CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 214Language, Discourse, Communication StrategiesGender Studies in LanguageGender and Feminist Studies

Making Gender Relevant: Conversation Analysis and Gender Categories in Interaction

STOKOE, ELIZABETH H., SMITHSON, JANET·2001·Discourse & Society
DOI 10.1177/0957926501012002005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this article, we critically evaluate a conversation analytic approach to the study of the links between gender and language from a feminist perspective. In so doing, we engage in the recent series of exchanges about conversation analysis (CA) and other strands of discourse analysis that have been published in Discourse & Society. We consider talk from two sets of discourse data, focusing on participants' orientation to gender categories as they crop up in the interactions. We suggest that a CA approach produces a rich understanding of the links between discourse and gender. However, we are critical of several, often unexamined aspects and conundrums of conversation analytic methodology. First, we consider the extent to which the `analytic stances' of feminism and conversation analysis are compatible. Second, we question whether, as Schegloff (1997) suggests, it is fruitful to rely on descriptions of and orientations to gender solely in participants' terms, as well as problematizing the notion of `orienting to gender' itself. Finally, while we propose CA is a useful tool for making claims about the relevance of gender in conversational interaction, and that such claims are grounded in speakers' orientations, we suggest that culture and common-sense knowledge, of both members and analysts, are largely unacknowledged and unexplicated resources in CA.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0957926501012002005

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
STOKOE, E. H., & SMITHSON, J.
Affiliations
  • UNIVERSITY COLLEGE WORCESTER
  • Manchester Metropolitan University (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Discourse & Society
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2001-03
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
217-244
ISSN
  • 0957-9265 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-3624
DOI
10.1177/0957926501012002005
OpenAlex
W2170216584
Cited by
214
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
85.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Discourse & Society (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Studies in Language
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
Keywords
gender and language, conversation analysis, feminist discourse analysis, gender categories, commonsense knowledge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review