Introduction - breathyvowel.files.wordpress.com · Web viewTwo common features of folktale tellings are the use of traditional openings and closings, and having a strong moral to

Gender, identity and narrative in oral tellings of Red Riding Hood by native

speaking English teachers in South Korea

Alexander GrevettUniversity of Leicester

Alexander GrevettED7504: Language, Discourse and Society

Gender, identity and narrative in oral tellings of Red Riding Hood by native speaking English teachers in South Korea

Contents

1 Introduction........................................................................................................................42 Literature review................................................................................................................5

2.1 The history of language and gender research..............................................................52.1.1 Deficit theory.......................................................................................................52.1.2 Difference theory.................................................................................................62.1.3 Performative theory..............................................................................................7

2.2 Differences in men and women’s speech....................................................................72.2.1 Linguistic features................................................................................................82.2.2 Styles, topics and purposes..................................................................................9

2.3 Society, power & language........................................................................................102.3.1 Reflexivity..........................................................................................................102.3.2 Socialization.......................................................................................................112.3.3 Power and asymmetry........................................................................................11

2.4 Identity and gender....................................................................................................122.4.1 Constructing and performing.............................................................................132.4.2 Group identity....................................................................................................13

2.5 Narrative and gender.................................................................................................143 Research background and method...................................................................................16

3.1 Background................................................................................................................163.2 Research method.......................................................................................................16

4 Discussion of results........................................................................................................184.1 Character voicing.......................................................................................................18

4.1.1 Results................................................................................................................184.1.2 Discussion..........................................................................................................19

4.2 Comments on voicing................................................................................................234.3 Narrative....................................................................................................................23

4.3.1 Audience............................................................................................................234.3.2 Storytelling as a community of practice.............................................................244.3.3 Traditional stories vs. individual stories............................................................28

5 Conclusion........................................................................................................................306 References........................................................................................................................317 Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................368 Appendix A: Transcripts and audio links.........................................................................37

8.1 Woman 1...................................................................................................................38

2



8.2 Woman 2...................................................................................................................398.3 Woman 3...................................................................................................................418.4 Woman 4...................................................................................................................448.5 Woman 5...................................................................................................................458.6 Man 1.........................................................................................................................478.7 Man 2.........................................................................................................................508.8 Man 3.........................................................................................................................518.9 Man 4.........................................................................................................................548.10 Man 5.....................................................................................................................568.11 Man 6.....................................................................................................................57

9 Appendix B: Marked up transcript...................................................................................5810 Appendix C: Submission Guidelines...............................................................................5911 Appendix D: Release form...............................................................................................61

3



1 Introduction

Do men and women really speak differently? Much research has been carried out in order to

answer this question, and many books have been written claiming that they do. Other books,

though fewer, claim that there is little significant difference in speech styles between genders.

Furthermore, the literature disagrees not only as to whether men and women speak

differently, but also as to why this may be so. This study aims to make a small contribution to

finding the answers to both questions, and suggest a research method and some areas of study

as yet underexplored, by asking men and women to tell their own versions of a famous

folktale, and analysing the differences therein.

The paper is organized as follows. It begins with a review of some of the literature relevant to

the project, in the areas of language and gender theory, features of gendered speech, the way

language constructs gender in society and individually, and the way gender links to narrative.

Following this, the research method is described, and the results are analysed.

4



2 Literature review

In this section the literature relating to theories of language and gender1 is reviewed. It begins

with the history of language and gender and purported differences in gendered speech, and

then moves to a wider focus on the role that language plays in society and in constructing

individuals’ identities. Finally, the relationship between gender and narrative is examined.

2.1 The history of language and gender research

This section will provide a review of recent work in the field of language and gender,

covering theories from 1970 to the present: namely Deficit, Difference and Performative,

with particular reference to a key text from each. Is has been noted by Cameron that these

theories did not directly supersede each other, but grew out of interaction, with the balance

between them shifting over time with academic developments and the changing social

climate. (2005:484)

2.1.1 Deficit theory

It seems almost impossible to discuss theories of language and gender without mentioning

Language and Woman’s Place2 (Lakoff 1975). Lakoff could reasonably claim to have

invented the discipline as we understand it today. Her influence, direct and indirect, can be

seen in many of the works mentioned in this study. Importantly, Lakoff’s work dealt with

language from a feminist viewpoint which saw language as discriminating against women

both in description and usage to a dehumanizing end (1975:4–5).

1 In keeping with current trends, seen for example in Wardhaugh (2009) and Cameron (2005, 2010) this paper

will use the term ‘gender’ in the ranged, socially constructed sense, as opposed to the more biologically based,

and binary ‘sex’.2 Hereafter LWP.

5



The problem for Lakoff was that the way that women were taught to speak led to them not

being taken seriously and “systematically denied access to power, on the grounds that they

are not capable of holding it as demonstrated by their linguistic behaviour” (1975:7). Her

‘women’s language’3 is marked by “powerlessness, insecurity, and triviality” (Cameron

2005:485). Lakoff saw ‘women’s language’ as reflective of a wider oppression, in which the

language that women are taught and the subjects that it relegates women to dealing with are

"not relevant to the real world of (male) influence and power" (1975:13). This leads to what

she calls a “double bind”, a “problem in our culture” which the women are seen as

unfeminine if they speak like men, and powerless if they speak like women (1975:57).

2.1.2 Difference theory

Difference theory was perhaps a reaction to criticism of LWP and the idea that it saw

‘women’s language’ as inherently deficient (see for example McConnell-Ginet 2004:108). Its

most famous text, You Just Don’t Understand (Tannen 1990), attempts to counter the view

that "Experts and nonexperts alike tend to see anything women do as evidence of

powerlessness" (1990:225), by revising Deficit theory and presenting men and women’s

speech styles as separate but equally valuable “genderlects” (1990:279).

Tannen’s genderlects are characterized by a focus on status and hierarchy in men, while

women tend to use language to establish connection and intimacy (1990:279). This basic

distinction is often the cause of misunderstanding in the way that men and women

communicate with each other. These differences are pronounced enough for Tannen to

proclaim that it is akin to cross-cultural communication (1990:18).

3 Lakoff’s scare quotes.

6



Like Lakoff, Tannen sees these differences as being produced by society, but for her they are

a result of the way that children are exposed to and acquire language in early childhood, in

particular during single sex play. As she says: "Even if they grow up in the same

neigborhood, on the same block, or in the same house, girls and boys grow up in different

worlds of words" (1990:43). It is this difference that informs the way we speak as adults, and

causes the misunderstandings that Tannen deals with in her book.

2.1.3 Performative theory

Performative theory came about with a “postmodern turn” in which less importance was

placed in grand narratives such as binary gender difference, and more attention given to a

range of locally constructed, gendered identities (Cameron 2005:487). This turn led to

Cameron writing The Myth of Mars and Venus (2007) in which she showed that the

differences that Tannen claimed for men and women held neither over time in Western

society, nor in different cultures today.

Performative theory is based on the ideas of philosopher Judith Butler, who suggests that

rather than being essential, gender comes about through continuous practices that constitute it

– in her words “gender is the repeated stylization of the body” (1990:33). These practices are

located in society, but the individual can either reinforce them or attempt to challenge or

revise it (Bucholtz 1999:206 citing de Certeau 1988). This theory is reflective of current

Western society, where gender is increasingly seen as a product of personal choice rather

than an inescapable essence (Cameron 2005:490).

This section examined three current and historical theories of language and gender and gave

brief descriptions which will be elaborated upon in the coming sections.

7



2.2 Differences in men and women’s speech

This section will examine some of the claims in the literature about the features, styles, topics

and purposes of men and women’s speech.

2.2.1 Linguistic features

In LWP, Lakoff suggested a number of features that characterized women’s speech. These

included trivial adjectives such as minute colour distinctions, or perceived feminine

adjectives such as “divine”; tag questions; uptalk (declarative sentences spoken with rising

intonation); powerless exclamations (“fudge” instead of “shit”); and intensifiers such as “so”

which bring little extra meaning to the utterance (1975: 53-56).

These claims were based on Lakoff’s impressions, but were investigated further by a

generation of researchers. Some found little support for Lakoff’s claims; for example Dubois

& Crouch (1975) found that in a meeting men used 33 tag questions to women’s 0 (they did

not however count the amount of talk by different genders). Siegler and Siegler found that

people thought that women used more tag questions, even when they didn’t (1973). Holmes

improved Lakoff’s hypothesis by dividing the functions of tag questions into modal and

affective. She found that women used more modal tags, and men used more affective ones

(Holmes 1984 cited in Cameron, McAlinden & O’Leary 1989: 82). Overall though, little

evidence was produced to validate or disprove Lakoff’s findings. However, the importance of

Lakoff’s observations may not be their empirical legitimacy, but that they all serve to

“weaken or mitigate the force of an utterance” (Cameron, McAlinden & O’Leary 1989:75).

Aside from Lakoff, other researchers have also made claims that women use more questions

than men (Fishman 1980), and that boys at play tend to give “aggravated directives” (such as

8



“Gimme some rubber bands”) while girls use more “mitigated directives” (“Let’s go around

Subs and Suds”) (Goodwin 1998). However, as theory moved on, researchers moved from

exploring individual features to examining the speech styles of men and women, which will

be covered in the following section.

