CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presents Lakoffs theory of womens speech features, ten

types of womens speech features and previous studies.

2.1 Men and Women in Language

Men and women are so different in the means of communication that it is

almost as if they speak separate languages. Communication is one of the most
important skills a human being can possess. In order to have fulfilling careers,
relationships and even marriages people need to learn how to communicate with
each other. For some people, this comes easy; however for most of us,
communication is difficult especially when dealing with a member of the opposite
sex. This is because men and women do not speak the same language.
When communicating, women are active participants in a conversation.
While women ask questions to facilitate the flow of conversation, men compete to
express their views and are eager to dominate the conversation. When it comes to
linguistics, women speak softer, are more polite and more feminine women also
seem more thoughtful in conversation and put more effort into the conversation
than men do. Mens speeches however, are more forceful and convincing.
Apparently these factors are evident because women are emotional while men are
more rational in characteristics. Because socially, men are dominant and women
are subordinate these differences often reflect in communication.
It is quite easy to make the claim that man and women differ in their
linguistic behavior. Assumed gender roles are contrastive, with men often thought
as dominant speakers, while women are placed in a subordinate role during the
conversation process. Important to realize in this issue, however, is the different

13

14

perspectives the two sexes have in casual speech. If women speak and hear a
language of connection and intimacy, a clash of conversation styles can occur,
when confronted with a mens language concerned with status and independence.
(Tannen 1990). Misinterpretation of the use of linguistic functions, thus, often
arises.
For Lakoff, there is a great concordance between femininity and
unassertive speech she defines as womens speech. According to her, in a maledominated society women are pressured to show the feminine qualities of
weakness and subordinance toward men. Thus, it is entirely predictable, and
given the pressure towards social conformity, rational, that women should
demonstrate these qualities in their speech as well as in other aspects of their
behavior. (Cameron, McAlinden and OLeary 1989:76).
Maccoby (1990:1998) has written about the way girls and boys, playing in
same-sex group, develop habits of interaction that can be characterized,
respectively, as enabling and constructing. Girls, she says, develop
communication styles that involve a lot of turn-taking, listening, and supportive
reactions to other speakers. Boys develop styles that involve power assertion,
competition for the floor, interruptions, and open disagreement with other
speakers. The same type of distinction has been elaborated upon by sociolinguist
Deborah Tannen in her popular book You Just Dont Understand (1990).
In the article Why are Women so Strange and Men so Weird? Bruce
Christopher insists that great communicators know how to speak the language of
the opposite sex. Christopher explains that men and women have different rules of
etiquette which can unintentionally create frustration and misunderstandings in
our relationships. For instance when a woman at a restaurant turns to one of her
female companions and asks for her friend to accompany her to the restroom; this
is socially acceptable whereas a man would not ask this of another male
companion. Christopher says that different rules for men and women apply in our
society.

15

Another interesting take on this topic comes from Phyllis Coopers article
The Stress of Life: Are Men and Women Really Different? which deals with
differences in the way men and women deal with stress through communication.
The article states that men often respond to stress initially in the fight-or-flight
mode, meaning they get in there and tackle the situation sometimes without
thinking, or they get away from it. Women, tackle the initial stress through
thinking about the situation or discussing it with other women. Most of the time
both genders will use a combination of fight-or-flight and tend-and-befriend,
however the differences are that women will discuss the stress, the situation, what
to do about it, who is involved and how to handle it while men will initially solve
the problem or remove themselves from it. Often times, when men do get
together in groups in order to deal with stress, they usually do not talk about the
actual stress but instead focus on guy talk or the sports game they are watching.
Here are some of the key findings about how men and women use
language differently.
A. Mens Language
According to Crawford (1997) notes the three main objectives of male
speech as: to assert ones position of dominance, to attract and maintain an
audience, and to assert ones self when another person has the floor.
For Mulac et al (2001) note that men tend to use language reflects a more
dominant and certain position. They identify:
a) Greater usage of

Example

Quantitative references

It is 25 miles away.

Judgmental adjectives

His performance is poor.

Commands

Turn that off now.

Location words

Take it off the table put in the

cupboard.

16

Brief sentences

Looks great! Now what?

Self-references

Im in agreement with that.

