English Linguistics 5: Language in Society
Research Proposal
Dr. V. Kostadinova
Celine Uijthoven
14303027
Introduction
Double-voicing is used by speakers who have a dual agenda – they are aware of the
interlocutor’s views and are able to adjust their speech based on this information. An example
of this can be found in a sentence such as ‘‘I am probably speaking out of turn, but…’’
(Baxter, 2013, p. 11). Research on double-voiced discourse has shown that women mainly
use the linguistic feature when situated in male-dominated professional contexts. Baxter’s
research (2013) shows that women engage in a linguistic ‘second guessing’ (Baxter uses this
description in order to make clear what double-voicing entails) as a response to their
language being scrutinised by the male colleagues (pp. 11-12). In addition, she argues that
double-voiced discourse is used as an essential survival strategy in a man’s world (Baxter,
2013, p. 12). Therefore, women in male-dominated workplaces use more double-voicing.
However, to my present knowledge, no research has yet been conducted in which double-
voicing was explicitly analysed in female-dominated contexts. As a result, the purpose of the
study is to identify if women also incorporate features of double-voicing when situated in a
female-dominated workplace. Additionally, this study will focus on situations in which
double-voicing can occur and to see if the speaker makes use of double-voiced discourse.
According to Baxter, this linguistic feature is mostly used when the speaker is of the opinion
that he or she is being threatened (2014, p. 5).
Finally, Baxter’s (2011, 2013, 2014) and Holmes and Schnurr’s studies (2006) on double-
voicing have observed this type of discourse in the United Kingdom and New Zealand.
Consequently, this research will be carried out in a context that is similar to the earlier-
mentioned studies – in this instance, the United Kingdom. This will result into the following
research question: Do women in a British male-dominated IT workplace use more double-
voiced discourse than women in a British female-dominated IT workplace when feeling
threatened by the interlocutor in a meeting?
, Literature Review
Double-voiced discourse is frequently observed in women due to its function of adjusting the
language to make the right impact on the interlocutor (Baxter, 2013, p. 11). As Holmes points
out, ‘gendered’ language is evoked in certain contexts or interactions (2006). It explains why
a more direct way of speaking indexes masculinity, whilst more indirect styles indexes
femininity (Holmes, 2006, p. 37). According to Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (2003), we
bring to every interaction we have in a workplace setting our familiarity with societal gender
stereotypes, and the gendered norms to which women and men are expected to conform (p.
87). For instance, a female director spoke twice in the meeting and commented: ‘‘Sorry,
sorry, I’m talking too much, I’m talking too much’’ which was confirmed by her male
colleagues nodding (Baxter, 2013, p. 11). This is a suitable example of taking gendered
norms into account via the usage of double-voiced discourse, since the woman is aware of her
gendered role and is confirmed as such by the men.
The concept of double voicing traces back to Mikhail Bakhtin, a Russian philosopher, who
proposed that whenever a person speaks, they have a heightened awareness of the concerns
and agendas of others, which is reflected in the different ways they adjust their language in
response to interlocutors (Baxter, 2014, p. 2). What happens is that women who rise up the
corporate ladder have learnt to use double-voiced discourse in order to minimise direct
confrontation or criticism from male colleagues (Baxter, 2013, p. 13). Bakthin’s concept of
double-voicing helps us understand and discuss why the linguistic feature occurs in this
particular group (Holmes & Schnurr, 2006, p. 41). This information consolidates the
hypothesis of this study: women are expected to use more double-voicing when surrounded
by predominantly male colleagues, because minimising or handling criticism is socially
approved when you are a woman.
