3. Research method
3.2. Operationalization of methods
This thesis will examine lexical items in terms of categorizing, naming and pronouns, and items with indexical functions such as style markings where appropriate. These lexical items will be sorted in terms of masculine and feminine categories, see table 1. Where appropriate, the findings will be elaborated on through the use of examples, i.e. excerpts, from the
dialogues.
The CDS approach calls for an interdisciplinary investigation and problem-oriented research (Meyer & Wodak 2016: 4). The main problem is how transgender identity is communicatively created, and how it is maintained, negotiated, accepted, resisted, or acknowledged by different interlocutors who participate in social interaction, i.e. language events. The study becomes interdisciplinary through the combination of CDS, MCA,
pronouns, naming, and the 'identities in interaction' model with Judith Butler's grand theory of
performativity, seen in the context of gender studies and sociolinguistic studies of transgender
experience. The power and ideology that is to be deconstructed is the power positions of the
two binary genders versus the transgender position, and the semiotic data that is investigated
is spoken and visual language. The values (Fairclough 2010: 7) that create the basis for the
researcher's point of departure are values associated with the social democratic politics of
Norway and Western societies, where equality, individual liberty and the opportunity to live
life on one's own terms are in high regard. This means being able to live in a society where
one is permitted to express the gender identity that 'feels right' rather than conforming to
35 gender roles that are otherwise determined by forces outside of the individual, whether the subject is conscious of them or not.
Table 1: 'Pronouns and membership categories' is a list of third person pronouns and common membership categories that are connected to the Membership Categorization Devices 'family' and 'gender'. The list is compiled by the analyst, based on Kulbrandstad (2005), Hasselgård et. al. (1998), Schlegoff (2006) and Stokoe (2012). The Norwegian pronouns come from Kulbrandstad, while the membership categories are translated to Norwegian by the analyst. The list is preliminary and may be expanded throughout the analysis chapters.
Masculine Feminine
English Norwegian English Norwegian
He Han She Hun
His Hans Her Hennes
Man Mann Woman Kvinne
Male Mannlig Female Kvinnelig
Dad Pappa Mom Mamma
Husband Ektemann Wife Kone
Brother Bror Sister Søster
Table 1. Pronouns and membership categories
The lexical items that are selected for gender identity construction through pronouns and the act of categorizing someone demonstrate how the language user perceives, or wishes to perceive, this person. In the context of gender, it expresses how someone sees a person, but also how that person wants to be seen. This creates a foundation for negotiation between the interlocutors in the conversation.
Indexicality investigates specific linguistic features that point to or index specific identity categories (Eckert & McConnell-Ginet 2013: 24, 27, 34, Cameron & Kulick 2003:
48). Some of the focus of the analysis in this thesis will be on stereotyping words that signal stance and indexicality. The list in table two is assembled from two lists that Toril Moi (2005:
102-103) has created in order to discuss vocabulary that is connected to attitudes to male and female gender. Moi's list is partly based on Mary Ann Case's case study of the Price
Waterhouse v. Hopkins lawsuit (1989), on Case's list of adjectives that psychologists and
other researchers consider to be coded as masculine or feminine in contemporary American
36 culture. In turn, Case's list is based on the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI). These
stereotyping words may contribute to demonstrate someone's stance or attitude towards the topic of the conversation, and towards the people who are involved in the conversation. In the case of gender expression, these stereotyping words will either have a masculine or a feminine value, see table 2.
Masculine Feminine
English Norwegian English Norwegian
Aggressive Aggressiv Affectionate Kjærlig
Ambitious Ambisiøs Cheerful Munter
Analytical Analytisk Childlike Barnlig
Assertive Bekreftende Compassionate Medfølende
Athletic Atletisk Flatterable Smigrende
Competitive Konkurransedyktig Gentle Mild
Dominant Dominant Gullible Lettlurt
Forceful Mektig Loyal Lojal
Independent Selvstendig Sensitive Sensitiv
Individualistic Individualistisk Shy Tilbaketrukket
Self-reliant Selvhjulpen Soft-spoken Vennlig
Self-sufficient Selvforsynt Sympathetic Sympatisk
Strong Sterk Tender Øm
Integrity Integritet Understanding Forståelsesfull
Decisiveness Besluttsomhet Warm Varm
Forthrightness Likefremhet Yielding Føyelig
Productivity Produktivitet Emotional Emosjonell
Energy Energi Kind Snill
Table 2: Stereotyping words that signal stance and indexicality
Not all of these words may occur in the empirical data. However, the list provides a
foundation for the categorization of stereotypically masculine and feminine lexical items in relation to MCA, stance, and indexicality.
The English and Norwegian families may construct MTF transgender family
members differently. Are they authenticated or denaturalized? How is gender negotiated
differently in the Norwegian and the American families? How to they address each other, and
how do they describe each other? The jargon or slang that is connected with a certain
37 subculture is used as acts of identity, often in order to signal belonging and identification with the subculture in question (Robert Le Page & Andée Tabouret-Keller 1985, in Mæhlum et. al.
2008: 106). Similarly, jargon can be used to signal distance from a subculture that someone does not want to be associated with. In regards to transsexuals who are in the process of transition, the jargon or vocabulary that is selected should signal that they no longer belong to the membership category 'male' and instead belong to the category 'female'. Likewise, their family members may use jargon or vocabulary to signal their protest or acceptance in this regard, thus demonstrating possible difficulties with accepting the transsexual's passing.
These are the interactional stances that are prototypically attached to women and men.
They were identified by Holms and Stubbe (2003: 574), and characterize feminine and masculine speech style in a modern Western society. The table is organized in binary oppositions.
Feminine Masculine
Indirect Direct
Conciliatory Confrontational
Facilitative Competitive
Collaborative Autonomous
Minor contribution in public Dominates public talking time
Supportive feedback Aggressive interruptions
Person/process oriented Task/outcome oriented
Affectively oriented Referentially oriented
Table 3: Interactional stances
The following categories and Membership Categorization Devices are relevant for this thesis. The categories may be further divided through identifiers like caring, traditional, dynamic, irresponsible, immoral, unprotected and progressive. Some social categories may belong to several MCDs.
MCD category Social categories (standardized relational pairs)
'Gender' Man, woman, trans, sexually oppressed, liberated woman 'Family' Mother, father, brother, sister, son, daughter, aunt, uncle 'Marriage' Husband, wife, housewife, fiancé, ex-husband, ex-wife Table 4: Membership Categorization Devices (Stamou et. al. 2011: )