2.2.2 Styles, topics and purposes

Lakoff claims that women seem more polite because they are socialized to be indirect,

deferential and unclear in order not to offend (1975: 73). These claims were developed by

Tannen (1990), who saw this politeness as an attempt to avoid conflict and strengthen bonds

between people. Men, on the other hand, see themselves in a hierarchy of power where

challenge and respect are much more important. Some effects of this are in the table below:

Men (Hierarchical) Women (Community-minded)

Independence: men will take decisions alone, and be less willing to show sympathy or concern for fear of seeming “one-up” or “one down”.

Connectedness: women take decisions in consultation, and are happier to show empathy.

Public speaking: men will speak more at public events in order to win respect.

Private speaking: women will speak more at home in order to build intimacy with their partners or friends.

Conflict: men seek conflict or challenge to demonstrate their hierarchical position.

Avoidance: women try to avoid conflict as it threatens intimacy.

Interrupting: Men interrupt to gain the floor (see also Zimmerman & West 1975:116)

Overlapping: women use overlapping speech to choose topics and build conversations collaboratively (see also Coates (1993: 138).

Tannen claims that these differences contribute to different “genderlects” spoken by men and

women (1990: 279).

9



While Tannen’s theories seem to relate to a universal concept of men and women, other

researchers investigated at a more local level. This came from notions of Speech

Communities (Milroy & Milroy 1978) and Communities of Practice (Eckert 1992). Coates

examines 2 studies (Milroy & Milroy 1978 and Cheshire 1982) that showed that where a

variable could be labelled prestige, it was generally used more by women (1993: 77). Eckert

and McConnell-Ginet found that in a high school community, “jock” girls used far less non-

standard forms, and “burned-out burnout” girls use far more. The boys use of non-standard

forms falls between the two (2003:295). Given that “jocks” tend to adopt middle class norms

(including standard language) while burnouts reject them, we can see this as these girls taking

the linguistic behaviour of their respective groups to the extreme. Cameron theorizes that this

was due to the fact that women are "judged more by style than achievement" (2007:148), and

therefore expend more energy in the area where they will be greater rewards. If we can draw

a parallel between prestige language in society, and language of identity in a group, which

has its own prestige, then we may be able to claim that this is one aspect of women’s speech

styles that is used across several Western contexts.

This section has examined several features and styles of men’s and women’s speech found in

studies by Deficit, Difference and Performative theorists.

2.3 Society, power & language

In this section, the relationship between society, power and language will be examined in

greater detail. The section begins by describing the reflexivity of language and society, before

discussing how children are socialized through language, and finally demonstrating how

power and inequality in society manifest themselves in language.

10



2.3.1 Reflexivity

Both Deficit and Difference theories see language as being firmly rooted in society (Tannen

1990:243, Lakoff 1975:3). For Lakoff, this concept is related to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis

(Hoijer 1954:93) which says that language constructs and limits our view of the world. Thus

the world that we experience will simultaneously be affected by language, while at the same

time being reflected in that language. This property is known as “reflexivity” (Gee

2010:101).

2.3.2 Socialization

The reflexivity of language means that we acquire and maintain concepts embedded in it,

such as the way men and women are supposed to speak (Goddard & Patterson 2000:86). This

is known as socialization:

This [socialization] is a two-way process: in becoming linguistically competent, the child learns to be a fully fledged male or female member of the community; conversely, when children adopt linguistic behaviour considered appropriate to their gender they perpetuate the social order which creates gender distinctions (Coates 1993:143).

Socialization is particularly important in Tannen’s work; throughout that she relates the

differences in genderlect to studies of children’s play, claiming that this is crucial to

developing the linguistic styles that we use in later life (1990). Her work leans heavily on an

article by Maltz and Borker (Malz & Borker 1982), which examines a range of studies of

childhood play (including the aforementioned Goodwin 1998). The study suggests that girls

play is by invitation, and requires closeness. If conflict occurs, the group breaks up, so girls

learn to engineer closeness and avoid conflict (Malz & Borker 1982:205) The boys play is

much more inclusive, but involves the use of speech to assert dominance and gain audiences

for stories (1982:209). These patterns mirror the linguistic behaviour of the adults in

Tannen’s book.

11



2.3.3 Power and asymmetry

One criticism of Tannen’s work is that it largely ignores the influence of power on language

and society (Cameron 2007:77–78). Tannen sees genderlects as springing innocently from

children’s play. For Lakoff, the differences are much more pernicious. Women are “taught”

(1975:4) language which is not so much ‘women’s language’ as powerless language: "These

words aren’t, basically, “feminine”; rather, they signal “uninvolved,” or “out of power.”

(1975:14). This idea is furthered by a study that examined the linguistic behaviour of

participants in trial, and found that many of Lakoff’s features of women’s language

corresponded not with gender, but perceived power in the courtroom. (O'Barr & Atkins 1998)

One manifestation of power, language and society all interacting is what Coates calls the

Androcentric Rule: "Men will be seen to behave linguistically in a way that fits the writer's

view of what is desirable or admirable; women on the other hand will be blamed for any

linguistic state which is regarded by the writer as negative or reprehensible" (Coates

1993:16). This explains the fact that men and women are judged differently even if they

speak the same way (Tannen 1990:228).

This final example is one of asymmetry – the tendency for male language to be considered

the norm. (Tannen 1990:244) gives an example that male language tends to feature in mixed

groups. In a study of British parliament, Sylvia Shaw (2006) found that powerful men had

access to powerful strategies such as transgressing the rules of debate, where women did not.

Linked to this asymmetry is Cameron’s view that while women have become a more

powerful group in modern society, they have achieved it through “masculinization” of

themselves to lessen this asymmetry, rather than a feminization of society (2007:175). Thus it

12



is perhaps power and the desire for it, rather than gender, that has a greater effect on the

language that we use.

This section has outlined some of the ways in which power, society, language and gender

interact.

2.4 Identity and gender

In recent years research has focused less on wider society, and more on gender as a part of

group or individual identity. This section will outline some of the key concepts in this area.

2.4.1 Constructing and performing

In 2.1.3 performativity was defined as a range of gendered practices, which can be adhered to

or subverted according to the desires of the individual. Cameron demonstrates this with an

example of Japanese schoolgirls adopting rebellious ways of speaking from comic books

(2007:143). The importance of this was that they did not originally pick the particles up from

play as infants, nor were they taught them by adults. They adopted them in order to signify

their independence. Further evidence of this concept comes from Bucholtz’s study of “nerd

girls” who use hyper-correct language both in order to distinguish themselves from the

“Jocks” and “Burnouts” and to construct a positive identity for themselves (1999:212). These

linguistic practices cannot be explained by theories of socialization (Cameron 2007:143).

2.4.2 Group identity

The two examples in the preceding section show individuals choosing identities so as to mark

themselves out as part of a group. This notion has been called a “community of practice” – a

group centred on a mutual endeavour (Eckert 1992:464) and relates closely to Gee’s notion of

language as “doing and being things” (2010: 2). Thus the language that people who are (or

13



wish to be) members of a particular group use, will serve to identify them as such.

Wardhaugh suspects that communities of practice may be a better indicator of speech style

than a single variable such as gender (2009:348). Cameron points out that "A further key

insight is that gender identities may be constituted less by the contrast with the other gender

and more by contrast with other versions of the same gender" (Cameron 2005:487–488) .

The research examined in this section suggests that looking for universal differences between

men and women is unlikely to succeed, but insights may still be gained in more local

contexts.

2.5 Narrative and gender

This section will explore the links between narrative and gender. The investigation of

narrative is a powerful sociolinguistic tool because “stories have a pervasive role in our daily

life” (Thornborrow 2005:1) and by telling stories we “actively create worlds” (Johnstone

1993:67). Being the teller4 of a story is a powerful position, from which choices can be made

to reflect both the subculture that the teller exists in, as well as the psychological, social and

cultural situation of the individual (Johnstone 1993:67–68). Threadgold takes a different

position that narratives “perform identities and rehearse, enact and change social realities and

norms” (2005:265). These differing viewpoints reflect Difference and Performative theories,

the first in which individuals reflect society, the other in which they are given more agency in

order to change it. Thornborrow also points out that by telling a story, one becomes part of a

community of practice (2005:15), and this may also have an impact on the telling.

4 The term “teller” for the performer of the story is borrowed from Blum-Kulka 2005:151, along with its sister

terms “tale” for the text of the story, and “telling” for the performance of the story.

14



Investigating the differences between men and women’s personal narratives, Johnstone

(1993) found important differences in the ways men and women told personal anecdotes. In

men’s stories, men were almost always the protagonist (supported by Cheshire (2000:253))

and often acted alone with successful results. In contrast, women generally tell stories with a

group of protagonists and violation of social norms. Again, Cheshire finds similar evidence

(2000:256) although the social norms violated by her subjects tend to be more frightening

than embarrassing. However, they are linked by the fact that women’s stories often seem to

involve things happening to women.

Johnstone (1993) also finds that women use reported speech (and even reports of unspoken

speech (1993:73)) more often in order to build rapport with the listener. They also include

names more often in their stories, whereas men focus more on time and place. Cheshire

reports an interesting finding in a similar vein, that in telling third person narratives, boys use

third party subjectivity (reporting the thoughts and feelings of the protagonist), while girls use

first person subjectivity (reporting their own reactions to events). Again it is suspected that

women do this in order to build rapport with an audience (Cheshire 2000:255).