Poynton (1989) noted that men, in comparison with women: use more
slang, swear more often, use fewer intensifiers, and use fewer adjectives.
B. Womens Language
Crawford (1997) notes the three main objectives of female speech as: to
create and maintain relationships of closeness and equality, to criticize others in
acceptable (indirect ways), and to interpret accurately and sensitively the speech
of other females.
Mulac et al (2001) note that women use language that is more cautious and
concerned not to offend or put the woman an embarrassing situation. They
identify:
a) Greater usage of
Intensive adverbs
Qualifying clauses
Emotional reference
Longer sentences

Example
Its so terribly interesting, isnt it?
In which something is
That made her feel rather angry.
Whilst I think it would be a
good idea I feel you might
want to...

Initial adverbials

Owing to the interest we have now...

Uncertainty

It seems rather vague, I suppose.

Hedging

Shes a bit like Jane in that.

Negation

Is it not a Bernini statue?

17

Simultaneous opposites

He looks a bit angry yet still

reasonably calm.

Questioning

Do you think this looks good?

Poynton (1989) noted that women: Are generally more polite in their
speech (though are no different in sincerity): use politeness markers such as
please and thank you, use super-polite 'multiple modalities' such as I was
wondering if you could possibly just do me a small favor, if you wouldn't mind,
tend to use tag questions, use more intensifiers, use more adjectives, and use
euphemisms rather than swearing.
According to Lakoff, women have a different way of speaking than men,
which is a way of speaking that reflect and produce a subordinate position in
society (Eckert & McConnell-Ginet, 2003:1). It means that language generated
women, consciously or unconsciously, a mirror of the controlled or
dominated.
Much research has gone into trying to uncover the differences in the ways
men and women use language to communicate, and several theories have come
out of such research. Some theorists propose that the differences in males and
females language are attributed to power differences, with men using language to
assert dominance and women using it to confirm their subordinance. Other
theorists propose that the difference stems from men and women belonging to two
very different cultures and, thus, living out very different life experiences.

2.2 The Advantages of Learning Womens Speech Features

Womens language can be addressed as a discourse, which means to say or
write or express the events, experiences, views and certain facts of life. Womens
language have always presented a model of a particular worldview, the picture of
a construction and the whole world round about idea of life and living which are
interpreted and processed women.

18

According to Anang Santoso (2009), he divided four advantages about

learning of womens speech features:
Decision-makers: in the context of policy makers to provide input to solve
social problems and social-cultural-political a nation. There will be something
very lacking when women's voices through the texts they produce are not listened
to and acted upon.
Communicators across gender: for men of understanding the language of
women is expected to provide important information about the secrets of women
in the form of ideology that will always fight, either explicitly or implicitly that
appear in the speech of women. So that symbolic violence is often the case in
cross gender (relations of solidarity rather than violence) can be minimized.
Observers of women: to make the results of the womens understanding of
the language is expected to increase knowledge and understanding of women
analysts and observers about the secrets hidden within the language of women,
especially the question of ideology stood for.
The development of Linguistics: an understanding of the womens
language expected to contribute, additions, and comparisons to theories;
linguistics, sociolinguistics, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, and
pragmatic ethno methodology.

2.3Lakoffs Theory of Womens Speech Features

These are ten elements of the language that women use, as identified by
Robin Lakoff in 1975. Of course, not all women use all of this language all of the
time, and some may question the whole. Lakoff (1975) is the one the early
linguists who investigate the issue of differences of men and womens speech.
Lakoff identified a number of linguistic features which she claimed were used
more often by women than by men, and which in her opinion, expressed
uncertainty and lack of confidence.

