The use of question tags in Jordanian Arabic by Facebook users

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the use of question tags among Jordanian female and male Facebook users and identify some commonly used words for question tags in colloquial Arabic. To this end, a focus group was formed, comprising individuals who possessed an advanced command of the Arabic language and an understanding of sociolinguistic concepts. In addition, a corpus of 515 comments on controversial topics was compiled. Data were analyzed by semi-automatically retrieving it from computerized sources and then analyzing it within its context. The analysis revealed that question tags in Jordanian Arabic serve various functions, including mitigation, confirmation, doubt, hedging, inviting response or interaction, and convincing. The study also found that the use of question tags differs between males and females and can be influenced by linguistic and social factors. Females tend to use question tags more frequently than males, which could be attributed to social norms, cultural expectations, and gender stereotypes in language use. As for linguistic factors, they include various elements, including intonation patterns and word choice. Females typically employ rising intonation patterns, which can give a statement the quality of a question, whereas males more commonly use falling intonation patterns. Furthermore, females tend to employ more polite and indirect language, whereas males often opt for a more direct and assertive communication style. The implications of this linguistic variation highlight the need for awareness and sensitivity to gender differences in communication styles.

Keywords:

• sociolinguistics
• question tags
• Jordanian Arabic
• Facebook
• corpus

1. Introduction

Question tags, a common grammatical feature, can enhance the versatility and expressiveness of both spoken and written language. They achieve this by transforming a declarative statement into a yes/no question (Achiri-Taboh, 2015). These linguistic elements, also referred to as question tags or tail questions (Wu et al., 2016), generally comprise a pronoun and an auxiliary verb. The specific form of a question tag depends on the tense and meaning of the sentence. Question tags can take on either a positive or negative form, and their intonation and tone can convey a range of nuances, including uncertainty, doubt, or assertiveness (Reese & Asher, 2007). Due to their widespread usage, mastering the use of question tags can greatly enhance communication skills and contribute to one’s effectiveness as a communicator.

Question tags are short, concise, and can be formed with a variety of auxiliary verbs, making them a flexible tool for communication. In other words, they have a diverse and extensive array of grammatical elements that enhance their interpretation. They are characterized by a syntactic combination, involving a declarative sentence combined with a condensed interrogative clause (Reese & Asher, 2007). For example, if someone says, “You like coffee,” a question tag could be added to the end of a sentence to make it a question, like “You like coffee, don’t you?” However, using question tags can be nuanced and context-dependent, ranging from formal to informal, colloquial to technical.

Question tags do exist in different languages, including Catalan, Spanish, French, Italian, German (Cuenca & CaStellà, 1995), and Arabic. However, it is argued that the corpus of question tags is very limited (Dehé & Braun, 2013), and this motivated this study to build a corpus of question tags used in Arabic by Jordanian speakers. Bearing in mind that question tags are used in various conversational contexts, this study aims to investigate the use of Arabic question tags among Jordanian female and male Facebook users. In addition, Arabic is still understudied and needs more investigation in this field of study, as there are no studies found that address question tags in Arabic. The Facebook platform was focused on because it is the most popular social media site (Duggan et al., 2015), where people send private messages and create group chats, making it easy for people to communicate with each other in real-time.

The subsequent sections present some background information and previous studies conducted in this field, explain the methodology used to carry out this study, report the findings and discuss them thoroughly, and finally draw some conclusions and make suggestions for future works.

2. General background

2.1. Functions of question tags

Question tags are common in spoken language and are recognized for their significant pragmatic roles in discourse (Andersen, 1998). They are a rhetorical tool to initiate a conversation or express doubt, curiosity, or surprise. In addition to being a helpful conversational tool, question tags can also be used to convey nuances and emotions such as sarcasm, politeness, or enthusiasm. Question tags possess the versatility to serve not just as questions and statements, but also as responses, commands, and offers (Kimps et al., 2014). Mastering the art of question tags can significantly enhance one’s communication skills. Question tags, which encompass various linguistic factors like intonation patterns and word choice, are often used to seek agreement or disagreement, confirm or clarify information, and establish rapport with the listener. They can serve a variety of purposes in communication, such as seeking confirmation or agreement, expressing doubt or surprise, or even conveying a command. They are typically composed of an auxiliary verb and a pronoun in English, and a few different forms in Arabic, including saˁħ, in English “right?,” mu: saˁħ, in English “isn’t that right?,” miʃ heik, in English “isn’t that correct?,” balla, in English “by the word of God,” willa laɁ, in English “No?,” and willa Ɂna ɣaltˁa:n, in English “Am I wrong?.” So, their form can vary depending on the tense, mood, and polarity of the statement being transformed. As such, it is important to understand the rules and conventions of question tag usage to use them effectively in conversation. Moreover, question tags play multiple roles in discourse, including strengthening the shared understanding among participants, facilitating the co-construction of discourse, indicating topic shifts, and aiding in the segmentation of spoken discourse (Martínez Caro, 2020). Understanding the rules and conventions of question tags can improve language proficiency and enable people to engage in more sophisticated conversations. Question tags can be used in a variety of contexts, from casual conversations to formal presentations, and they can be a useful tool for clarifying and reinforcing the speaker’s intended message.