Baxter (2011) has divided double-voicing into four principal types: anticipatory,
authoritative, corrective, and mitigating. Anticipatory double-voicing is used in order to
anticipate and dilute possible criticism; authoritative to heighten impact and display personal
power, especially if this was threatened; corrective to correct or repair a mistake or error,
usually their own; and mitigating double-voicing is used to reduce authority and build rapport
with their team (Baxter, 2011, p. 239). The different types have in common that they are
perpetuated by the speaker whenever the interlocutor represents a threat. Double-voiced
discourse is implemented to ward off that threat (Baxter, 2014, pp. 5-6). The present study
Research Proposal
Dr. V. Kostadinova
Celine Uijthoven
14303027
Introduction
Double-voicing is used by speakers who have a dual agenda – they are aware of the
interlocutor’s views and are able to adjust their speech based on this information. An example
of this can be found in a sentence such as ‘‘I am probably speaking out of turn, but…’’
(Baxter, 2013, p. 11). Research on double-voiced discourse has shown that women mainly
use the linguistic feature when situated in male-dominated professional contexts. Baxter’s
research (2013) shows that women engage in a linguistic ‘second guessing’ (Baxter uses this
description in order to make clear what double-voicing entails) as a response to their
language being scrutinised by the male colleagues (pp. 11-12). In addition, she argues that
double-voiced discourse is used as an essential survival strategy in a man’s world (Baxter,
2013, p. 12). Therefore, women in male-dominated workplaces use more double-voicing.
However, to my present knowledge, no research has yet been conducted in which double-
voicing was explicitly analysed in female-dominated contexts. As a result, the purpose of the
study is to identify if women also incorporate features of double-voicing when situated in a
female-dominated workplace. Additionally, this study will focus on situations in which
double-voicing can occur and to see if the speaker makes use of double-voiced discourse.
According to Baxter, this linguistic feature is mostly used when the speaker is of the opinion
that he or she is being threatened (2014, p. 5).
Finally, Baxter’s (2011, 2013, 2014) and Holmes and Schnurr’s studies (2006) on double-
voicing have observed this type of discourse in the United Kingdom and New Zealand.
Consequently, this research will be carried out in a context that is similar to the earlier-
mentioned studies – in this instance, the United Kingdom. This will result into the following
research question: Do women in a British male-dominated IT workplace use more double-
voiced discourse than women in a British female-dominated IT workplace when feeling
threatened by the interlocutor in a meeting?
, Literature Review
Double-voiced discourse is frequently observed in women due to its function of adjusting the
language to make the right impact on the interlocutor (Baxter, 2013, p. 11). As Holmes points
out, ‘gendered’ language is evoked in certain contexts or interactions (2006). It explains why
a more direct way of speaking indexes masculinity, whilst more indirect styles indexes
femininity (Holmes, 2006, p. 37). According to Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (2003), we
bring to every interaction we have in a workplace setting our familiarity with societal gender
stereotypes, and the gendered norms to which women and men are expected to conform (p.
87). For instance, a female director spoke twice in the meeting and commented: ‘‘Sorry,
sorry, I’m talking too much, I’m talking too much’’ which was confirmed by her male
colleagues nodding (Baxter, 2013, p. 11). This is a suitable example of taking gendered
norms into account via the usage of double-voiced discourse, since the woman is aware of her
gendered role and is confirmed as such by the men.
The concept of double voicing traces back to Mikhail Bakhtin, a Russian philosopher, who
proposed that whenever a person speaks, they have a heightened awareness of the concerns
and agendas of others, which is reflected in the different ways they adjust their language in
response to interlocutors (Baxter, 2014, p. 2). What happens is that women who rise up the
corporate ladder have learnt to use double-voiced discourse in order to minimise direct
confrontation or criticism from male colleagues (Baxter, 2013, p. 13). Bakthin’s concept of
double-voicing helps us understand and discuss why the linguistic feature occurs in this
particular group (Holmes & Schnurr, 2006, p. 41). This information consolidates the
hypothesis of this study: women are expected to use more double-voicing when surrounded
by predominantly male colleagues, because minimising or handling criticism is socially
approved when you are a woman.
Baxter (2011) has divided double-voicing into four principal types: anticipatory,
authoritative, corrective, and mitigating. Anticipatory double-voicing is used in order to
anticipate and dilute possible criticism; authoritative to heighten impact and display personal
power, especially if this was threatened; corrective to correct or repair a mistake or error,
usually their own; and mitigating double-voicing is used to reduce authority and build rapport
with their team (Baxter, 2011, p. 239). The different types have in common that they are
perpetuated by the speaker whenever the interlocutor represents a threat. Double-voiced
discourse is implemented to ward off that threat (Baxter, 2014, pp. 5-6). The present study