19

Lakoff's writings have become the basis for many researches to conduct
the research by using womens language as subject. Most of what Lakoff
proposed in her article agreed with theories which originally proposed in the
1920s by Otto Jespersen in Growth and Structure of the English Language. The
features of womens language are;
1. Lexical Hedges or Fillers
Hedging is an aspect of womens insecurity. According to Lakoff, one
would expect you know to be randomly scattered throughout womens speech,
since it usage is supposed to reflect the general insecurity of the speaker. The use
of hedges is also the manifestation of womens lack of self-confidence. Lakoff
considered that pause fillers are also categorized as hedges, because of their
function which is expressing lack of confidence or uncertainty.
The hedging devices can be used to weaken the strength of an assertion
while the boosting devices can be used to strengthen it. For example, its a good
film can be strengthened by adding the intensifier really (its really good film) or
weakened by adding the lexical hedge sort of (its sort of a good film).
Lakoff (cited in Cameron, 1990:237), she claims that women use you
know more often than men. You know scattered randomly throughout womens
speech, because its usage is supposed to reflect the general insecurity of the
speaker. If, however, you know does same kind of work in conversation, people
would expect its occurrence to cluster at points in conversation where the
interactional context seems to call for its usage. Lakoff claimed both kinds of
modifiers were evidence of an unconfident speaker. Hedging devices explicitly
signal lack of confidence, while boosting devices reflect the speakers anticipation
that the addressee may remain unconvinced and therefore supply extra
reassurance. So, she claimed, women use hedging devices to express uncertainty,
and they use intensifying devices to persuade their addressee to take them
seriously. Women boost the force of their utterances because they think that

20

otherwise they will not be heard or paid attention to. So, according to Lakof, both
hedges and boosters reflect womens lack of confidence.
Coates (2004) defined hedges as a linguistics forms reflect the speakers
certainty or uncertainty about the current situation. Using hedges such as (sort of,
you know and I think) are related to the women rather than men, because always
women speech characterizes as tentative (Coates, 2004). According to Lakoff
(1975), speakers use hedges when they lack self-confidence, and she claims that
women use hedges more than men, because they are socialized to believe that
asserting themselves strongly isn't nice or ladylike, or even feminine (p. 75).
Brown claims that using apologizes for intruding; uses impersonal structure and
hedges found where people are in an inferior position in the society (Brown,
cited in Coates 2004). Moreover, Coates explains that when the speech is about
sensitive affairs like personal issues, using hedges is a precious resource to reduce
the force of speech, so she claims that in contrast with women, men always avoid
talking in personal issues as women do.
Hedging provides a way out, should disagreement occur, qualifying
statements with non-absolute language, such as sort of, I guess, yknow,
kinda etc.
Well, I sort of looked at him, and then he kind of looked back. Then I guess I kept
looking.
2. Tag Question
A tag question is used when the speaker is stating a claim, but the speaker
is not totally sure about the truth of that claim, for example: Juan is leaving, isnt
he?.
Based on Chaika (1994: 216) women tend to ask three times as many
questions as men. It can be used in many kinds of way. Question can be used to
look for some information, to introduce new topic, to encourage other speaker to

21

participate in talk, to invite someone to tell a story, among other things (Coates,
1996:176).
According to Lakoff (1975) tag question is a syntax usage using between
an outright statement and a yes-no question. She claims that women tend to use
tag questions with intonation at the end of declarative sentences is an indication to
the lack of self-confidence, for example (the weather is very nice, isn't it?).
Therefore, using tag question with intonation inappropriately indicates to
weakness, inferiority and woman class (p. 52). Crawford (1995) argues that
women use tag question to convey uncertainty and lack of conviction. On the
other hand, Coates (2004) claims that one of the linguistics usage features which
related to the women is using tag question, so she argues that women use tag
question more than men, especially when they are participants in the interactions
like, interviewers on radio and television, teachers and discussion group leaders.
Moreover, Coates mentions that preislers (1986) research tells that by comparing
between using tag question and other linguistics forms like some models, we will
find that women use tag question more than men.
There is at least one rule that a woman will use more conversational
situations than a man. This is the rule of tag question formation. This is the rule of
tag question formation. Lakoff (cited in Cameron, 1990:229) wrote that a tag
question, in its usage and syntactic shape, in English, is midway between an
outright statement and a yes-no question.
One makes a statement when one has confidence in his knowledge and is
pretty certain that his statement will be believed; one asks a question when one
lacks knowledge on some point, and has reason to believe that this gap can and
will be remedied by an answer by the addressee. A tag question, being intermediate between these, is used when the speaker is stating a claim, but lacks full
confidence in the truth of that claim. A tag question, then, might be thought of as
a declarative statement without the assumption that the statement is to be believed

22

by the addressee: one has an out, as with a question. A tag gives the addressee
leeway, not forcing him to go along with the views of the speaker.
Tag questions are grammatical structures in in which a declarative is
followed by an attached interrogative clause or tag, such as
You were missing last week, werent you?
Thorpes away, is he?
In her influential (1975) work Language and Womens Place, Robin
Lakoff depicted a typical female speech style, allegedly characterized by the use
of features such as hesitations, qualifiers, tag questions, empty adjectives, and
other properties, which she asserted to have a common function: to weaken or
mitigate the force of an utterance. Thus tag questions are associated with a desire
for confirmation or approval which signals a lack of self-confidence in the
speaker.
Lakoff's description of female speech style was based on her remembered
impressions rather than on any systematic, quantitative observation. When
subsequent researchers went out and counted things, they often found it difficult
to confirm her observations. For instance, some studies found that men actually
used more tag questions than women did.
3. Rising Intonation on Declaratives
Women show non-assertive behavior by using question intonation in
conjunction with declarative sentences. That is, rather than making direct
statements, they suggest or request agreement from their addressee(s). Lakoff says
that in answering a question like when will lunch be ready? women will respond
not with a statement but with a question intonation response, such as oh, about
twelve oclock?
As Lakoff found in English language, there is a peculiar sentence
intonation pattern only among women. It is not only has the form of declarative

23

answer to a question, but also has the rising inflection typical of a yes-no question
and seems like being especially hesitant (cited in Cameron, 1990:230). The effect
is one were seeking confirmation, at the same time the speaker may be the only
one who has the requisite information.
Whats your name, dear? Mary Smith?
4. Empty Adjectives
Empty adjectives are meaningless, can be omitted or changed into
another words. E.g. divine, charming, cute.
According to Lakoff, certain words are used almost exclusively by
women. Lakoff claims that women use empty adjectives such as divine and
cute, these adjectives are said to be not only meaningless, but also lacked of any
connotation of power if contrasted with mens adjectives such as great, terrific.
In Lakoffs opinion, if a man uses the womens adjectives, it will damage
his reputation (cited in Cameron, 1990: 226-227). On the other hand, a woman
may use the neutral words freely. However, a woman use womens word is
without risks. Women are freely to choose between the neutral words and the
womens words, which man does not have, she may be suggesting very different
thing about her own personality and her view about the subject matter by her
choice of words of the neutral words or words of the womens words.
Some of these adjectives are neutral as to sex of speaker; men or women
may use them. But another set seems to be largely restricted to use by women.
According to Lakoff (Language and Woman's Place: p. 51-52) there is, for
instance, a group of adjectives which have, besides their specific and literal
meanings, another use, that of indicating the speaker's approbation or admiration
for something. Some of these adjectives are neutral as to sex of speaker: either
men or women may use them. But another set seems, in its figurative use, to be
largely confined to women's speech. Representative lists of both types are below:

24

Neutral

Women Only

Great

Adorable

Terrific

Charming

Cool

Sweet

Neat

Lovely
Divine

Where a woman has a choice between the neutral words and the womens
words, as a man has not, she may be suggesting very different things about her
own personality and her view of the subject matter by her choice of words of the
first set or words of the second.
(a) What a terrific idea!
(b) What a divine idea!
It seems to me that (a) might be used under any appropriate conditions by
a female speaker. But (b) is more restricted. Probably it is used appropriately
(even by the sort of speaker for whom it was normal) only in case the speaker
feels the idea referred to be essentially frivolous, trivial, or unimportant to the
world at large - only an amusement for the speaker herself. Consider, then, a
woman advertising executive at an advertising conference. However feminine an
advertising executive she is, she is much more likely to express her approval with
(5) (a), than with (b), which might cause raised eyebrows, and the reaction,
Thats what we get for putting a woman in charge of this company. On the other
hand, suppose a friend suggests to the same woman that she should dye her
French poodles to match her cigarette lighter. In this case, the suggestion really
concerns only her, and the impression she will make on people. In this case, she
may use (b), from the womans language. So the choice is not really free: words
restricted to womens language suggest that concepts to which they are applied
are not relevant to the real world of (male) influence and power.

