Editor for this issue: Ann Dizdar <ann
linguistlist.org>
According to many dictionaries and reference books published in Japan, expressions like 'I'd love to' and 'That's lovery!' are preferred by women. This observation may be originated from Robin Lakoff'(1975). However, I've noticed that those expressions are often used by men these days. And as far as I know no dictionaries published in Britain or America mention the sex difference or preference for those expressions. Therefore, I suspect there is a change in the use of these expressions or even that there has been no difference or preference in the first place. What I'd like the members of this linguist society(?) to do is to answer the following questionnaire. - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------------ Questionnaire : Please tick English variety: American English speaker [ ], British English speaker [ ], Others [ ] ( Please describe what variety you speak.( )) Sex: Male [ ], Female [ ] Age: -20[ ], 20-30[ ], 30-40[ ], 40-50 [ ], 50-60[ ] , 60+[] Please read the following expressions and put into each parenthesis the number 1, if you think that the expression has been and still is preferred by women. 2, if you think that it used to be preferred by women but there is no preference now (or there is less and less preference between the sexes.) 3, if you feel that there has been no preference as far as you know. Expressions: A. [ ] "I'd love to." (in response to "Would you like to come to the party? ") B. [ ] "I'd love to." (in response to "Would you like to dance? ") C. [ ] I'd love to see you act Hamlet. D. [ ] I'd love you to come with us. E. [ ] What a lovely view! F. [ ] We've had a lovely dinner/time. G. [ ] It's lovely and warm in here. H. [ ] Isn't it a lovely day? If you have any comment, please write it below. Thank you for your cooperation. - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------------ - --------- Junichi Murata Kobe City University of Foreign StudiesMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue