Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T05:19:52.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Speaking style as an expression of solidarity: Words per pause

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Norman Markel
Norman Markel
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Processes and Disorders, University of Florida
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines the use of words per pause (W/P) as a practical means for identifying solidarity in everyday conversation. Eight listeners recorded the narratives of a female and a male, either friends or strangers. Ten speakers were categorized as friends and six as strangers; they talked about a good and a bad experience. Average reliability of coding pauses was .83. The results indicated a statistically significant difference in W/P of speakers who were friends and those who were strangers. Statistical results support the conclusion that friends are more likely to employ many W/P and strangers few W/P. One practical implication of this study is that W/P can be employed by researchers with relative ease and a high degree of reliability for investigations of speaking style in a variety of contexts. A second practical implication is that W/P is a diagnostic device that can serve as a social litmus test in everyday conversation to identify the expression of sympathy and estrangement. (Expressive language, nonverbal communication, paralanguage, pauses, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, solidarity, speech and personality)

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , March 1990 , pp. 81 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

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

Bernstein, B. (1962). Linguistic codes, hesitation phenomena, and intelligence. Language and Speech 5:31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R., & Gilman, A. (1960). The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Sebeok, T. (ed.), Style in language. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 253–76.Google Scholar
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1968). Psycholinguistics. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
King, M., & Ziegler, M. (1975). Research projects in social psychology. Monterey, Calif.: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, J. (1972). Appreciation. In Tedlock, D., Finding the center: Narrative poetry of the Zuni Indians. New York: Dial. xi–xiv.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Siegman, A. W. (1978). The telltale voice: Nonverbal messages of verbal communication. In Siegman, A. W. & Feldstein, S. (eds.), Nonverbal behavior and communication. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. 183–244.Google Scholar
Siegman, A. W. (1980). Interpersonal attraction and verbal behavior in the initial interview. In Clair, R. N. St. & Giles, H. (eds.), The social and psychological contexts of language. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. 73–99.Google Scholar
Tedlock, D. (1972). Finding the center: Narrative poetry of the Zuni Indians. New York: Dial.Google Scholar
Trager, G. (1958). Paralanguage: A first approximation. Studies in Linguistics 13:1–12. Reprinted in Hymes, D. (ed.), Language in culture and society. New York: Harper & Row, 1964. 274–79.Google Scholar