2.2. Question tags in Jordanian Arabic

Question tags are commonly used in spoken Arabic to show agreement or disagreement with a statement, to seek confirmation, or to clarify a statement. They are also used to express politeness and to show interest in what the other person is saying. It is important to note that the use of question tags in Arabic can vary based on regional dialects and can have different forms or particles. For example, while Jordanians say “mu: saˁħ” in the end of a sentence to mean “isn’t that right?,” Egyptians would say “muʃ kida” to convey the same meaning. In addition, Arabic yes/no questions and real question tags are delivered with a descending intonation (Al-Shamarti, 2022).

It can be observed that question tags are used in a wider range of situations in English than in Arabic. When analyzing English texts, one can notice a higher frequency of question tags compared to Arabic texts. This observation suggests that in various contexts where English speakers commonly employ question tags, Arabic speakers tend to use more direct expressions without employing a tag. In addition, it was argued that Arabic learners of English do not employ question tags in their English educational and everyday conversations due to the syntactic and pragmatic challenges they encounter when attempting to construct question tags in English (Al-Nafi, 2016).

Although question tags in Arabic are not commonly utilized, they can still be identified in certain situations where a more tentative and indirect form of speech is intentionally employed. They are not commonly used because Arabic is spoken in many different regions, and there can be significant variations in dialects and language use. While question tags may be less common in standard Arabic, there could be regional dialects or informal speech patterns where they are more prevalent. In addition, Arabic communication often favors more direct expressions and clarity, so instead of using question tags to seek agreement or confirmation, Arabic speakers may use explicit questions or statements to convey their intentions.

This goes in line with what Dayem (2019) argues that the majority of Arabic question tags are used to elicit confirmation for both general statements and contentious issues. The Arabic language maintains a greater level of directness in speech compared to English. This linguistic feature becomes particularly important in areas of communication that involve directing, expressing, or asserting speech acts. Indicators of indirect discourse, such as hedging and excessive use of question tags, which are commonly used by native English speakers, are comparatively less frequently used in typical Arabic communication styles (Dayem, 2019).

2.3. Theoretical background

Variational pragmatics is an approach to language study that focuses on the investigation of the variability of language use in social contexts. In other words, it is “studying the impact of social factors in language” (Cameron & Schwenter, 2013). It constitutes a main part of the “descriptive-interpretive” strand of modern linguistic research (Tagliamonte, 2011). It aims to examine how language users produce and interpret language in different social settings and how this variability is linked to social factors such as gender, age, ethnicity, and social class.

The approach is rooted in the field of sociolinguistics, which is the study of the relationship between language and society. However, variational pragmatics differs from traditional sociolinguistics in its emphasis on the analysis of pragmatic features, such as politeness, indirectness, and context dependence, rather than on the study of linguistic structures alone (Terkourafi, 2012). This approach aims to explain why and how language use varies, as well as to examine the social and cultural factors that contribute to such variation.

Variational pragmatics has been applied to the study of a variety of languages and has provided insight into the ways in which language use reflects and reproduces social and cultural values and attitudes. It has also contributed to the development of more comprehensive models of language use that take into account the interplay between linguistic form, context, and social factors. Besides, variational pragmatics views gender as a key social demographic category (Cheshire, 2004), and that is why this approach was chosen to be adopted in conducting this study.

2.4. Previous studies

Question tags in English are marked as a fruitful area of research and have received widespread attention in the literature. The discussion has often focused on issues concerning different accents of English, English as a second language, question tags in early English history of canonical and fiction language, and question tags in women’s speech. For example, Dubois and Crouch’s (1975) investigated whether women use more question tags than men in their speech. They analyzed conversations between men and women in various settings and found that women did not use more question tags than men. The authors concluded that the perception that women use more question tags than men is a stereotype and does not reflect reality. The study also suggests that using question tags implies a reluctance to commit and may make the speaker appear unsure of themselves, seeking confirmation from the listener, or lacking their own opinions.

The study of Cameron et al. (1988) examines the social and linguistic functions of 96 question tags: 36 by women and 60 by men. It was argued that question tags are used by women to create solidarity with their interlocutors and to seek agreement, while they are used by men to assert power and dominance. The results indicate that examining multiple variables, rather than just gender, can reveal the patterns of specific linguistic forms. These variables include the participants’ roles in the interaction, the goals of the interaction, and the participants’ relative status across various dimensions. It is important to note that “women” are not a uniform social group, as gender intersects with other social divisions that may vary in relevance depending on the situation, such as in a courtroom or classroom where occupational roles may be more significant than other social variables. The study highlights the importance of considering the social context in understanding the use of question tags.

Tottie and Hoffmann’s (2009) explores the origins of canonical question tags in English during the 16^th century, using drama texts as a primary source. The researchers collected 136 instances of question tags via semi-automated retrieval from computerized sources and analyzed them in context, assessing their polarity, operator and subject selection, meter, authorship, and pragmatic functions. The results suggest that even at this early stage, question tags had various functions beyond confirming information, including expressing attitudes, challenging interlocutors, or issuing directives. The study also discusses the importance of modal verbs and do-support in the emergence of canonical question tags but claims that the most significant factor was the rise of “not” as the sole sentence negator in English. The research cautiously compares the usage of question tags in the present-day with the 16th century.

Similarly, the study by Axelsson (2011) examined the use of question tags in British English fictional dialogues. The study’s data was collected from two sub-corpora of the British National Corpus: the Fiction Sub-corpus and the spoken component’s demographic section. More than 2,500 question tags were analyzed for their formal aspects, while about 600 question tags were assessed for their pragmatic functions. The study’s findings indicate that declarative question tags are less common in fiction dialogues, while imperative question tags are more frequent. Additionally, the study highlights several differences between the characteristics and functions of question tags in fiction dialogues compared to spoken conversations. In fiction, narrative elements such as reporting clauses and comments provide readers with context and information that aids in understanding the intended meaning of dialogues, making it a useful resource for analyzing linguistic phenomena like question tags.

Wilson et al., (2017) research explores the utilization of question tags in Trinidadian English. Employing a variational pragmatics approach and spoken data from the Trinidad and Tobago division of the International Corpus of English, they detail the spread and pragmatic purposes of both variant and invariant tags in four distinct text types. Although rare, variant question tags can be found in Trinidadian English, while a diverse selection of invariant question tags can be observed in the corpus. These tags serve several pragmatic functions and can fulfill multiple functions concurrently. The findings demonstrate that there are differences in text type, structure, and pragmatic purpose. Other factors, such as age or gender, may also have an impact on text type.

Since it is not appropriate to accept stereotypes about language based on popular beliefs without proper evidence, as such observations lack a systematic approach and cannot be verified. Additionally, because the linguistic behavior of men and women has attracted significant attention (Cameron et al., 1988), this study aims to investigate the use of question tags of male and female Facebook users in the understudied Jordanian context. In addition, based on the reviewed studies above, there are still conflicting results regarding the different male and female uses of question tags, so the current study aims to address such points in the Jordanian Arabic context. Moreover, the literature on this topic is exceedingly limited in Arabic, emphasizing the need for greater attention and exploration of this idea. Therefore, this study is an attempt to bridge the existing gap in knowledge and contribute valuable insights into the area. The hypothesis adopted by the study is that Jordanian-Arabic speaking male and female Facebook users employ Arabic question tags with varying functions and forms, and gender plays a significant role in shaping the usage patterns of these linguistic elements in Jordanian Arabic discourse on social media. More specifically, it aims to answer the following research questions:

1. What are the functions of Arabic question tags as used by Jordanian-Arabic speaking male and female Facebook users?

2. What role does gender play in the usage of various forms and functions of question tags among male and female Facebook users in Jordanian Arabic?

The results of the study would contribute to the understanding of the linguistic features of Jordanian Arabic and how gender plays a role in the use of question tags in social media contexts. To answer these research questions, the following methodology was employed.

