Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:40:58.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bent Preisler, Linguistic sex roles in conversation: Social variation in the expression of tentativeness in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1986. Pp. xviii + 347.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Janet Holmes
Janet Holmes
Affiliation:
Linguistics Department, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
Language in Society , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 1989 , pp. 293 - 299
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (1985). Feminism and linguistic theory. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coates, J. (1983). The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Coates, J. (1986). Women, men, and language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. (1984a). Women's language: A functional approach. General Linguistics 24(3): 149–78.Google Scholar
Coates, J. (1984b). Hedging your bets and sitting on the fence: Some evidence for hedges as support structures. Te Reo 27: 47–62.Google Scholar
Coates, J. (1985). Sex differences and mis-communication – Some data from New Zealand. In Pride, J. B. (ed.), Cross-cultural encounters. Melbourne: River Seine. 24–43.Google Scholar
Coates, J. (1986). Functions of you know in women's and men's speech. Language in Society 15(1): 1–21.Google Scholar
Huebler, A. (1983). Understatements and hedges in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, A. R. (1983). Compromisers in English: A cross-disciplinary approach to their interpersonal significance. Journal of Pragmatics 7: 191–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society 1: 97–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, R. (1972). The pragmatics of modality. Chicago Linguistics Society Papers 8: 229–46.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and woman's place. Language in Society 2: 45–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman's place. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milroy, L. (1980). Language and social networks. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Perkins, M. R. (1983). Modal expressions in English. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
Smith, P. M. (1985). Language, the sexes, and society. New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. (1985). Complex illocutionary acts and the analysis of discourse. Lancaster Papers in Linguistics II. Lancaster: Lancaster University.Google Scholar
Thorne, B. & Henley, N. (eds.) (1975). Language and sex: Difference and dominance. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Thorne, B., Kramarae, C., & Henley, N. (eds.) (1983). Language, gender, and society. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar