Gender and Language: Signalling Importance in English Academic Lectures

Document Type : research article


Kosar University of Bojnord


This paper reports on a study which explored importance marking in English academic lectures by male and female faculty members. The purpose of study was to investigate importance marking across gender. The method of study was corpus-driven, mixed-methods, and discourse analytic. Importance marking was investigated in the 160 English academic lectures of the BASE corpus. The results of the study showed that, regardless of the gender of the lecturer, importance marking takes place through (1) organizing the lecture into points and non-points, (2) using evaluative adjectives and adverbs such as important and more importantly, (3) indicating the extended coverage of topics, (4) relating the content of the lecture to exam and assessment, and (5) interaction with the audience. Additionally, it was found that importance marking does not necessarily involve using evaluative adjectives and adverbs. It can be done both explicitly and implicitly. Moreover, it was observed that orientation of the importance marker depends on its function. Finally, female lecturers were found to involve the audience more frequently than male lecturers.


زارع، جواد، اسلامی‌راسخ، عباس و عزیزا... دباغی (پذیرفته‌شده). «»این نکته‌ای که من می‌خوام اینجا دقت کنید«: برجسته کردن نکات مهم در ارائه‌های علمی فارسی». زبان پژوهی.
Ädel, A. (2010). Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going: a taxonomy of      metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies 9(2), 69–97.
Ädel, A. (2012). What I want you to remember is: Audience orientation in monologic academic     discourse. English Text Construction 5(1), 101–127. doi:10.1075/etc.5.1.06ade
Baron, N., & Campbell, E. (2012). Talking takes too long: Gender and cultural patterns in                mobile telephony. Language Sciences 34, 13– 27.
Basow, S. A. (1995). Student evaluations of college professors: When gender matters. Journal of   Educational Psychology, 87(4), 656–665. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.87.4.656
Biber, D. (2006a). Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for               Academic Purposes, 5(2), 97–116. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2006.05.001
Biber, D. (2006b). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers.            Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of              spoken and written English. London: Longman.
Biggs, J. (1997). Teaching across and within cultures: The issues of international students. In R.      Murray-Harvey & H. C. Silins (Eds.), Learning and teaching in higher education:Advancing international perspectives (pp. 1–22). Proceedings of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA) Conference, Adelaide, South Australia.
Bilbow, G. (1989). Towards an understanding of overseas students’ difficulties in lectures: A phenomenographic approach. Journal of Further and Higher Education 13(3), 85–99.         doi:10.1080/0309877890130308
Björkman, B. (2011). The pragmatics of English as a lingua franca in the international university:                 Introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(4), 923–925. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.015
Bligh, D. A. (1998). What’s the use of lectures? Exeter: Intellect Books.
Bondi, M. (2008). Emphatics in academic discourse: Integrating corpus and discourse tools in the study of cross-disciplinary variation. In A. Ädel & R. Reppen (Eds.), Corpora and               discourse: The challenges of different settings (pp. 31–55). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Carrier, C. A., Williams, M. D., & Dalagard, B. R. (1988). College students’ perceptions of                 notetaking and their relationship to selected learner characteristics and course achievement.     Research in higher education 28(3), 223–239. doi:10.1007/BF00992232
Chaudron, C., & Richards, J. C. (1986). The effect of discourse markers on the comprehension of lectures. Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 113–127. doi:10.1093/applin/7.2.113
Cheng, S. W. (2012). “That’s it for today”: Academic lecture closings and the impact of class size.                 English for Specific Purposes 31(4), 234–248. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2012.05.004
Choi, M. (1997). Korean students in Australian universities: Intercultural issues. Higher Education Research and Development 16(3), 263–282. doi:10.1080/ 0729436970160302
Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2004). Audience-oriented relevance markers in business studies              lectures. In G. Del Lungo Camiciotti & E. Tognini Bonelli (Eds.), Academic discourse:            Linguistic insights into evaluation (pp. 81–97). Bern: Peter Lang.
Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2005). Adjusting a business lecture for an international audience: a       case study. English for Specific Purposes 24(2), 183–199. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2004.05.002
Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2007). The language of business studies lectures. Amsterdam: John     Benjamins.
Csomay, E. (2012). A corpus-based look at short turns in university classroom interaction. Corpus                Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 8(1), 103–128. doi:10.1515/cllt-2012-0005
DeCarrico, J., & Nattinger, J. R. (1988). Lexical phrases for the comprehension of academic            lectures. English for Specific Purposes, 7(2), 91–102. doi: 10.1016/0889-4906(88)90027-                0
Deroey, K. L. B. (2014). 'Anyway, the point I'm making is’: Lexicogrammatical relevance marking                in lectures. In V. Lieven, K. Davidse, C. Gentens & D. Kimps (Eds.), Recent advances in               corpus linguistics: Developing and exploiting corpora (pp. 265–291). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Deroey, K. L. B. (2015). Marking importance in lectures: Interactive and textual orientation.           Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 51–72. doi:10.1093/applin/amt029
Deroey, K. L. B., & Taverniers, M. (2011). A corpus-based study of lecture functions. Moderna      Språk, 105(2), 1–22.
Deroey, K. L. B., & Taverniers, M. (2012). Just remember this: Lexicogrammatical relevance          markers in lectures. English for Specific Purposes, 31(4), 221–233.          doi:10.1016/j.esp.2012.05.001
Duguid, A. (2010). Newspaper discourse informalization. Corpora 5(2), 109–138.
Duszak, A. (1997). Cross-cultural academic communication. A discourse-community view. In A.   Duszak (Ed.), Culture and styles of academic discourse (pp. 11–39). Berlin: Mouton de             Gruyter.
Flowerdew, J. (1994). Research of relevance to second language lecture comprehension: An            overview. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp. 7–29).        Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Flowerdew, J. (2003). Signalling nouns in discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 329–       346. doi:10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00017-0
Fortanet, I. (2004). The use of ‘we’ in university lectures: reference and function. English for          Specific Purposes 23(1), 45–66. doi:10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00018-8
Giannoni, D. S. (2010). Mapping academic values in the disciplines: A corpus-based approach.  Bern: Peter Lang.
Giannoni, D. S. (2011). Academic values in context. In R. M. Millar & M. Durham (Eds.), Applied                 linguistics, global and local (pp. 105–114). London: BAAL & Scitsiugnil Press.
Hanson, J. M., & Sinclair, K. E. (2008). Social constructivist teaching methods in Australian             universities–reported uptake and perceived learning effects: A survey of lecturers. Higher      Education Research & Development 27(3), 169–186. doi:10.1080/07294360802183754
Heino, A., Tervonen, E., & Tommola, J. (2002). Metadiscourse in academic conference presentations. In E. Ventola, C. Shalom, & S. Thompson (Eds.), The language of conferencing (pp. 127–146). Bern: Peter Lang.
Hunston, S. (1994). Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse. In M.                Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 191–218). London: Routledge.
Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the          construction of discourse (pp. 176–207). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. London: Continuum.
Isaacs, G. (1994). Lecturing practices and note-taking purposes. Studies in Higher Education         19(2), 203–216. doi:10.1080/03075079412331382047
Jung, E. H. (2003). The role of discourse signalling cues in second language listening comprehension. The Modern Language Journal 87(4), 562–577. doi: 10.1111/1540- 4781.00208
Kiewra, K. A. (2002). How classroom teachers can help students learn and teach them how to        learn. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 71–80. doi:10.1207/ s15430421tip4102_3
Kilgarriff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P., &    Suchomel, V. (2014). The Sketch Engine: ten years on. Lexicography, 1(1), 7–36.
Kuh, G. D., Nelson Laird, T. F., & Umbach, P. D. (2004). Aligning faculty and student behavior:      Realizing the promise of greater expectations. Liberal Education, 90(4), 24–31.
Labov, W. (1991). The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change 2, 205–254.
Lacey, C. H., Saleh, A., & Gorman, R. (1998). Teaching nine to five: A study of the teaching styles of male and female professors. Paper presented at the Annual Women in Education Conference, Lincoln, Nebraska, October 11-12.