3. Methodology

A corpus of 515 comments from Facebook male and female users who are identified as Jordanian Arabic speakers was manually built (see Zibin & Al-Tkhayneh, 2019). The type of corpus built for the current study is a specialized corpus which is normally compiled by the researcher to investigate a specific phenomenon or genre (see Zibin, 2020, 2021). Based on the observation of the researchers who are all native speakers of JA, the comments were collected from posts on controversial topics from different Jordanian Facebook pages and collected into a corpus. That is, the researchers copied the entire post or comment if it contained a tag question. Controversial topics were chosen in particular because they often generate intense discussions, varying perspectives, and emotional responses, making them interesting subjects for linguistic and sociolinguistic analysis. Controversial topics also provide valuable insights into how language is used to express opinions, persuade others, or engage in debates. By studying comments related to such topics, researchers can gain a better understanding of the linguistic and discursive strategies employed by individuals in online discussions.

The Jordanian Facebook pages included Roya, Fi:l Zahri, and Bump (see ElShami et al., 2023; Younes & Altakhaineh, 2022). They were chosen because they have more than one million followers, providing ample space for discussions and differing opinions. The posts from which the comments were collected addressed topics such as a public holiday in Jordan, the political situation in Jordan, education, weather forecasts, a concert held in Jordan, and the employment situation, among others. Since the selected Facebook pages are public, no informed consent was needed; however, the users’ anonymity and confidentiality are maintained. The gender of the Facebook users was determined based on the name, profile picture and finally gender indexical language, such as husband, wife etc. The gender of the users was double checked by multiple informants for reliability (see Herring & Paolillo, 2006, p. 445). The collected data were translated and analyzed to identify the different types of question tags that appear in Jordanian Arabic. Then, the functions of the Arabic question tags with regard to gender were analyzed. This analysis was done separately for male and female speakers to determine if there are any differences in how question tags are used based on gender.

To identify the words commonly used for question tags in colloquial Jordanian Arabic, a focus group was formed due to the lack of existing studies specifically addressing this topic. The purpose of the focus group was to facilitate a comprehensive discussion among native Arabic speakers, enabling the exploration and analysis of the various ways in which question tags are expressed in the Arabic language. The focus group included seven male and female professors and part-time lecturers working at the University of Jordan, who possess a high level of proficiency in Arabic and a deep understanding of the sociolinguistic knowledge and usage patterns associated with question tags. The age range of the participants varied, with individuals typically ranging from their late 20s to early 50s, representing a broad spectrum of ages. The study conducted in-depth discussions about the usage of question tags in colloquial Jordanian Arabic. Participants were carefully selected based on their linguistic expertise and familiarity with the relevant Arabic dialects and registers. The inclusion of the focus group significantly enriched the methodological approach of this study, enabling a deeper exploration of the linguistic features and sociolinguistic dynamics related to question tags in Arabic. The insights and information gathered from the focus group discussions were integrated into the analysis and interpretation of the collected data, contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of question tag usage within the Arabic context. As a limitation, it is important to acknowledge that Facebook interactions are virtual, devoid of face-to-face interactions, and in principle, this distinctive mode of communication may significantly influence both the manner and frequency of employing question tags in Jordanian Arabic—a language variety that is spoken and has not undergone a standardization process. The results are discussed subsequently.

4. Data analysis

In addition to the frequency of using question tags by males and females, this section presents some authentic examples extracted from the collected comments from males and females, and the question tags contained in them are grouped thematically according to the functions they serve as follows.

4.1. The commonly used words for question tags in Jordanian Arabic

The analysis of the collected data revealed a few commonly used words for question tags in Arabic. Among the frequently observed question tag words were saˁħ, “right?,” mu: saˁħ, “isn’t that right?,” mu: heik, “correct?,” balla, “by the word of God.” Other frequently encountered question tag words are willa laɁ, “No?,” and willa Ɂna ɣltˁan, “Am I wrong?.” These words are commonly used in colloquial Jordanian Arabic as question tags to seek confirmation or agreement, and they are often added at the end of a statement to transform it into a question.

It was discussed by the participant in the focus group that the specific question tag words used in colloquial Jordanian Arabic can vary depending on the region and dialect being spoken. The observed diversity and variation in the choice of question tag words highlight the richness of the Arabic language across its various dialects and registers. These findings provide valuable insights into the linguistic features and usage patterns within Arabic discourse, enhancing our understanding of the language. The identification of commonly used question tag words contributes to a deeper comprehension of how question tags function in different Arabic dialects, enabling further exploration of the intricate nuances and dynamics of Arabic communication.