This section examined theories of narrative related to gender, and found close links between

gender and narrative theories, along with important differences in the way men and women

tell stories.

15



3 Research background and method

3.1 Background

The idea for this study comes from Cameron’s claim that "if you study situations where men

and women are doing the same things and playing the same roles, you may find... that the

expected differences between men and women do not appear" (Cameron 2007:50) and sets

out to test this hypothesis. Her claim is based on performative theory (see 2.1.3), which

suggests that gender can be made more or less relevant according to the will of the performer

and the expectations on them. Performative theory superseded difference theory, which held

that men and women speak in inherently different ways due to socialization and that gender

was always an influence on speaking (see 2.1.2).

Johnstone’s (1993) study found major differences in the way men and women told personal

anecdotes, both in content and style (see 2.5). This would seem to suggest that difference

theory was more valid, especially as the content and style differences matched with the

aspects of “genderlect” claimed by Tannen (1990). However, telling personal narratives is

very general task, and if men and women are essentially different, Johnstone may actually

have been asking them to perform different tasks. By asking different genders to perform a

text already known to society, the task is the same for both, and variation may not be

expected. In addition, by telling the stories in isolation, some of the social aspect is removed,

especially the problem of the gender of the interviewer. This experiment was designed to give

as similar a task as possible to both genders in order to test Cameron’s hypothesis.

3.2 Research method

The study was carried out with ex-patriot English teachers living in South Korea, all of whom

spoke English as their L1. All were aged 22-32 and were living and working in South Korea

16



at the time. This group was selected for ease of access, and all subjects were previously

known to myself. Participants were asked to record themselves telling the story of Little Red

Riding Hood (with no researcher present) and submit it for analysis5. In total 6 men and 5

women submitted recordings.

The Red Riding Hood story was chosen to give participants the chance to create some

stereotypical gendered characters - the predatory wolf, the defenceless girl and grandmother,

the avenging woodsman - and also because it is a well-known folktale, but with opportunities

for content and style choices within a relatively fixed story. Participants were told that they

were telling the story to no particular audience, and that they could tell the story as they felt it

should be told. The only stipulation was that they could not read from a text, though they

could first research the story. These choices were designed to give participants maximum

creative control over their story worlds, and to remove them from any expectations.

The recordings were transcribed, with long and short pauses noted. They were then printed

and annotated by hand, particularly where intonation was examined6. The transcripts were

then analysed to produce the discussion that follows.

All participants agreed to participate in the experiment but were not told in advance the

nature of the project in order to not influence their recordings. However, once the recordings

were complete, the purpose of the study was revealed to them, and they signed release forms7

allowing use of their stories. All of them participated on the condition of anonymity, and

agreed that the data they supplied could be published or shared as long as their identity was

protected. 5 A copy of the request document can be seen in section 10.6 A marked up transcript can be seen in section 9.7 An example of the release letter can be seen in section 11.

17



18



4 Discussion of results8

This section will analyse the stories submitted, present significant findings and their relation

to language and gender9.

The 11 stories analysed showed a great deal of variation. Length ranged from around two

minutes to over 5 minutes for both men and women. In creating their tellings, all narrators

stuck closely to the original storyline, but there were elements that varied between stories

such as whether Red Riding Hood10 meets the wolf in the forest, and whether she is eaten by

the wolf. None of this variation appeared to be typical of male or female11 narrators.

4.1 Character voicing

4.1.1 Results

There were, however, elements of creating the story where men and women’s tellings varied

significantly. One of these was voicing the characters, especially feminine ones. Table 1

(below) shows a description of the voices used for each character, if they spoke. The voice

the teller used for narration was taken as a standard against which the voices used for the

characters could be compared. In the table, a black square indicates that the character did not

speak directly in the story; grey shading indicates that the character’s voice varied

8 The small scale nature of this experiment means that any quantitative data will be insignificant and not suitable

for presentation. This section will therefore move straight to a discussion of some of the issues arising from the

analysis of the recordings and transcripts.9 Full transcripts and links to audio recordings are in section 810 Hereafter RRH.11 This study agrees with Bucholz that “contemporary feminists view identities as fluid, not frozen; they note

that, although identities link individuals to particular social groups, such links are not predetermined” Bucholtz

1999:209. Therefore, terms such as “male”, “female”, “man”, “woman”, “masculine” and “feminine” are used

advisedly, and for the purposes of an easily understandable discussion, but not in order to establish a binary

opposite view of gender.

19



significantly from the narrator’s, and no shading indicates minor or zero variation from the

narrator’s voice.

There was little difference between men and women’s narratives in the amount of characters

who spoke directly – 18 characters in 5 women’s stories compared to 20 characters who

spoke in 6 men’s stories. As predicted by Cameron (2007: 133), there were significant

differences between individuals within each group, and the number of characters who spoke

seemed to vary, predictably, with the enthusiasm that the teller displayed for the task.

However, in giving the character a voice different to the narrator, women were much more

willing – 13 characters to men’s 6. Furthermore, of the 6 characters voiced by the men, 3

were the wolf and 2 were the wolf as the grandmother, with no attempt at sounding feminine.

This means that a single feminine12 voice was attempted by men. By contrast, all of the

women who gave the wolf a voice altered it significantly from the narration by lowering their

pitch and becoming gruffer or huskier. In addition, the one woman who voiced the huntsman

also gave him a voice with considerably lower pitch. While the number of male voices

created by women was only 4 in total, this was four times as many as the female voices

created by men, and may be lower due to the low number of male characters in the story. It is

suspected that the number of male voices performed would be higher were there more male

characters.

4.1.2 Discussion

These results seem to show that men are less willing to give female characters a female voice.

– but why is this so? An explanation may be found in the concept of power. While Lakoff

talked more about lexical items than voice quality; it is suspected that feminine voice

12 The story has both female characters, and male characters pretending to be female characters, hence the term

“feminine” is preferred here.

20



qualities also contribute to the powerless position in which Lakoff states that women are

placed (1975:7). There is some evidence for this in Lakoff’s mention of intonation patterns

(1975:56). In creating a story, the position of narrator is a powerful one involving choices

(Johnstone 1993:71–72), and thus adopting a powerless manner of speech is perhaps seen by

men as a threat to their role.

21



Table 1

Participant Narrator RRH Mother Wolf as Wolf Wolf as Granny Granny Huntsman/ Woodsman

Wolf as RRH

Woman 1 Even and slow, but with more intonation at key points.

Same pitch, but more intonation and emphatic stress.

No different from narrator.

Woman 2 Natural, quite conversational.

No different at first. Then a bit more sing song.Much greater emphatic stress.

Actually starts higher – unthreatening? Then pitch lowers but is still more sing-song than the narration.Drop in pitch below narration and huskier at “eat you”.

Higher, very similar to Granny. Drops in pitch later.

A little higher, but not as exaggerated as Wolf as RRH.

Very high pitched.

Woman 3 Normal pitch, but very precisely enunciated and lots of intonation and emphatic stress.

Very high pitched and sing-song.

Much lower pitch – almost booming. Gruff and fierce at “eat you”.

Frail but not much change in pitch. Exaggerated stress.

Very high pitched.

Lower pitch. Very high pitched. More so than RRH herself.

Woman 4 Normal pitch, carefully spoken. Exaggerated stresses.

No different to narrator at first, but slightly higher later.

Slightly more intonation than narrator. Lower and gruffer at “eat you”.

Noticeably higher pitch.

22



Participant Narrator RRH Mother Wolf as Wolf Wolf as Granny Granny Huntsman/ Woodsman

Wolf as RRH

Woman 5 Normal pitch. Weary sounding . Not much intonation.

No difference Barely noticeable increase in intonation.

Man 1 Slow, deliberate. Normal pitch.


A tiny bit more deliberate, but no change in pitch.

No different from narrator except some gruffness on “eat you”.

Very small increase in pitch and softness.

Man 2 Steady, normal pitch. Average intonation and some emphatic stress.

Marginally softer, higher and more intonation. More exaggerated at the climactic exchange.

No different to narrator.

Significantly lower pitch and gruffer.

Significantly lower pitch and gruffer.

Man 3 Slow, informal. No different from narrator.

Slower and more stressed. Same pitch.


Man 4 Slow, pronounced intonation.


Lower pitch. Huskier.

Same pitch. Huskier.

Man 5 Slow. Exaggerated emphatic stress.

Slightly higher. More intonation.


Man 6 Slow. Little intonation or stress.





23



Performative theory may provide another insight into the reasons for this difference. Asking

participants to create characters of the opposite gender is in fact a dual task. Firstly, the teller must

create the gender of the character in the story. While doing this however, they have to manage the

presentation of their own gender as narrator or teller. Clearly from these results, women are less

worried about using stereotypical aspects of a male voice (lower pitch, gruffness) than men are

about using equivalent aspects of a female voice (higher pitch, sing-song quality). Participants knew

that the recordings would be examined by myself (a male researcher known to them). It is theorized

that a desire not to be seen as either effeminate or powerless in my eyes may have contributed to

men’s reluctance to speak in female voices. This may also be explained by Terry Threadgold.

