Analyzing Subjectivity in University Students’ Spoken Discourse
Abstract
Subjectivity, defined as the presence of personal bias or emotional inclination, often undermines the objectivity required in academic settings. While extensive research has examined subjectivity in written communication, the subjective nature of oral discourse among university students remains an underexplored area. This study investigates the manifestations of subjectivity in the oral discourse of university students through textual analysis of interview data. Grounded in Émile Benveniste’s theory of subjectivity which posits that language is inherently shaped by the speaker’s perspective this research also adopts Alan McKee’s framework for textual analysis to identify linguistic markers of subjectivity. The analysis reveals a prevalent use of self-referential pronouns, emotionally charged vocabulary, and personalized expressions, indicating a consistent pattern of subjective language in students’ spoken interactions. These findings suggest that oral discourse in academic environments is often compromised by personal biases, potentially limiting critical engagement and scholarly rigor. The study highlights the need for targeted interventions in higher education curricula to enhance students’ oral communication skills, particularly by promoting objective discourse practices. Integrating structured training in rhetoric and critical speaking may help cultivate a more balanced and analytical academic culture. Moreover, this research paves the way for future studies to explore the impact of pedagogical strategies on reducing subjectivity in academic speech across various disciplines. Such inquiries may offer deeper insights into how students' spoken communication can be refined to meet the intellectual standards of higher education.
Keywords
- Subjectivity
- Oral Discourse
- University Students
- Emile Benveniste
- Textual Analysis
- Academic Communication
- Linguistic Bias
- Higher Education
- Communication Training
- Objective Speech
Views & Downloads Statistics (Last 12 Months)
Monthly performance and trends of article views and downloads
References 10 References
Bibliography and cited literature of the article
-
1
Benveniste, E. (1971). Subjectivity in Language. In: M. E. Meek (Ed.). Problems in General Linguistics (pp. 223-230). Coral Gables: FL: University of Miami Press
-
2
Gee, J. P. (1990). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Idealogy in Discourses, Critical perspectives on Literacy and Education . London: New York.
-
3
Hyland, K. (2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(8), 1091–1112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00035-8
-
4
Hyland, K. (2005, may). Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365
-
5
Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The Discoursal Construction of Identity in Academic Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.5
-
6
Lyons, J. (1982). Deixis and subjectivity. In R. Jarvella & W. Klein (Eds.), Speech, place and action (pp. 101–124). New York: Wiley
-
7
McKee, A. (2003). Textual Analysis. A beginners guide. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857020017
-
8
Pavlenko, A. (2002). Emotion and the body in Russian and English discourses of emotion. Multilingua, 21(1), 45–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2002.004
-
9
Siegesmund, R. (2008). Subjectivity. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 844–845). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
-
10
Tang, R., & John, S. (1999). The “I’ in Identity: Exploring Writer Identity in Student Academic Writing through the First Person Pronoun”. English for Specific Purposes. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00009-5