4.2. Functions of question tags in Arabic

4.2.1. Softening or mitigating

Question tags can serve as a politeness strategy to soften or mitigate the impact of a statement, especially when it is potentially face-threatening or contentious. By using a tag question, one can signal that they are not trying to impose their opinion or judgment on the listener, or the reader in this study’s case, as they are open to other perspectives. Examples are discussed below:

1) ʕa:di law Ɂabʕatlik ʕala Ɂilma:sindʒar, saˁħ?

You don’t mind if I send you on Messenger, do you?

2) ha:d lħall mu: muna:sib lalʃaba:b, miʃ heik?

This solution isn’t appropriate for the young, is it?

Example 1 employs a tag question to make a polite request for help, implying that the speaker is aware of the inconvenience it may cause and is open to the possibility of a negative response, depending on the context, which includes factors such as the interlocutors, formality, and solidarity. Example 2 employs a tag question to express consideration or concern for people’s preferences or sensitivities, implying that the commentor wants to ensure appropriateness and comfort. The tag question is used to convey a friendly or respectful tone, mitigating the potential impact of the statement. An alternative interpretation could view it as a means of eliciting feedback, primarily seeking approval, from the audience or readers. The function is more about expressing consideration, concern, or respect for the audience’s preferences or sensitivities. Put differently, it is aimed at creating a friendly, respectful tone or ensuring appropriateness and comfort in the conversation.

4.2.2. Confirmation

One of the most common functions of question tags is to seek confirmation or agreement from the interlocutor. By adding a tag question to the end of a statement, one signals that they are uncertain about the validity or relevance of their statement and wants the listener to confirm or contradict it. The examples below demonstrate this.

3) bas ldʒaww miʃ ħilo, saˁħ?

But the weather is not good, right?

4) lwaɁit biʃa:fi ldʒru:ħ, miʃ heik?

Time heals everything, right?

In example 3, the commentor is asking for others’ opinions of the weather and seeks confirmation, and in example 4, the commentor is confirming an already confirmed statement that is usually said in situations where no solutions can be resolved to, but to wait. In both examples, the tag question is used to seek confirmation or affirmation of a statement or assumption, implying that the commentor wants to ensure that their understanding is correct, and that the reader shares it. A response regarding the content of the sentence is often anticipated, with an expectation of either affirmation or negation to confirm or refute the statement’s accuracy. These sentences illustrate how question tags can be a useful linguistic tool to check understanding, clarify information, and avoid confusion, especially in situations where accuracy and efficiency are important.

4.2.3. Hedging

Speakers/commentors use question tags to indicate uncertainty or doubt about a statement they have made or a question they have asked. In other words, they are used to indicate that the speaker is not entirely confident in what they are saying or asking. Consider the following examples:

5) ħaku: lʕutˁleh 4 Ɂajja:m, saˁħ?

They said that the holiday is four days, didn’t they?

6) ha:d Ɂaħsan ħall, saˁħ?

That’s the best solution, isn’t it?

The tag question in examples 5 and 6 invites the reader of the comment to agree or disagree, and it also signals to the reader that the commentor is open to other viewpoints or ideas. The use of hedging in question tags contributes to politeness and diplomatic discourse in communication, and it can also be a way to invite the listener/reader to participate in the conversation by offering their own thoughts or perspective. These examples differ from the confirmation function in that they used question tags to convey uncertainty or doubt about a statement or question made by the speaker or commentor. However, in the confirmation function, question tags are typically attached to a statement that the speaker believes to be true and expects the listener to confirm (positive question tag) or deny (negative question tag) the statement’s accuracy.

4.2.4. Doubt

In some cases, question tags can express hesitation or doubt on the part of the speaker, especially when they are unsure about the accuracy or completeness of their information. By using a tag question, the speaker can show that they are aware of their own uncertainty and want to signal it to the listener.

7) ha:j fikra mni:ħa, mu: saˁħ?

This is a good idea, isn’t it?

8) mfakkrah Ɂinnu biħki: lħaɡi:ɡa, saˁħ?

You think he’s telling the truth, don’t you?

Example 7 uses a tag question to express doubt or skepticism about the commentor’s opinion or judgment, implying that they are not fully convinced or confident. Similarly, example 8 uses a tag question to express the doubt or skepticism about the reader’s belief or assumption, implying that the commentor is not convinced of the truthfulness of the statement.