Invoking Butler’s claim that “gender is the repeated stylisation of the body” (Butler 1990:33) he

describes the difficulty that children had in performing a role of “pro-asylum roles” in a play, when

they had been “stylised” to “anti-asylum” roles by the press (Threadgold 2005:276). The male

participants difficulties in performing feminine features of voice may be because they never

perform them, as opposed to the women, who may be more comfortable, or used to performing as

men, in order to succeed in a society which still bears marks of androcentrism (Coates 1993:16).

This may contribute to the feminine being cast as “outside” (Butler 1993:42) and thus difficult or

distasteful for men to perform.

So far, reasons why men are unwilling or unable to use features of female voices have been

examined, but it is also important to investigate why women use features of men’s voices. If Tannen

(1990) is correct and we do really speak inherently different genderlects, but society has undergone

a process of masculinization (Cameron 2007:175), then perhaps women have arrived at a position

of greater flexibility in how they can perform gender. While the difficulty of a position in which

women must learn to speak like men was lamented as uncomfortable and energy-sapping by

(Lakoff 1975:7), it does give a lot more flexibility and could even be an advantage in tasks such as

this. A more positive idea is that recently the performance of gender has come to be seen as more 24



choice than socialization (Cameron 2005:490), and the evidence from the stories suggests that

women may have more choice in their self-presentation, and feel either more confident in

displaying features of male speech, or less bound by either their own or society’s notions of

femininity. In this experiment, there would seem to be an asymmetry in favour of women, in that

they can speak as either men or women, while men may only speak as men, though this may be a

reflection of a wider asymmetry to the reverse in society.

4.2 Comments on voicing

One further interesting feature of these tellings was the comments of the tellers on the voices used.

Women tended to comment on the femininity of their voices, even where it was the wolf, (“In his

sweetest girl voice he could come up with” – Woman 2), and men only commented on more

masculine features of voices (“a loud gruff voice” – Man 2). In both of these examples, the actual

voice used displayed these features, so there was no need to mention them. This phenomenon may

well be revealing about attitudes to stereotypes of gender, as the voices used were at the extremes of

what might be called stereotypical speech (high and shrill for feminine, deep and gruff for

masculine). The descriptions of the voices may be acting as a hedge against an extreme

performance of gender. However, this theory is based on very small amounts of data, and more

research is required in this area.

4.3 Narrative

4.3.1 Audience

Use of different voices may make women more effective tellers of stories like these. In this study,

women seemed, on average, the more enthusiastic tellers (although these are, of course, subjective

judgements). However, it is important to consider the conditions of the telling that may be

significant, and what we may be able to learn from the literature on this. In an informal

25



conversation after Man 1 had submitted his recording, he revealed that he found it difficult making

a recording without any audience. From the evidence of the recordings, it can be assumed that

women find this less difficult – but why is this? Tannen’s claim that men do “public speaking” in

order to curry status with observers, whereas women do “private speaking” in order to create

intimacy with friends (1990:76–77) may answer this question. By asking the tellers to speak

without an audience, the telling was perhaps seen as more private, and so perhaps disadvantageous

to men. A similar experiment conducted with a live audience would provide some evidence to prove

or disprove this theory.

4.3.2 Storytelling as a community of practice

In the previous section it was suggested that in this experiment women were the better storytellers.

One explanation for this may come from theories of communities of practice (Eckert 1992). In

telling a story, one is naturally orienting to a tradition of a storytelling that could be viewed as a

community of practice, as it is organized around a common goal (Thornborrow 2005:15). If women

tend to follow the linguistic norms of a group closer than men do (see 2.2.2), and we extrapolate

this theory to the practice of telling a story, we may expect women to follow more closely its norms.

In contrast, given the evidence in section 2.5, if men are more focused on the audience than the

practice, then it is expected that they will consider the audience more than the tale itself. Table 2

examines some ways in which we may be able to evaluate this.

Two common features of folktale tellings are the use of traditional openings and closings, and

having a strong moral to the tale. These are examined in the first two columns of the table.

Following this, instances where the telling diverts from the norm, or tradition. First, instances of the

story breaking down are examined, either where it loses logical cohesion, or where something is

forgotten or unknown by the narrator. After this, ways in which the tale is deliberately subverted

from the norms, either in terms of language or plot are listed. Finally the table looks at attempts to

26



involve an audience in the telling, either by first person subjectivity (Cheshire 2000:255) or by

addressing them directly using the pronouns “we” or “you”.

Table 2 (below) shows little variation in the usage of traditional openings and closings between

genders. However, there does seem to be a stronger moral to the women’s tales, with 3 out of 5

women mentioning the importance of not straying from the path, compared to 2 out of 6 men. This

could perhaps have been expected. Johnstone (1993) found that mid-western women tended to tell

stories with multiple protagonists which focused on building community bonds. If we see moral

tales as the passing on of advice between generations (in this tale the advice is from mother to

daughter in order to keep her safe) then it seems to bear out both Johnstone’s findings and the wider

views of Tannen (1990) that women are focused on interconnectedness whereas men are more

hierarchical.

If this is true of men, then we may expect them to focus more on their relationship with the

audience, which naturally involves relations of power (See 2.3.2). In the context of this study,

where there is no defined audience, it was theorized that men may still try to create an imagined

audience (something akin to Eco’s “model reader” (Eco 1994:9)), and a relationship with it to

legitimize themselves as narrators. This tendency was expected to be reflected in features such as

direct address to the audience and first person subjectivity. In fact, the only instance of direct

address was by a man, excepting a “you know” in Woman 5’s story, but this was insufficient

evidence from which to draw a conclusion. Cheshire suggested that in telling third person stories,

boys use third person subjectivity more, and girls use first person (2000: 255). Again, table 2 shows

that both men and women use first person subjectivity in their stories, both to comment on events in

the story (“luckily”, “strangely”) and to pass judgement on the characters actions (“naively”). In this

27



Table 2

Participant Beginning / Ending Moral? Breakdowns Subversions 1st Person Subjectivity

Direct Addresses

Woman 1 “Once upon a time”Story unfinished.

No “The wolf somehow got into her house”

None “Luckily” None

Woman 2 “Once upon a time”“Happily ever after”

Yes, but not strongly emphasized.

None None “Luckily”“Being the sweet girl that she was”

None

Woman 3 “Once upon a time”Moral ending

Yes, strongly emphasized.

None None None None

Woman 4 “Once upon a time”“The end”

No “Then it’s possible that red riding hood and the woodsman got married”

See breakdowns. This could be seen as subversion.

“Because it was very gory”

None

Woman 5 “A long time ago”Moral ending


“And whatnot”“And so on like this”“I guess he’s maybe the grandmother’s neighbour”“I believe the huntsman killed him. I’m not sure.”

None “Stupidly”“Or smarter than Red Riding Hood”“Miraculously”“Apparently”

“You know”

Man 1 “There once lived”“Happily ever after”

Strong moral, but only mentioned once.

“Simple enough”“Or I guess he opened the door – it was already open.”“Somehow she was still alive”

None “as girls are wont to”“being a little bit naïve”“Somehow”“Strangely”

None

Man 2 “Once upon a time”“Happily ever after”

No None None None None

28



Participant Beginning / Ending Moral? Breakdowns Subversions 1st Person Subjectivity

Direct Addresses

Man 3 “Once upon a time”“That’s the story of little red riding hood”


None Talks about Red riding hood being from the ‘hood.

“Little Red Riding Hood wasn’t the brightest of the bunch”“Very naively”“She’s not very smart”“It was a miracle”

“As you know”“As we said”“As we just explained”

Man 4 “Once upon a time”“Happily ever after”

No “She met…err…who was watching her”

None “Both miraculously unharmed”

None

Man 5 “Here is the story of Little Red Riding Hood”“That is the story of”

No Cuts short the climactic exchange between RRH and the wolf.

“Awesome goodies”

None None

Man 6 Story title“At which point they all celebrated”

No “Ah sorry and was seen by a wolf”“Or Little Red Riding Hood told the woodsman”“I’m not exactly sure how the woodsman was following…”“Window or door or whatever”“I’m not sure why the wolf didn’t attack her”

“Anyway” None None

29



second category, there may be a suggestion that men are more willing to comment on the

thoughtlessness of RRH’s actions, but the data is not significant enough to draw a firm conclusion.

This may however be an area for further research.

4.3.3 Traditional stories vs. individual stories

The narrators’ comments on the story highlight one further interesting power relation here, that of

the individual and the traditional telling. In creating their stories, the narrators are exercising

creative power over the story, but the traditions of the story simultaneously exercise power over

them. This can be best observed in areas where the story breaks down, diverges from tradition, or is

deliberately subverted. Again, given men’s desire to act independently (Tannen 1990:24–25), we

may expect to see evidence of both, as men’s desires conflict with the story’s traditions, whereas

women may be happier to follow those traditions. In fact, the data shows that men may be happier

to subvert both the story (RRH’s being from the ‘hood in Man 3’s story) and the language used to

tell it; “Awesome goodies” (Man 5) and “Anyway” are also examples of non-traditional language

for a fairy story.