25

5. Specialized vocabularies (Precise Color Terms)

Lakoff stated that there are some colors that are less common and used by
women only, such as mauve and chartreuse. Because women like details more
than men do. Therefore, women have more vocabulary in colors than men have.
Furthermore, Lakoff said that womens language shows up in all levels of
the grammar of English (cited in Cameron, 1990:223). Sometimes the
differences in the choice and frequency of lexical items happen in the situations
where the certain syntactic rules are performed, in intonation and other super
segmental patterns.
Women make far more precise discriminations in naming colors than do
men; words like beige, ecru, aquamarine, lavender, and so on, are unremarkable
in a womens active vocabulary, but absent from that of most men. These example
of unremarkable word in a womans active vocabulary, but those are absent for
most men. When men say something in precise color terms, other people might
conclude he was imitating a woman sarcastically or homosexual. Discrimination
of color is relevant for women, but not for men because women are not expected
to make decisions on important matters, such as what kind of job to hold. They
are relegated the non-crucial decisions as a sop. Deciding whether to name a
color lavender or mauve is usual or sop for women.
6. Intensifier
Female often use intensifiers as so, such, quiet and vastly. E.g I hate her so
much. Lakoff claimed that if women use hedging to express uncertainty, on the
other hand women use intensifying devices to persuade their addressee to take
them seriously and also to strengthen the meaning.
Intensifiers such as so, just, very, and quiet indicate more
characteristic of womens language than men. So is claimed as having something
of the eternally feminine about it (Jespersen 1922:250). It also said that women

26

much more often than men break off without finishing their sentence, because
they start talking without having thought out what they are going to say.
For example to say I like him very much would be saying precisely that
you like him to a great extent. To say I like him so much weasels on that
intensity: again, a device you would use if you felt it unseemly to show you had
strong emotions, or to make strong assertions, but felt you had to say something
along those lines anyway.
Look at the following sentence.
a. I feel so unhappy!
b. That movie made me so sick!
Men seem to have the difficulty to use this construction when the sentence
is in unemotional condition or non-subjective without reference to the speaker
himself. Compare sentence (a) and (b) with sentence (c) and (d).
c. That flower is so beautiful!
d. Fredy is so dumb!
Lakoff said that substituting an equative like so for absolute
superlative(like very, really, utterly) seems to be a way of backing out of
committing oneself strongly to an opinion, rather like tag questions (cited in
Cameron, 1990: 223).One might hedge this way with perfect right making
aesthetic judgment, as in c, or intellectual judgment, as in d. But it is odd to hedge
in describing someones mental or emotional state. To hedge in this situation is to
seek and avoid making strong statement as a characteristic of womens speech.
7. Hypercorrect Grammar
Hypercorrect grammar is the consistent use of standard verb forms.
Hypercorrect grammar involves avoidance of coarse language; more frequent
apologizing and the usage of super polite forms are additional features. In other
words, women speak as close to the British standard as possible. Lakoff connects

27

these features with each other since they all come down to the fact that women are
not supposed to talk rough or less polite than men. (Norman 2006:8)
According to Lakoff, women tend to use more formal syntax than men, to
use forms of pronunciations which are closer to the prestige norm, and in general
to speak more formally than men do in similar situation.
Hypercorrect grammar: women are not supposed to talk rough. It has been
found that, from a very young age , little boys drop their gs much more than do
little girls: boys say singin , goin , and so on, while girls are less apt to.
8. Superpolite Forms
Lakoff (cited in Cameron, 1990:231) argued that in the same sense a
request may be a polite command; it does not need obedience overtly, but suggest
something to be done as a favor to the speaker. An overt order (as in imperative)
expresses the assumption of the speakers superior position the addressee,
carrying with it the right to enforce compliance. The implication is not that the
addressee is in the danger if he or she does not comply, merely that he or she will
be glad if he or she does. The decision is also up to the addressee. Therefore, a
suggestion is politer than an order.
The more particles in a sentence reinforce the notion that it is a request
rather than an order, the politer the result. Look at the sentences below:
a. Close the door.
b. Please close the door.
c. Will you close the door?
d. Will you please close the door?
e. Wont you close the door?
Sentence (a) is direct order, sentence (b) and (c) are the example of simple
request, while sentence (d) and (e) is compound request. A sentence likes wont
you please close the door would count as a compound request doubly.