4.2.5. Convincing

Question tags can be effective tools in convincing others because they often assume agreement and use language that seeks confirmation and reinforces shared beliefs or values. The examples below show this.

9) Ɂinta fa:him leiʃ ha:d lħaki: muhhim, saˁħ?

You understand why this speech is necessary, don’t you?

10) ma: bidna ndˁajjiʕ ha:j lfursˁah, saˁħ?

We don’t want to miss this opportunity, do we?

In example 9, the question tag presupposes that the reader comprehends the necessity of something and aims to strengthen this comprehension. The question tag in example 10 assumes that the listener agrees that the opportunity is worth taking and uses the tag to persuade them to take action.

4.2.6. Inviting response or interaction

Another function of question tags is to invite response or interaction from the listener, especially in social contexts, where maintaining rapport or establishing a connection is important. By using a tag question, the speaker can signal that they are interested in the listener’s/reader’s opinion, feelings, or experience, and want to engage in a dialogue.

11) ka:n ʕardˁ ħilu:, saˁħ?

That was a great presentation, wasn’t it?

12) bitħibb ssija:səh, saˁħ? ʃu: raɁjak bil wadˁəʕ lħa:li?

You’re interested in politics, aren’t you? What do you think of the current situation?

The question tag in example 11 above assumes that the listener agrees that the presentation was great and invites them to share their thoughts on a specific topic. The tag leads to a conversation that encourages interaction. Example 12 assumes that the listener is interested in politics and invites them to share their thoughts on the current situation. The tag encourages interaction by asking for the reader’s perspective. That is, the question tag is subsequently accompanied by an inquiry to elicit a response from the reader and invite the listener or reader to share their thoughts on the topic or situation.

This goes in line with Meyerhoff (2018, p. 250) who suggests that question tags perform numerous functions that can be analyzed through adopting Ochs’s (1992) indexing approach. According to him, one of the main functions of question tags is to continue a conversation by indicating attentiveness, asking questions, and encouraging others to contribute. The structure of question tags directly indexes the act of asking questions and inviting responses.

In all these examples, the tag question is used to express different viewpoints, often with the intention of provoking a response or opening a dialogue. These sentences show how question tags can be a powerful linguistic tool to convey emotions, attitudes, and beliefs, especially in situations where there is a potential for conflict or misunderstanding as they play a significant role in managing the differences in communication, where speakers wait for a response or provoke a discussion.

4.3. Frequency of using question tags be males and females

Derived from the corpus comprising 515 collected comments, the chart below demonstrates a higher usage of question tags by females compared to males:

Women use question tags (N = 69) more frequently than men (N = 31) as a way of seeking confirmation or agreement, expressing uncertainty, or showing politeness and deference. In other words, based on the linguistic analysis of the collected data, in mixed-gender conversations, females exhibit a higher propensity for employing question tags. This may vary depending on the context, culture, and individual differences. Table 1 details the percentage of each genders use of the functions of question tags.

Table 1. The percentage of each genders use of the functions of question tags

	Males	Females
Softening or mitigating	10%	26%
Confirmation	25%	6%
Hedging	12%	18%
Doubt	15%	19%
Convincing	15%	22%
Inviting response or interaction	23%	9%

Based on Table 1 and Figure 1 provided above, it is evident that females are more inclined to use question tags for softening or mitigating their statements compared to males. This aligns with the stereotype that females tend to prioritize polite and harmonious discourse. By employing question tags for softening, females aim to convey empathy and maintain social rapport, contributing to smoother interactions. A significant gender-based difference emerges in the use of question tags for confirmation. Males employ confirmation-oriented question tags substantially more frequently than females. This suggests that males often seek agreement or affirmation from their interlocutors, which may indicate a more assertive or directive communication style.

Figure 1. Question tags usage in the collected corpus.

While both genders employ hedging question tags, females use them slightly more frequently than males. Hedging serves to soften the directness of statements and reduce potential confrontational tones. Females’ use of hedging aligns with communication styles that prioritize cooperation and avoid overt confrontation. The findings also show that both males and females use question tags to express doubt, with a marginal difference in favor of females. This suggests that both genders employ linguistic tools to convey uncertainty or seek reassurance in conversations.

Females employ question tags for convincing more frequently than males. This indicates that females may engage in more persuasive communication, seeking to build consensus, negotiate, or influence decisions. It aligns with the stereotype of females as skilled communicators and consensus builders. The data reveals that males are more likely to use question tags to invite responses or interactions in their conversations. This suggests that males may be more inclined to start a conversation.

The analysis of question tag functions highlights gender-related differences in communication strategies. While some functions, such as softening or mitigating and confirmation, align with traditional gender stereotypes, others, like convincing and inviting response, challenge these stereotypes. It is crucial to note that individual variation within gender groups can be substantial, and these findings represent general trends rather than absolutes. Furthermore, cultural, and contextual factors play a significant role in shaping these linguistic patterns.

5. Discussion

According to the results, females tended to use question tags more frequently than males did. This result, according to the variationist approach, could be interpreted as an example of linguistic variation based on gender, where different social norms, expectations, or identities influence how individuals use language. In addition, this observation could have several implications, such as indicating a tendency for females to seek more social interaction or affirmation in their communication styles.

Specifically, women use more question tags as a strategy to soften or mitigate their statements, express uncertainty, or seek confirmation or agreement from their interlocutors. This could be related to social norms that encourage women to be more polite, accommodating, and deferential in their language use. Another possibility is that women use question tags because they feel less confident or authoritative in their speech and want to avoid sounding too assertive or aggressive, unlike men who are more decisive. This goes in line with Dubois and Crouch’s (1975) which highlights gendered stereotypes and biases that associate assertiveness with masculinity and submissiveness with femininity.

Moreover, it is possible that women use question tags more frequently than men because they have been socialized to adopt a more interactive and collaborative communication style, where showing interest, empathy, and rapport is valued. This could be influenced by cultural expectations, education, and family upbringing. This is in conformity with Cameron’s et al. (1988) which states that the goals of the interaction differ according to relevance of the situation, where occupational roles may be more significant than other social variables.

It can be argued that linguistic differences between the way men and women use language have a significant influence. For example, among the main functions of question tags used by males, based on the data provided are confirmation and inviting response or interaction, while females tend to express more hedging, convincing, and doubt. So, the prominent use of question tags for confirmation by males suggests a communicative style that seeks validation and agreement. This could be interpreted as males often expressing confidence in their statements and desiring acknowledgment of their viewpoints. It aligns with the notion that males may be more assertive and self-assured in their communication. In addition, Males’ tendency to use question tags to invite responses or interactions indicates a communicative approach that fosters dialogue and engagement. They appear to be more inclined to participate in active discussions and encourage others to share their thoughts. This can be seen as a desire for collaborative communication.

On the other hand, females’ higher usage of question tags for hedging aligns with communication styles that prioritize politeness and harmony. By employing hedging, females aim to soften their statements, avoid appearing too assertive, and maintain social rapport. This linguistic feature can foster a cooperative and non-confrontational tone. Moreover, Females’ more frequent use of question tags for convincing suggests their engagement in persuasive communication. This aligns with the stereotype of females as skilled communicators and consensus builders. It indicates a willingness to influence decisions, build consensus, and negotiate.

Corpus-based studies have demonstrated that women use more supportive question tags than men when controlling for function, which proposes that question tags could be associated with femaleness. However, the explanation that women use question tags more frequently because they are more uncertain or seek validation is flawed, as it confuses the function of a speech act with the user’s state of mind. Question tags have linguistic and social functions and can be used to encourage contributions and convey a stance, not just to ask for information. Women are expected to be attentive and encourage contributions in many English-speaking communities as well as Arabic-speaking communities, which may explain why they use more supportive question tags than men. However, although men also use question tags, their use is influenced by different social expectations and attributes, societal norms, power dynamics, and cultural stereotypes. When men employ question tags, their language patterns can be reflective of societal expectations that may encourage assertiveness, self-confidence, and a sense of authority. This is in contrast to women, who, in some social contexts, may be expected to use question tags as a means of politeness or to mitigate the directness of their speech. Therefore, it can be argued that supportive question tags indirectly index female gender (Meyerhoff, 2018). These results are in agreement with those reported by researchers who examined variation in Jordanian Arabic. For example, Hamdieh et al. (2022) reported that females prefer to use one negation pattern rather than the other; hence, the researchers concluded that the variant [mu] could be considered as indicator of femininity in Ammani Arabic (see also Al-Hloul et al., 2023).