This tendency may also be visible in the breakdowns observed (see table 2), with 6 in the women’s

stories compared to 10 in the men’s. The type of breakdown is also important, and in men’s stories

often come as an attempt to rephrase or explain something necessary for the cohesion of the story

(“I’m not exactly sure how the woodsman was following…” – Man 6) or to express some kind of

reaction, such as surprise, when the traditional story and the teller’s story appear to be in conflict

(“Grandma answered the door and the wolf gobbled her up. Simple enough” – Man 1). It is

suspected that the higher number of these kinds of breakdown in men’s stories may have been

caused by friction between their own narratives and those of the traditional story.

30



In this section the stories submitted were examined, and some significant differences were found

between men and women’s tellings. Male tellers did not use traditionally female features of voice

such as high pitch, but female tellers were able to use equivalent features of male speech. It was

theorized that this was principally because male tellers did not want to or could not present

themselves as more feminine, perhaps because of the male researcher. It also found that the

audience may be more of a concern to male speakers, and that men’s stories suffer breakdown more

often than women’s do. This may be because of friction between the individually created narrative

and the traditional one.

31



5 Conclusion

This study did not find that if men and women are given the same task, the expected differences did

not appear (Cameron 2007:50). In fact, the stories in this study showed significant differences

between men and women’s tellings in voicing of characters and in story breakdown. Time and

space restrictions on the study also prevented other suspected differences from being examined,

such as differing levels of politeness in the character of RRH, differences in detail levels when

describing clothes, and amount of speech acts. All of these examined and unexamined features may

be explicable in terms of Deficit and Difference theory, suggesting that they still carry some weight.

However, a valid criticism of the work of Tannen (1990) by Cameron (2007) is that we cannot

create a stereotype of all women or all men by examining a small group of them. Given this, and the

extremely small scale of the study, these results are not claimed to be significant of anything outside

of the context examined in this paper.

If this study has value, it is more likely in suggesting new directions and techniques for further

research. Little has been done in some of the areas that this paper has touched upon. For example,

while there is some research (for example Barrett 1998) into men presenting themselves as feminine

(or not!) there is little outside the context of queer studies. Asking men who would identify as

heterosexual to perform femininity may provide some useful insights into both their and society’s

attitudes. Similarly, while there is a raft of research on personal narratives, there is little on the

telling of traditional stories, at least within the area of language and gender. Finally, the comments

that narrators made on extremely feminine or masculine voices may also provide another of these

interesting avenues for research. Therefore, my aim in presenting this paper is, to borrow Lakoff’s

term, as a “goad” (1975: 5) to explore them.

Word count: 6,457 (not including cover, contents, section numbers and Tables 1 and 2)

32



6 References

Barrett, R. (1998) ‘Markedness and Styleswitching in Performances by African American Drag

Queens’ pp. 139-161, in Myers-Scotton, C. (ed.) (1998) Codes and Consequences: Choosing

Linguistic Varieties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Blum-Kulka, S. (2005) ‘Modes of meaning making in young children's conversational storytelling’

pp. 149-170, in Thornborrow, J. & Coates, J. (eds.) (2005) The Sociolinguistics of Narrative.

Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Bucholtz, M. (1999) ‘“Why be normal?”: Language and identity practices in a community of nerd

girls’. Language in society 28(2), 203‐223.

Butler, J. P. (1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York:

Routledge.

Butler, J. P. (1993) Bodies That Matter: On the discursive limits of "sex". New York: Routledge.

Cameron, D. (2005) ‘Language, gender, and sexuality: Current issues and new directions’. Applied

Linguistics 26(4), 482‐502.

Cameron, D. (2007) The Myth of Mars and Venus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cameron, D. (2010) ‘Sex/Gender, Language and the New Biologism’. Applied Linguistics 31(2),

173–192.

33



Cameron, D., McAlinden, F. & O’Leary, K. (1989) ‘Lakoff in context: the social and linguistic

functions of tag questions’ pp. 74-93, in Coates, J. & Cameron, D. (eds.) (1989) Women in their

speech communities. London: Longman.

Certeau, M. de (1988) The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Cheshire, J. (1982) ‘Linguistic variation and social function’ pp 153–166, in Romaine, S. (ed.)

(1982) Sociolinguistic Variation in Speech Communities. London: Edward Arnold.

Cheshire, J. (2000) ‘The telling or the tale? Narratives and gender in adolescent friendship

networks’. Journal of Sociolinguistics 4(2), 234‐262.

Coates, J. (1993) Women, Men and Language. London: Longman.

Dubois, B.L. & Crouch, I. (1975) ‘The question of tag questions in women’s speech: They don’t

really use more of them, do they?’. Language in society 4(3), 289‐294.

Eckert, P. & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992) ‘Think practically and look locally: Language and gender

as community-based practice’. Annual Review of Anthropology 21, 461–490.

Eckert, P. & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2003) Language and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Eco, U. (1994) Six Walks in the Fictional Woods. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Fishman, P. (1980) ‘Conversational insecurity’ pp. 127-132, in Giles, H., Robinson, P. and Smith,

P.M. (eds). (1980) Language: Social psychological perspectives. New York: Pergamon Press.

Gee, J.P (2010) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. London: Routledge.34



Goddard, A. & Patterson, L.M (2000) Language and Gender. London: Routledge.

Goodwin, M.H (1998) ‘Cooperation and Competition Across Girls' Play Activities’ pp. 121–146, in

Coates, J. (ed.) (1998) Language and Gender: A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell.

Hoijer, H. (1954) ‘The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis’ pp. 92-105, in Hoijer, H. (ed.) (1954) Language in

Culture: Conference on the Interrelations of Language and Other Aspects Of Culture. Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press.

Holmes, J. (1984) ‘Hedging your bets and sitting on the fence: Some evidence for hedges as support

structures’. Te Reo 27(1), 47‐62.

Johnstone, B. (1993) ‘Community and Contest: Midwestern Men and Women Creating Their

Worlds in Conversational Storytelling’ pp. 62–77, in Tannen, D. (ed.) (1993) Gender and

Conversational Interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lakoff, R. (1975) Language and Woman's Place. New York: Harper & Row.

Malz, D. N. & Borker, R. A. (1982) ‘A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication’ pp.

196-216, in Gumperz, J.J (ed.) (1982) Language and Social Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

McConnell-Ginet, S. (2004) ‘Positioning Ideas and Gendered Subjects: "Women's Language"

Revisited’ pp. 106-113, in Bucholtz, M. (ed.) (2004) Language and Woman's Place: Text and

Commentaries. New York: Oxford University Press.

35



Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1978). ‘Belfast: change and variation in an urban vernacular’ pp. 19-36, in

Trudgill, P. (ed.), Sociolinguistic patterns in British English. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

O'Barr, W. M. & Atkins, B. K. (1998) ‘"Women's Language" or "Powerless Language?"’ pp. 377-

387, in Coates, J. (ed.) (1998) Language and Gender: A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell.

Shaw, S. (2006) ‘Governed by the Rules? The Female Voice in Parliamentary Debates’ pp. 81–103,

in Baxter, J. (ed.) (2006) Speaking out: The female voice in public contexts. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Siegler, D.M. & Siegler, R.S. (1973) ‘Stereotypes of Male and Female Speech’. ERIC ED 120657,

1–10.

Tannen, D. (1990) You Just Don't Understand: Men and women in conversation. London: Virago.

Thornborrow, J. & Coates, J. (2005) ‘The sociolinguistics of narrative: Identity, performance,

culture’ pp. 1-16, in Thornborrow, J. & Coates, J. (eds.) (2005) The Sociolinguistics of Narrative.


Threadgold, T. (2005) ‘Performing Theories of Narrative: Theorising narrative performance’ pp.

261-278 in Thornborrow, J. & Coates, J. (eds.) (2005) The Sociolinguistics of Narrative.


Wardhaugh, R. (2009) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 6th ed., Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

36



Zimmerman, D. H. & West, C. (1975) Sex Roles, Interruptions and Silences in Conversation, in

Thorne, B. & Henley, N. (Hg.): Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance. Rowley, MA:

Newbury House, 105–129.

37



7 Acknowledgements

I would like to express my gratitude to the 11 friends and acquaintances who took the time and

effort to record and submit their stories to this project. This was not an easy task, so I am all the

more appreciative. I hope that having read this project, you feel that your efforts were worthwhile;

to me, they were invaluable. I would also like to pass on my thanks to my supervisor Dr. Fei-yu

Chuang for her help and support.

38



8 Appendix A: Transcripts and audio links

On the following pages transcripts of the 11 stories submitted can be found. There is a link to a

downloadable audio version below each story.

These electronic transcripts were the basic versions. They were then printed and marked up by hand

with notes and some intonation and stress markers. A marked up version can be seen in appendix B.

