Gender Differences in Language Use Among EFL Students : A Sociolinguistic Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29303/kopula.v8i1.9414Kata Kunci:
Gender differences, Language use, EFL Students, Sociolinguistics, Classroom interactionAbstrak
This study examines gender differences in language use among EFL students from a sociolinguistic perspective. The research aims to explore how male and female students differ in their interaction patterns, politeness strategies, levels of formality, and the influence of social and cultural norms in English classroom communication. A descriptive quantitative research design was employed, using a questionnaire as the primary instrument to collect data from third-semester students of the English Language and English Education Study Programs. The data were analyzed by categorizing responses based on gender and conducting a comparative analysis to identify patterns of language use and sociolinguistic variation.
The findings reveal that both male and female students actively participate in English classroom interactions; however, notable differences emerge in their communication styles. Male students tend to demonstrate higher confidence, more direct speech, and greater dominance in classroom discussions. In contrast, female students generally employ more indirect language, higher levels of politeness, and greater use of mitigating expressions to maintain social harmony. The results also indicate that students adjust their language use according to interlocutors and social context, particularly when interacting with lecturers versus peers. Furthermore, cultural values and social norms play a significant role in shaping students’ language choices and interaction strategies, sometimes exerting a stronger influence than gender alone.
Overall, the study concludes that language use among EFL students is not solely determined by linguistic competence but is shaped by a complex interaction of gender, sociocultural norms, and contextual factors. These findings highlight the importance of integrating sociolinguistic awareness into EFL instruction to foster more inclusive and effective classroom communication.
Referensi
Awan, A. G., & Azeem, M. S. (2017). Gender differences and its impact on students’ performance: A socio-linguistic analysis. Global Journal of Management, Social Sciences and Humanities, 3(2), 352-372.
Choudhary, A. I., & Rehman, S. (2009). Gender inequality in education: Evidence from Pakistan. Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), 45–56.
Madrid, D., & Hughes, S. (2011). Studies in bilingual education and gender differences. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 345–360.
Shaheen, R., & Mujahid, A. (2002). Female education and dropout rates in primary schools in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 23–37.
Uganda Christian University. (2015). Academic performance and gender differences among university students. Mukono, Uganda: Uganda Christian University Press.
UNESCO. (2018). Global education monitoring report: Gender review. Paris, France: UNESCO Publishing.
Ali, H. O. (2016). Gender differences in using language in the EFL classes: From teachers’ views. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 2(4).
Mulac, A., Seibold, D. R., & Farris, J. L. (2000). Female and male managers’ use of language in professional criticism. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19(4), 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X00019004002
Thomson, R., & Murachver, T. (2001). Predicting gender differences in electronic discourse. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(2), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466601164812
Holmes, J., & Meyerhoff, M. (Eds.). (2003). The handbook of language and gender. Blackwell Publishing.
Magon, J. (2009). Gender differences in language processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 38(1), 1–15.
Gorjian, B. (2008). The role of gender in the use of hedging devices in academic writing. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 4(2), 123–134.
Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and woman’s place. Language in Society, 2(1), 45–80. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500000051
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. Harper & Row.
Saffarian, R., & Gorjian, B. (2012). Gender differences in the use of hedging devices in academic discourse. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(3), 1–15.
Samaie, M., Khosravian, F., & Boghayeri, M. (2014). The frequency and types of hedges in English and Persian research articles. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1678–1687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.594
Wardaugh, R. (1986). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics: Edition 5. Cornwall: Blackwell Publishing. Retrieved in May 19th, 2016 from
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Hak Cipta (c) 2025 Wahyuni, Siti Ainun Kelsaba, Andi Nirwana Humairah A.N, Fitri Arisanti, Saiful, Qalbi
Artikel ini berlisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Kopula: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Bahasa, agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in Kopula: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Bahasa.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
