chapters apply the sociolinguistic and sociocultural methodologies
outlined in Chapters 2-4, while continuing to address the concerns from
Chapter 4 (“Doing Ethnography with the Stompers”).

Jones closes with a discussion of the CoP model and how it is successful for
this kind of sociolinguistic research (Chapter 9) and the role of sexuality in
sociocultural linguistics (Chapter 10). In these chapters, she revisits her
methodology and addresses its impact on her results.

EVALUATION

Jones’s book fills a gap in queer sociolinguistics by focusing specifically on
the discourses of lesbians as a participant of their CoP. This approach is not
without ethnographic concerns, which she addresses carefully in Chapter 4 and
Chapter 9.  Ways her methods may have been disruptive and/or not entirely
ethical are discussed in detail, which is a major strength of this book. Over
the course of 15 months of observation, she realizes she has accidentally
befriended these women. Her study is effectively bookended by chapters where
she explores the potential consequences of this in her research, in addition
to the possible biases which may be inherent in the discourse analysis of a
specific identity group. Though Jones admits that she also self-identifies as
a lesbian (p. 54), she rightfully suggests that this is a strength to her
study, as she has the relevant cultural capital to not infringe on the Sapphic
Stompers’ natural conversation. The attention given to this issue runs the
risk of being tedious; here, it is carefully curated to address a reader’s
concerns about the study directly.

The careful considerations given to identity and methods in this text
highlight the difficulties in ethnographic sociolinguistic research, and Jones
presents a clear discussion of her samples, devoting a chapter to each one.
These samples cover a variety of conversations about the perceived qualities
of and in community references to lesbianism (e.g., ‘the finger question’, The
L Word, visible lesbians, skirt-wearing, among others), allowing the
participants to discuss what their perceptions of the Dyke/Girl dichotomy are,
and how the participants see themselves in relation to this binary
distinction. This involves a deconstruction of heteronormative femininity, its
relationship to lesbian authenticity, and how this fits into this community of
practice.

As Jones argues, this process constructs Dyke to be the dominant CoP for the
Sapphic Stompers. A “Girl” stance can be presented as being so femme as to be
unrecognizable as a lesbian identity. When “Girl”ishness is presented, it is
not perceived as a direct threat to the Dyke stance. Instead, “Girl”ishness is
presented as merely inauthentic rather than threatening, thus positing the
Sapphic Stompers outside a heteronormative worldview. This sets up a number of
jokes about “Girl”ishness, in which Jones deconstructs the power dynamics at
play to create this specific type of discourse. Though billed as a
sociolinguistic study, it is just as much about discourse analysis as it is
about linguistic enactments of social constructions of a shared sociocultural
capital. Jones addresses these jokes with a careful deconstruction for a
nonmember of the lesbian community, without detracting from her microanalysis
of the Stompers’ discourse.

Jones does not ignore the other various social identities of these women,
which adds further depth to her analysis. Although they are around the same
age and in the same socioeconomic group, with many of the same interests,
Jones is careful to not to make assumptions about their similarity. Though she
is more concerned with their queer identity than their various social
identities, she does not ignore it at all -- in her early chapters, she
addresses how queer studies as a broad theoretical approach has arisen from
gender studies and sociology, setting the stage for her later discussion of
intersecting identities. The Sapphic Stompers, as a group, are all older than
Jones. A number of examples in the book discuss the impact of generational
queer identities: Is Shane, from The L Word, really a Dyke?; Are Dykes allowed
to wear skirts now, or is that still too Girlish? The themes touched on in
this book -- maintenance of a lesbian identity, sociopolitical approaches to
queer feminism, and authenticity -- are all closely tied to lesbian culture
and social interactions. Though, as Jones says, “they use stereotypes to index
often exaggerated lesbian persona [...] one could argue that the women
parodied the ideological lesbian in order to find something coherent to engage
with” (129).

Jones carefully considers how these identities are informing their lesbian
identity and in what ways they might be different from her own identity,
without impeding her analysis and role as a participant observer. One study in
particular (Section 7.2.1) is most indicative of this. In a social gathering
with the usual Sapphic Stomper hikers, one of the women presents Jones with a
pamphlet, thinking that she might be interested (p. 107). This prompts a
discussion of queer identities and feminist ideologies for the Sapphic
Stompers and ways they have changed since the publication of this pamphlet --
things that Jones does not necessarily know, having not lived through it. This
chapter in particular highlights the social and cultural understandings of
this shared history, but this has been the undercurrent of the chapters
leading up to it: The Sapphic Stompers construct the Dyke identity as a
specific variety of first-wave feminist ideology. Unlike the other examples,
where they might make a joke of the perceived “Girl”ishness of not being Dyke
enough, the group deconstructions the Girl/Dyke dichotomy of first-wave
feminism for Jones. In many examples, Jones is the one introducing a
discussion point, but here the tables are turned on her, creating a more
natural discussion. This chapter is one that clearly causes some concern for
Jones; she has realized that she’s not just a participant observer but now
fully ingrained in their social world. Without this chapter, however, I
suspect the study would be much weaker, as it may veer too dangerously close
to dealing explicitly with posed ethnographic questions determined to elicit a
response -- instead, this chapter gives the book a certain authenticity which
it was in danger of missing out on completely.

Ultimately, this study highlights that the construction of a Dyke identity is
more desirable than that of a Girl identity within the community of the
Sapphic Stompers. Jones’ study adds to the currently small amount of
scholarship which exclusively addresses lesbian-specific interaction. She has
succeeded in creating space for further studies in cross-generational lesbian
language; it is my hope that this study will open further avenues for queer
sociolinguistics research much in the same way that Paul Baker’s (2002a,
2002b) work on Polari, the now-lost language of gay men, has.

REFERENCES

Baker, P. (2002a) “Fantabulosa: A Dictionary of Polari and Gay Slang”. London:
Continuum.

Baker, P. (2002b). “Polari: The Lost Language of Gay Men”. London: Routledge

Bucholtz, M., and K. Hall (2005). Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural
Linguistic Approach.  “Discourse Studies” 7(4-5), 584-614.

Eckert, P. and S. McConnell-Ginet. (1992) “Communities of Practice: Where
Language, Gender and Power all Live”. In Kira Hall, Mary Bucholtz and Birch
Moonwomon eds., Locating Power, Proceedings of the 1992 Berkeley Women and
Language Conference.

Eckert, P. and E. Wenger. (2005) “What is the role of power in sociolinguistic
variation?” “Journal of Sociolinguistics” 9:4. 582-9.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Heather Froehlich is a PhD student at the University of Strathclyde, where she
studies gender in Early Modern London plays using methods and approaches from
corpus stylistics, historical sociolinguistics, and discourse analysis.








----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-25-2359	
----------------------------------------------------------



More information about the LINGUIST mailing list