39



8.1 Woman 1

ok here’s the story of little red riding hood um once upon a time little red riding hood was

told by her mom to go visit her grandma to bring her a basket of fruit and cookies um little red

riding hood skipped through the forest and picked flowers and took her time then

meanwhile err her grandma was sick and err the big bad wolf somehow got into her grandma’s

house and was really really hungry so he ate the grandma and then he disguised her-himself as

little red riding hood’s grandma so err little red riding hood gets to her grandma’s house and um

when she knocks on the door [cough] and [cough]

?

she says “whoa what big- what a big nose you have” and grandma says “all the better to smell

you with” and then finally little red riding hood says “Whoa what big- [cough] My what big

teeth you have” and grandma goes “all the better to eat you with” [cough cough] and goes to

eat little red riding hood and chases her around the house but luckily there’s a woodcutter in

the forest and hears little red riding hood’s screams and bursts through the door and then he

punched the wolf in the stomach and the wolf spit out the grandma and grandma and little red

riding hood are safe and the wolf…

Total words: 229Length: 1:56Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/f6ab4e59e09e3f5ff153

40

https://www.box.com/s/f6ab4e59e09e3f5ff153



8.2 Woman 2

This is the story of little red riding hood once upon a time there lived a young girl and her family

in the woods and they were quite happy her name was little red riding hood nearby lived her

grandmother once little red riding hood’s grandmother became ill so being the sweet girl that

she was she decided to bring her grandmother a basket full of treats to make her feel better on

her way through the woods to get to grandmother’s house little red riding hood encountered a

wolf and she had been warned many times by her parents to be careful of wolves but this wolf

seemed friendly “where are you going little red riding hood” oh I’m going to grandmother’s

house to bring her these treats she’s very ill” “oh what a sweet girl you are” answered the wolf

“be on your way then get off to grandmother’s house” however the little red riding hood had no

idea that the wolf was actually being malicious and cunning in his questions he was off to

grandmother’s house himself as soon as he heard this and at breakneck speed he ran through the

woods and got to grandmother’s house before little red riding hood had a chance he knocked on

the door and said “hello granny it’s me little red riding hood” in his sweetest girl voice he could

come up with “come in dear” answered grandma once inside the wolf gobbled her up “tralalala”

along came little red riding hood not knowing the danger that was awaiting her inside the granny’s

home knock knockknock “grandma it’s me” “come in dear” answered the wolf there he laid

in bed disguised as grandmother with a bonnet and the blankets pulled up close to his face “oh

granny you must be very ill” “oh dear I’m fine don’t worry come closer” “oh my grandmother

what big eyes you have” “oh the better to see you with my dear” “oh dear granny what a long

nose you have” “oh the better to smell those lovely treats” “and granny what big teeth you have”

“the better to eat you” growled the wolf and he was off after little red riding hood she was

running through the woods screaming “oh my dear” and the wolf was fast on her tail luckily

there was a nearby woodsman who had been working chopping away at some trees and he heard

the ruckus he stopped what he was doing and ran right into the direction of the wolf and saw

41



that he was hot after little red riding hood using his axe he cut down the wolf and in doing so the

wolf opened up and they found granny luckily still alive inside the wolf’s gut they were able to

save granny and they lived happily ever after

Total words: 471Length: 3:32Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/9fe33974a716f6a0235e

42

https://www.box.com/s/9fe33974a716f6a0235e



8.3 Woman 3

Once upon a time in a village far away there lived a little girl the girl was loved by everyone

but most so by her grandma when she was young her grandma gave her a red cloak she loved

it so much that she wouldn’t take it off so people started calling her little red riding hood and the

name stuck one day little red riding hood’s mother asked her to take some things to her grandma

who was sick and unable to get out of bed as this was the first time little red riding hood had

gone to her grandma’s house alone her mother cautioned her to be careful and not to dawdle on

the way Soon after entering the woods that her grandmother lived in little red riding hood

became distracted by the BEAUTY of the forest suddenly a wolf appeared to her but not

knowing what a wicked creature he was little red riding hood was not afraid “good afternoon

young lady” said he “good afternoon mr wolf” she replied “where are you off to?” he asked

“to my grandmother’s she’s sick and I’m bringing her food to make her strong again” “This is

a dangerous forest for a young girl to be walking in alone and you are alone right?” he asked in

the sweetest voice he could muster “yes my mother said I could come all by myself because

I’m a big girl” “maybe I should accompany you” “That won’t be necessary mr wolf her

house isn’t that much further down the road it’s in the clearing past the three large oak trees”

“oh yes I know that house that old woman looks quite delightful” he replied “and delectable”

he added to himself “I should hurry mr wolf my grandmother is expecting me soon bye bye”

as the girl skipped down the path towards her grandmother’s house the wolf took a shortcut

through the woods to the house and knocked on the door “who’s there” “little red riding

hood” relied the wolf “I have food to make you stronger” “come in my dear” called out the

grandmother “I am too weak and cannot get up” the wolf threw open the door and without

saying word he went straight to the grandmother’s bed and gobbled her up then he put on her

clothes dressed himself in her cap and laid himself on the bed a little while later little red

riding hood appeared she was surprised to find the cottage door partially ajar she felt uneasy

43



but went on in she called out “good morning grandma” but received no answer so she went to

the bed and opened the curtains there laid her grandmother with her nightcap pulled over her face

and looking very strange “oh grandmother” she said “what big ears you have” “all the

better to hear you with my child” was the reply “but grandmother what big eyes you have” she

said “all the better to see you with my dear” “but grandmother what large hands you have” “all

the better to hold you and hug you with” “oh but grandmother what a big mouth you have” “all

the better to eat you with” and scarcely had the wolf said this that one within one bound he was

out of bed and swallowed up red riding hood when the wolf had finished his meal he laid back

down on the bed and fell asleep and began to snore VERY loudly a little while later a kind

huntsman who was passing the old woman’s house decided to stop and see if the old woman was

feeling better being accustomed to letting himself into the house he didn’t bother to knock

going right on in he saw the wolf laying down right on top of the bed the old woman’s clothing

being shed from him when he devoured little red riding hood now the huntsman and the wolf

had a longstanding nasty feud seeing him there the huntsman immediately drew the rifle he always

carried but just as he was about to blow the wolf to smithereens a thought occurred to him

“this wicked beast might have swallowed the old woman maybe she’s STILL ALIVE!” and

with that he grabbed the carving knife that was laying on the kitchen table and began to slowly

cut open the sleeping wolf’s stomach when he made a long enough cut he saw the little girl’s

red hood having seen that the huntsman dug his fingernails into the slice he’d made and began

to RIP the huge wolf in half with his hands soon the hole was big enough for him to pull the

little girl out as she sprang out she cried “thank you huntsman I’ve been so in frightened inside

that dark wolf” after that the old woman came barrelling out with the fiery vengeance that one

can only get after being swallowed by a wicked animal the grandmother although still sick and

a little weak from her ordeal grabbed the carving knife that the huntsman had dropped and cut

straight through the wolf’s neck then all three were delighted because the wicked beast was no

44



more after the huntsman drew off the wolf’s skin and proudly went home with it the

grandmother butchered and baked the wolf’s kidney and liver into a delicious pie that helped

revive her ailing health and red riding hood she thought to herself “as long as I live I will never

talk to strangers or spend time alone in the woods”

Total words: 921Length: 4:55Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/8ba9b673f2d694904ec7

45

https://www.box.com/s/8ba9b673f2d694904ec7



8.4 Woman 4

Once upon a time there was a little girl who lived near a forest one day her grandmother was

sick so her mother made her a basket of picnic goods and told her to take it up the mountain to her

grandmother so she was walking through the woods and she ran into a wolf and the wolf

said “where are you going little girl” and she looked at him and said “my grandmother is sick

and so I’m taking her this food and the wolf said “aha! good luck” and off she went and the

wolf decided to take a shortcut up to her grandmother’s house so he ran up the mountain and he

got there well before little red riding hood and he went inside and he gobbled her grandmother up

and then he put on her clothes and lay in her bed and he waited a little while after that little

red riding hood arrived and knocked on the door and the wolf said “come in” doing his best little

old lady voice and so she came in and she saw him lying in the bed with her grandmother’s

bonnet and dress and she said “is something wrong with your voice grandmother you sound

funny” and the wolf said “oh [short cough] it’s just this cold I have” and she said “my!

grandmother what big eyes you have” and the wolf said “all the better to see you with my dear”

and she said “my! grandmother what big EARS you have” and the wolf said “all the better to hear

you with my dear” and she said “my! grandmother what big TEETH you have” and the wolf said

“all the better to EAT you with” and he sprang out of bed and he was just about to eat her up

when a woodsman who had been passing by heard her screaming for help and he ran inside and

he chopped the wolf’s head off with his axe and then because it was very gory they cut the wolf

open and stacked him full of rocks and sewed him up again and threw him into the river so that

he would never bother anyone again and then it’s possible that red riding hood and the woodsman

got married the end

Total words: 382Length: 2:09Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/a1b5435b4cff9c7ce3e8

46

https://www.box.com/s/a1b5435b4cff9c7ce3e8



8.5 Woman 5

This is the story of little red riding hood a long time ago in a village there was a little girl who

was loved by her mother and her grandmother and the grandmother loved her so much that she

had a red riding hood made for the little girl and it looked so good on her that she became known

as little red riding hood one day the mother made some cake and packaged it up with some

wine and asked little red riding hood to [pause] to take it to her grandmother’s house her

grandmother lived in in the woods quite far from the village and the mother taught little red riding

hood to go straight there and not to diverge little red riding hood agreed and so she set out with

the cake and wine to her grandmother’s house on the way err a wolf saw little red riding hood

and thought she looked delicious and that he wanted to eat her so he asked her where she was

going and little red riding hood said you know she was going to her grandmother’s and he asked

where that was and she explained you know it’s under some trees and whatnot and so the wolf was

a little bit smart or smarter than red riding hood and he said to her why don’t you enjoy the

scenery why don’t you pick some flowers and enjoy the sunlight and so little red riding hood

stupidly did so and the wolf took off towards the grandmother’s house when he reached the

grandmother’s house he had seen that the grandmother was very sick and quite old and helpless

he ate her up and then little red riding hood went to the grandmother’s house and had seen that

the door was open and she thought that it was a bit strange she went in anyways and she called out

to her grandmother but her grandmother didn’t reply so she went to her grandmother’s room to

bring her the cake and wine and the flowers that she had picked while she was traipsing around in

the woods [cough] she said she knows that her grandmother looked a bit strange so she said to her

grandmother “Oh my what big ears you have” and the wolf replied “well better to hear you with”

and so on like this until little red riding hood said “my what a terrible mouth you have- terribly big

mouth you have” and the wolf said “well you know what better to eat you with” and then he

gobbled her up so the huntsman had realized that I guess he’s maybe the grandmother’s