28

Sentence c means Are you willing to close the door? Even though this
sentence has functioned as a request, the decision is living up to the willingness of
the addressee. Saying it as positive question makes the implicit assumption that
the addressee will answer yes.
Sentence d is more polite than b or c because it combines them. Please
indicating that to accede will do something for the speaker, and will you
suggesting that the addressee has the final decision. If the question is phrased with
negative like in e, the speaker seems to suggest the stronger likelihood of a
negative response from the addressee. The assumption is that the addressee is
freer to refuse. So, e is request which is more polite than c and d put the burden of
refusal on the addressee, while e does not.
Women are said to frame request and other sorts of utterances with
excessively polite forms such as would you please open the door, if you dont
mind. These forms are often used by women than men.
Do excuse me, but I really appreciate it if you could take a little time to help
me.
9. Avoidance of strong swear words
Taboo language or non-standard words, have considered on strong swear
words. In language taboo is a prohibition forces the substitution of another word
for one. These words are rarely used and even are avoided by women.
Swearing is kinds of interjection that can express extreme intensify. It has
been widely considered as an expression of very strong emotion (Eckert:
2003:181). It is viewed as potent language and can indeed sometimes achieve
impressive effect. It is also considered unsuitable for woman and children.
Women usually use softer forms such as Oh, dear! or Darn!, then men use the
stronger swear words such as Damn it! or Oh Shit!
Lakoff said the language of the favored group, the group that holds the
power, along with its non-linguistic behavior, is generally adopted by the other

29

group, not vice versa (cited in Cameron, 1990: 225). The consequence is that
mens language is being used increasingly by women, but womens language is
not being adopted by men, apart from those who reject the American masculine
image. The stronger expletives are reserved for men, while the weaker ones for
women. The difference between using shit or damn as opposed to oh dear,
goodness, or oh fudge lies in how forcefully one says how one feels.
As an experiment, one might present native speakers of standard American
English with pairs of sentences, identical syntactically, and in terms of referential
lexical items, and differing merely in the choice of 'meaningless' particle, and ask
them which was spoken by a man, which a woman. Consider:
(a) Oh dear, you've put the peanut butter in the refrigerator again.
(b) Shit, you've put the peanut butter in the refrigerator again.
It is safe to predict that people would classify the first sentence as part of
womens language, the second as mens language. It is true that many selfrespecting women are becoming able to use sentences like (3) (b) publicly without
flinching, but this is a relatively recent development, and while perhaps the
majority of Middle America might condone the use of (b) for men, they would
still disapprove of its use by women.
Otherwise, men are allowed to express stronger means than women
because men have strong position in the real world. The more strongly and
forcefully someone expresses opinions, the much likely he or she to be taken
seriously. Therefore, men usually also have the ability to use strong particles likes
hit and hell. If someone is allowed to show emotions, others may be able to view
him or her as real individual in his/her own right. The behavior a woman learns as
correct prevents her from being taken seriously as an individual, and further is
considered correct and necessary for a woman precisely because society does not
consider her seriously as an individual (Lakoff, cited in Cameron, 1990: 226).

30

10. Emphatic Stress

Women use the modifiers so, such and very to emphasize their utterances
much more frequently than men do and they combined this usage with an
intensifiers of intonation out proportion with the topic of the phrase. Expressions
like its so beautiful! are seen as feminine.
A long with tag question, Lakoff identified the use of a question intonation
on sentence that are not question as a central she characterized as womens and
powerless or weak. This question intonation has a high rising tone at the end of
the sentence (Eckert, 2003:174). Women tend to use words which are used to
emphasize the utterance or strengthen the meaning of an utterance. For example,
It was a brilliant performance. The word brilliant is one of the examples of an
emphatic stress.
The linguistic features identified by Lakoff can be divided into two
groups. First, the linguistics devices may be used for hedging or reducing the
force of utterance. Second, the features may boost or intensify proportion of a
force. Features which may serve as hedging devices are lexical hedge, tag
questions, questions intonation, super polite forms, and euphemisms, while
intensifiers and emphatic serve as boosting devices(As cited in Holmes1992:316).
The hedges devices can be used to weaken the strength of an assertation,
then the boosting devices can be used to strength it. Lakoff claimed that both
kinds of modifier were evidence of the speaker unconfident. Hedging devices
explicitly signal lack of confidence; boosting devices reflect the speakers
anticipation that the addressee may remain unconvinced and then supply extra
reassurance. So, Lakoff claimed that women use hedging devices to express
uncertainty and they use intensifying devices to persuade their addressee to take
them seriously. Women boost the force of their utterance because they think that
they will not be heard or paid attention. Therefore, according to Lakoff both
hedges and boosters reflect womens lack of confidence.