Moreover, in written language, one linguistic factor that can impact the utilization of question tags is the choice of sentence structure and punctuation. Females tend to employ sentence structures and punctuation that give statements a more inquisitive quality, akin to a question. Conversely, males often opt for structures and punctuation that lend a statement a more declarative and assertive tone. These differences can manifest in the deployment of question tags, with females more inclined to utilize them to introduce a sense of gentleness or seek concurrence, while males may use them to assert a viewpoint or engage in a challenge or an opposite viewpoint.

Another linguistic factor that can influence the use of question tags is the choice of words. Females tend to use more polite and indirect language, while males tend to use more direct and assertive language (Holmes, 1984). This can affect the use of question tags, with females more likely to use them as a way of seeking confirmation and agreement, while males use them to challenge or confront. Individual differences, such as personality traits and communication styles, may also play a role in the use of question tags. Some women may use question tags more frequently than others, depending on their level of assertiveness, confidence, or interactional goals. Similarly, some men may use question tags more frequently than others, depending on their communication style or the situation.

Social factors can also influence the use of question tags between males and females. For example, this study has shown that females are more likely to use question tags in mixed-gender conversations, as a way of seeking approval or agreement from males who may hold more power or authority. In contrast, males may use question tags less frequently in these situations, as a way of asserting their dominance and avoiding appearing unsure or insecure.

In summary, linguistic and social factors can influence the use of question tags between males and females. Females tend to use rising intonation patterns and more polite and indirect language and may use question tags to seek agreement and approval. Males tend to use falling intonation patterns and more direct and assertive language and may use question tags to challenge or assert dominance. However, it is important to note that these are general tendencies and individual differences will always exist.

6. Conclusion

This study has examined the use of question tags among Jordanian female and male Facebook users and identified some commonly used words for question tags in colloquial Jordanian Arabic. After collecting 515 comments on controversial topics from Jordanian Facebook pages, the analysis showed that question tags serve a variety of functions, including softening or mitigating, confirmation, doubt, hedging, inviting response or interaction, and convincing. In addition, based on the variationist approach, the use of question tags differs between males and females and can be influenced by a variety of linguistic and social factors. Females tend to use question tags more frequently than males, which can be interpreted as an example of linguistic variation based on gender. Females use question tags as a way to soften their statements, express uncertainty, seek confirmation or agreement, or adopt a more interactive and collaborative communication style. Personality traits, such as assertiveness or confidence, can influence how individuals use language and express themselves. Communication styles can also affect the use of question tags. Some individuals may have a more collaborative or interactive communication style, where they seek to engage with their interlocutors and elicit their opinions. This gendered linguistic behavior could be influenced by social norms, gender stereotypes, personal traits, and cultural expectations, as cultural norms and expectations regarding gendered communication play a significant role. Some cultures may emphasize assertiveness in males and politeness in females. The implications of this linguistic variation highlight the need for awareness and sensitivity to gender differences in communication styles in various contexts. However, it is worth noting that the study only focused on a limited set of data and did not explore the underlying reasons for the gender gap, so further research may be necessary to confirm and contextualize the findings.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Mohammad Yousef Alsaraireh

Mohammad Yousef Alsaraireh is an Assistant Professor of English Language and Linguistics at Al-Balqa Applied University, Kerak branch, Kerak, Jordan. His research areas include, but are not limited to, applied linguistics, second language acquisition, and discourse analysis. He has published several papers in different journals such as the International Journal of Linguistics, International Journal of Academic Research, and Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences.

Contact information: Balqa Applied University Kerak. Jordan, Fax [phone] email: [email protected]

Abdel Rahman Mitib Altakhaineh

Abdel Rahman Mitib Altakhaineh is an Assistant Professor of English Language and Linguistics at The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. His research interests encompass the areas of morphology, lexical semantics, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and technology in language learning. He has published numerous research papers in journals such as Lingua, Languages, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Studia Linguistica, Language and Cognition, Canadian Journal of Linguistics, Applied Linguistics Review, and others.

Contact information: University of Jordan Queen Rania St., Amman, Jordan, P.O. Box 11942 email: [email protected]

Lama Ahmed Khalifah

Lama Khalifah is a part-time lecturer at the University of Jordan in Amman, Jordan. She obtained her MA in Linguistics from the University of Jordan. Her research interests include translation, discourse analysis, pragmatics, and metaphor. Additionally, she works as a full-time translator at EY in Amman, Jordan.

Contact information: University of Jordan Queen Rania St., Amman, Jordan, P.O. Box 11942 email: [email protected]