47



neighbour um he realized that there was something- something amiss amiss at the grandmother’s

house so he went over to investigate and he had seen that the wolf was sleeping in the

grandmothers bed and at first he was going to shoot the wolf but then he realized that maybe the

wolf had eaten the grandmother so instead he began to cut open the wolf ??? the wolf’s stomach

while the wolf was sleeping and the huntsman saw the red riding hood so he pulled out little red

riding hood as well as the grandmother who were both miraculously alive and then little red riding

hood stuffed the wolf with some stones and they stitched him up and the stones were so heavy

that the wolf couldn’t escape and he fell over and died and they were all happy and they celebrated

with their cake and wine then there was another wolf who was trying to do almost the same thing

and he wanted to eat little red riding hood because she apparently looked so delicious and the wolf

was trying to trick her and the grandmother realized this so the grandmother had made some

sausages and then she asked little red riding hood to go fill the trough with the water that she had

used to boil sausages so she did this and then the wolf smelled it went to go investigate and then I

believe the huntsman killed him I’m not sure anyway after then little red riding hood was free

and she went back to her grand- her mother and never diverged from her mother’s direction again.

Total words: 713Length: 4:36Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/dc1324f5934acef67fa4

48

https://www.box.com/s/dc1324f5934acef67fa4



8.6 Man 1

There once lived a young girl named little red riding hood she got this name because she

always used to wear a red cloak wherever she went she lived in a small village with her mother

her mother used to always warn her “never go into the forest never go into the forest alone it’s a

very dangerous place for young girls like you” so one day the mother sent her off into the forest

to deliver some wine and some cookies to her grandmother her had been sick recently and it

was believed at that time that wine would cure her her illness so off she went into the forest but

her mother said “don’t stray away from the path stay on the path in the forest” along the way

she was walking in the forest and through the pa- through the path in the forest and she saw some

flowers at the side of the path a little bit into the forest so as girls are wont to do she went over

over and started looking at the flowers and smelling the flowers and watching the bees buzzing

around when suddenly a big wolf appeared “Oh what are you doing here” said the wolf “oh

I’m just on my way to see my grandmother she’s very sick these days” said little red riding hood

“Is your- Does your grandmother live in the forest” the wolf said “oh well kind of she lives in a-

in a hut that’s in the forest so I’m just on my way there” said riding hood “oh well how exactly

do you get to this hut” asked the wolf little red riding hood being a little bit naïve and not knowing

much about wolves and how dangerous they are just easily answered by saying “oh straight down

this path over the bridge and to the left” the wolf said “I see well I’ll be seeing you later” “ok”

said little red riding hood and the wolf took off unbeknownst to little red riding hood the wolf

actually knew a shortcut to the grandmother’s house little red riding hood then continued on her

way down the path the wolf thought to himself “hmm this’ll be perfect away from the road

where people can’t see me I can go into the grandmother’s house eat her and then wait for the

girl and eat her too this’ll be perfect I’ll be able to eat both of them at the same time so the

wolf arrived at the home at the grandmothers home and knocked on the door and when the

grandmother answered the door the wolf ate her simple enough ah after the wolf ate her he

49



decided the best way to trick red riding hood err would be to wear the grandmother’s clothes so

the wolf went through the grandmother’s wardrobe and chose some clothing to cover his face as

much as possible or his head as much as possible his body as much as possible his face would

have still been revealed slightly he then got under the covers of the grandmother’s bed

meanwhile red riding hood was crossing over the bridge turning and going towards her

grandmother’s home she arrived at the home and she knocked on the door she noticed it was a

little bit open so she just pushed the door open called out to her grandmother “grandmother are

you there” said riding hood and she could hear a faint call from the bedroom “I’m in here I’m in

here sweetie” and so red riding hood walked towards the bedroom red riding hood entered the

bedroom and could see a figure in the bed looked a little bit strange though didn’t look exactly

like her grandmother and she said “grandmother is that you” and grandma said “yes dear come

closer” so red riding came a little closer and then stopped and said “oh but grandmother what big

eyes you have” “oh yes the better to see you with my dear” the wolf said and red riding hood

came a little closer and riding hood said “oh but grandmother what big ears you have” “yes yes

the better to hear you with my dear” so riding hood came a little closer and stopped and said “oh

grandmother what big teeth you have” and immediately the wolf jumped up and said “the better to

eat you with“ and immediately jumped on red riding hood and ate her up while she was being

eaten she started screaming and screaming and a local woodsman heard the screaming the wolf

swallowed her completely as the woodsman came by he broke down the door or I guess he

opened the door it was already open and came in and saw the wolf and realized this wolf must

have eaten the grandmother because the grandmother lives here the woodsman then grabbed the

wolf pinned him down took his axe and slit open the wolf’s stomach pulled out the grandmother

somehow the grandmother was still alive and came right out and then cut a little bit more of the

wolf open and also somehow the little red riding hood was also alright the wolf was unconscious

at this point and the three of them decided on what should be the fate of the wolf and strangely

50



they decided to put rocks in his stomach and sew him back up this resulted in the wolf waking up

and then trying to run away but being in terrible pain and then the wolf died and they all lived

happily ever after

Total words: 930Length: 6:37Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/60676076565febd0c746

51

https://www.box.com/s/60676076565febd0c746



8.7 Man 2

the little red riding hood once upon a time there was a little girl named little red riding hood

she lived in a small forest with her mother one day she asked her mother if it would be ok to go

visit grandma “of course” her mother said “but let me bake you some cookies so you can take

them to her” once the cookies were finished she put on her little red bonnet took the cookies

and hopped along down the path towards grandma’s house when she stopped to pick some

flowers by the side of the path she did not notice a large black wolf watching her from just inside

the forest when the wolf found out where little red riding hood was going he ran along ahead of

her to grandma’s house when little red riding hood got to her grandmother’s house she felt a

little nervous so she called out first “grandmother are you there?” a loud gruff voice answered

her “of course I am come on in darling” when little red riding hood opened the door she saw

her grandmother in the bed covered with blankets “oh my are you sick grandmother?” “[cough]

just a little but it’s ok come on in” little red riding hood approached the bed cautiously

“what big eyes you have grandma” “all the better to see you with my dear” “and what big

ears you have” “all the better to hear you with” “and what big teeth you have” “all the

better to eat you with” the wolf jumped out of the bed and lunged toward little red riding hood

but just before little red riding hood was about to get eaten by the wolf a lumberjack swung open

the door wielding his axe and grabbed the wolf by the tail he took the wolf outside and took care

of him once he was finished he went back inside and him and little red riding hood

discovered grandma hiding in the closet she told them the whole story that she saw the wolf

coming and ran to hide in the closet because she was afraid after that little red riding hood

her grandmother and the lumberjack all sat down and ate cookies with some fresh lemonade and

they lived happily ever after

Total words: 382Length: 2:37Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/a93d1ca21696aca51aa5

52

https://www.box.com/s/a93d1ca21696aca51aa5



8.8 Man 3

Once upon a time there lived a young girl named little red riding hood now they called her this

because she wore a red cloak and she was from the hood so she was from you know the bad

part of town some would call it the ghetto well one day little red riding hood’s mother told her

that she needed to go visit her grandmother so she was going to send little red riding hood to see

her grandmother and give her some medicine because she had been sick well little red riding

hood agreed and she looked forward to visiting her grandmother she hadn’t seen her in a long time

now little red riding hood and her mother lived in the city but her grandmother lived out in the

woods out in the forest far away so her mother told little red riding hood that she needed to be

safe stay on the path and don’t wander off into the forest where there are dangerous creatures

and criminals so little red riding hood agreed and she said that she would do exactly as her

mother said so she set off with the medicine the food to see her grandmother but as she was

going she noticed but as she was going she noticed a lot of interesting flowers and animals that

she wanted to chase after and play with so she spent about a good hour wandering around in the

forest off of the path before she decided to go on to her grandmother’s house but during this time

little did she know that she was being watched by a big hungry wolf as she decided to make

her way to her grandmother’s home the wolf approached her and asked her where she was going

little red riding hood wasn’t the brightest girl of the bunch so she told the wolf exactly where she

was going very naively then she went on her way but the wolf was really hungry and he

thought little red riding hood looked delicious but he didn’t wanna kill her on the path on the

public path where he could easily be seen so he decided to go to little red riding hood’s

grandmother’s house and be waiting for her there so that he could eat her at the opportune time

so he went along on to the grandmother’s house in a hurry as you know he’s a wolf so he’s very

fast quick footed little red riding hood trotted along at normal pace to her grandmother’s house

as she arrived at her grandmother’s house she knocked on the door and said “hello grandmother