Lebauer, R. S. (1984). Using lecture transcripts in EAP lecture comprehension courses. TESOL Quarterly 18(l), 41–53. doi:10.2307/3586334
Lin, C. Y. (2010). '... that's actually sort of you know trying to get consultants in...': Functions and multifunctionality of modifiers in academic lectures. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(5), 1173–1183. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.001
Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T. & Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in educational research from      theory to practice. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Lynch, T. (1994). Training lecturers for international audiences. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp.  269–289). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lynch, T. (2004). Study listening: a course in listening to lectures and note taking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lynch, T. (2011). Academic listening in the 21st century: Reviewing a decade of research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(2), 79–88. doi:10.1016/ j.jeap.2011.03.001
Marchi, A. (2010). ‘The moral in the story’: A diachronic investigation of lexicalized morality in     the UK press. Corpora 5(2), 161–189.
McKeachie, W. J. (1994). Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers. Lexington: Heath and Co.
McKeachie, W. J. (2002).  Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and               university professors. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Morell, T. (2004). Interactive lecture discourse for university EFL students. English for SpecificPurposes 23(3), 325–338. doi:10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00029-2
Nelson Laird, T. F., Garver, A. K., & Niskode´-Dossett, A. S. (2011). Gender gaps in collegiate teaching style: Variations by course characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 52, 261–277. doi: 10.1007/s11162-010-9193-0
Nesi, H. (2001). A corpus-based analysis of academic lectures across disciplines. In J. Cotterill, & A. Ife (Eds.), Language across boundaries. BAAL, Vol. 16 (pp. 201–218). London:             Continuum.
Olsen, L. A., & Huckin, T. H. (1990). Point-driven understanding in engineering lecture comprehension. English for Specific Purposes, 9(1), 33–47. doi:10.1016/0889-4906(90)90027-A
Partington, A., Duguid, A., & Taylor, C. (2013). Patterns and meanings in discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Romaine, S. (2003). Variation in language and gender. In J. Holmes & M. Meyerhoff (Eds.), Handbook of language and gender (pp. 98–118). Blackwell: Malden, MA.
Samuelowicz, K., & Bain, J. D. (2001). Revisiting academics' beliefs about teaching and learning. Higher Education 41(3), 299–325. doi:10.1023/A:1004130031247
Siepmann, D. (2005). Discourse markers across languages: A contrastive study of second-level     discourse markers in native and non-native text with implications for general and         pedagogic lexicography. New York: Routledge.
Simpson, R. (2004). Stylistic features of academic speech: The role of formulaic expressions. In U. Connor & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 37–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Singer, E. (1996). Espoused teaching paradigms of college faculty. Research in Higher Education, 37(6), 659–679. doi: 10.1007/BF01792951
Statham, A., Richardson, L., & Cook, J. A. (1991). Gender and university teaching: A negotiated difference. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Sutherland, P., & Badger, R. (2004). Lecturers’ perceptions of lectures. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(3), 277–289. doi:10.1080/0309877042000241751
Suviniitty, J. (2010). Lecturers‖ questions and student perception of lecture comprehension. Helsinki English Studies 6, 44–57.
Swales, J. M. (2001). Metatalk in American academic talk the cases of point and thing. Journal of English Linguistics 29(1), 34–54. doi:10.1177/00754240122005189
Swales, J. M., & Burke, A. (2003). “It’s really fascinating work”: Differences in evaluative adjectives across academic registers. In P. Leistyna & C. F. Meyer (Eds.), Corpus analysis:Language structure and language use (pp. 1–18). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Swales, J. & Feak, C. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students, Ann Arbor: University of     Michigan Press.
Thompson, G., & Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation: an introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thompson, S. E. (2003). Text-structuring metadiscourse, intonation and the signaling of organization in academic lectures.  Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2(1), 5–20. doi:10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00036-X
Titsworth, B. S., & Kiewra, K. A. (2004). Spoken organizational lecture cues and student note          taking as facilitators of student learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 447–461. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2003.12.001
Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.