53



I’m here” but she didn’t receive any answer so she just opened the door and walked in there

she saw her sick grandmother who was tucked away in her bed very comfortably up to her

mouth err the covers were up to her mouth so her face couldn’t really be seen and little red

riding hood approached a little bit and noticed that her grandmother looked very strange so she

said “oh grandmother what’s the matter with your eyes? they’re so big” and her grandmother

said “well I can see you better now my dear” and little red riding hood also noticed her ears

were extra large so she asked her grandmother “grandmother why are your ears so large?” and

grandmother said “oh the better to hear you with my dear” and little red riding hood was becoming

a little suspicious at this time so she approached a little closer err grandmother pulled down the

covers from her mouth and little red riding hood saw how big her mouth was so she asked

“grandmother why is your mouth so big?” and grandmother answered “the better to eat you with

my dear” now this was a very strange answer for little red riding hood and as we said she’s not

very smart so she approached a little closer but at that time her grandmother jumped out of bed and

revealed her true form which was actually a wolf so the wolf had beaten little red riding hood to

her grandmother’s house and had eaten her grandmother before she had got there and the wolf

started to chase little red riding hood around the house now little red riding hood was faster

because the wolf had eaten her grandmother he was a bit slow at this time she was able to make it

outside of the door outside of the house and begin running the wolf close behind her but he

couldn’t quite catch her because of the extra weight of the grandmother now at that time a

lumberjack in the area he saw what was going on and he decided to intervene he grabbed his axe

and started to run after the wolf who wasn’t quite as fast as we just explained he grabbed the wolf

by the tail and cut off his head and at that time the grandmother was able to slide out the neck of

the wolf and she was saved luckily ah she was still able to breathe after being in the wolf’s

stomach it was a miracle now anyway at that time she and little red riding hood thanked the

lumberjack greatly for his service to them for saving their lives and they decided to have him

54



over for dinner where they had a generous feast of wolf meat and also gave the wolf’s fur err his

pelt over to the lumberjack so that the lumberjack could make some new clothes so he

received a reward and a nice meal for his heroic act later on it was time for little red riding

hood to go back home and her grandmother urged her to follow the instructions and stay on the

path and not wander off into the woods again so this time little red riding hood promised and

she stayed on the path and she made it home safely err without any trouble from any more wild

animals and that’s the story of little red riding hood

Total words: 1013Length: 6:45Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/6e674e7d008edc69c589

55

https://www.box.com/s/6e674e7d008edc69c589



8.9 Man 4

once upon a time there was a little girl who was called red riding hood she was called that

because she always wore a red riding cloak whenever she went outside one day she decided to

travel through the forest to deliver food to her sick grandmother so she packed up a picnic basket

and headed off into the woods Whilst she was there she met err she didn’t know it but who

was watching her was a big bad wolf and he was very hungry and he put together a plan he

decided he ran ahead of her he found the grandmother’s house and he knocked on the door

the grandmother who was expecting little red riding hood opened up and he gobbled her up

right away when little red riding hood finally got there she um she knocked on the door and

she heard a distant voice saying “come in dearie come in” so she opened up the door and she

walked in it was very dark inside it was hard to see but she heard the voice coming from the

bedroom “this way dearie, over here” so she walks in to see her grandmother and the room is so

dark she can only see the shadow in the bed so she walks a little closer “grandma, are you ok”

she asks and the wolf who’d put on the grandmother’s clothes says to her “I’m fine dearie just

come a little closer I want to see you” so little red riding hood takes another step forward and

she can start to see a little more of the shadow and she says “grandmother are you ok w-w-what

big ears you have” and the wolf says “aah the better to hear you with my dearie” come closer

so little red riding hood takes another step and she says “huh grandmother what big eyes you

have” “the better to see you with my dear” come closer little red riding hood takes another

step she’s right by the bed and says “oh grandmother what big teeth you have” and the wolf

says “the better to eat you with my dear” and gobbles up little red riding hood so the wolf sits

back in contentment having devoured two delicious people but what he doesn’t know is that a

woodsman nearby heard the scream when he ate little red riding hood he walks to the window

and he sees the wolf lying in the bed so he busts in the door with his axe chops off the wolf’s

56



head cuts open the wolf’s stomach and out pop little red riding hood and the grandmother both

miraculously unharmed and they all lived happily ever after

Total words: 450Length: 2:56Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/8858535cebf6304fc1be

57

https://www.box.com/s/8858535cebf6304fc1be



8.10 Man 5

OK so here is the story of the little red riding hood you see little red riding hood was going

to see her grandmother who was very sick and ill so she was bringing some awesome goodies

with her and while she was traipsing through the forest she sees a big bad wolf and the wolf

talks to little red riding hood and finds out where she’s going then sprints ahead and goes to

the grandmother’s house at the grandmother’s house the wolf pretends to be the little girl and

gets inside the house then the big bad wolf decides to eat the grandmother whole and pretends

to be the grandmother so when little red riding hood gets there she looks at the grandma and

says “my you look different” your voice is very deep and the wolf replies “all the better to greet

you with” and then little red riding hood realizes that the hands are too big and big nose and

gets very very scared and then the big bad wolf eats her whole too and then the wolf is very full

and takes a nap this is where the hunter comes in and saves both little red riding hood and the

grandma by cutting open the wolf’s belly and putting stones in instead that is the story of the

little red riding hood

Total words: 226Length: 1:33Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/67b9a504b1387ca5fd86

58

https://www.box.com/s/67b9a504b1387ca5fd86



8.11 Man 6

little red riding hood little red riding hood lived in the woods or along the edge of the woods

she was sent by her mother to deliver some fruit vegetables or biscuits to her grandmother her

grandmother lived in the woods so she had a basket filled with the food and left the house she

was wearing her red riding hood she walked through the woods and saw ah sorry and was seen by

a wolf and I’m not sure why the wolf didn’t attack her but anyway she was seen by a wolf

she also met a woodsman and the woodsman was concerned why is there a child walking in the

woods she told her or little red riding hood told the woodsman “I’m walking in the woods to

deliver something to my grandmother” the woodsman said “oh my god go home it’s dangerous”

she said “no no I must deliver” anyway the wof went to the grandmother’s house ate the

grandmother whole and dressed up in the clothes of the grandmother little red riding hood

arrived walked in started to lay out the food and said “grandmother why are you in bed” and

grandmother said “I’m a little bit sick” so little red riding hood asked her “oh grandmother

what big eyes you have” the response “all the better to see you with” “what big ears” “all the

better to hear you” “what big nose” “all the better to smell you” etcetera and eventually little red

riding hood said “oh grandmother what big teeth you have” at which point the wolf jumped up and

said “ll the better to eat you with” um I’m not exactly sure how the woodsman was following or

if he was actually with red riding hood or so on anyway he jumped in the window or came in the

door or whatever killed the wolf and then when he chopped open the wolf there was the

grandmother inside alive at which point they all celebrated

Total words: 332Length: 2:09Audio File: https://www.box.com/s/33a4d7e09d4ac3224f62

59

https://www.box.com/s/33a4d7e09d4ac3224f62



9 Appendix B: Marked up transcript

60



10 Appendix C: Submission Guidelines

On the following page is the instruction letter sent to potential participants.

61



Hi,

Thanks for agreeing to participate in my project. This document will explain exactly what you need to do.

This is a project I am doing for my MA TESOL & Applied Linguistics at University of Leicester, UK. I am collecting recordings of people telling the story of Little Red Riding Hood. I can’t tell you much more about the project until you have completed the recording for fear of prejudicing the experiment, but please rest assured that its nothing sinister! Once you have submitted the recording I will be happy to tell you more about the project.

Some instructions:

Please make a recording of yourself telling the story of Little Red Riding Hood. As a guideline, the story should be 2-5 minutes long, but more or less is OK too.

Please record it using a computer, table or phone (Windows sound recorder will work nicely) in any common format (.wav, .mp3, .caf, .3ga). However, please avoid using Kakao Talk as the voice recorder has a limited time, low quality and it’s a pain to convert the files to anything usable.

When you have finished your recording, please email it to [email protected].

Please tell the story as you want to and as you remember it. If you don’t remember it well, feel free to look at one or preferably more than one story online or in a book, so that you have an idea of the different tellings. However, when you do the recording, please tell the story from your memory or imagination, please don’t read it from the source.

You do not need to assume any particular audience.

If you have any procedural or technical questions, please get in touch by email or Kakao Talk (my ID is AlexGrev).

Your privacy will be respected at all times during this experiment. You will be anonymous to everyone but me. The audio files and transcripts will be available to staff at the University of Leicester, and to anyone else who views the final paper.

As a participant, you have the right to refuse to do the recording, or to withdraw from the experiment at any time up until the project is submitted on 17th August. If you wish to read the final results, they will be available from 17th of August and I will be happy to send you a copy.

Again, please contact me if you have any questions or concerns, and thanks once again for taking part. Sociolinguistics salutes you.

Alex

62

mailto:[email protected]



11 Appendix D: Release form

63

Documents

Introduction - breathyvowel.files.wordpress.com · Web viewTwo common features of folktale tellings are the use of traditional openings and closings, and having a strong moral to