本論文目的在分析男性及女性在不同的電腦溝通媒介中的語言使用。此研究挑選了三種不同的電腦溝通媒介：網誌、電子佈告欄，以及即時溝通系統。收集的資料包括60篇網誌文章(30篇男性作者，30篇女性作者)，60篇電子佈告欄文章(30篇男性作者，30篇女性作者)，和60篇即時溝通系統的對話內容(20篇男男對話，20篇女女對話，20篇男女對話)。七組語言變項包括語碼混合、語言創意、問句、粗俗語、強調語、禮貌語，以及回饋語。此外，此研究亦分析15種電腦溝通媒介使用者的互動方式：提供相關經驗、開玩笑、鼓勵、同意、感到有趣、讚美、安慰、感謝、改正、建議、同理、祝福、問題(作為促進互動方法)、問題(作為尋求資訊方法)，以及對某人表達愛意或想念。本研究包含質與量的分析以調查男女語言使用是否有顯著差異，並查看語言特徵在不同的語境中是否有不同功能。
　　研究結果顯示男女使用語言的差異在網誌及電子佈告欄中(非同步電腦溝通媒介)沒有顯著差異。相反地，在即時溝通系統(同步電腦溝通媒介)中，男女在語言使用上有顯著差異。非同步電腦溝通媒介似乎更像口語會話，因而造成性別在語言使用上的顯著差異。至於非同步電腦溝通媒介可能是個無性別的環境。另外，觀眾也可能會影響電腦溝通媒介使用者用語言的方式。在非同步電腦溝通媒介中，文章可被不熟悉的人看到。因此，使用者可以隱藏他們真實的性別身分。然而，像即時溝通系統這樣的同步電腦溝通媒介較為隱私，使用者因而較願意透過語言展現他們真實的性別身分。此現象可解釋為何在同步電腦溝通媒介中，不同性別有顯著的語言差異，但在同步電腦溝通媒介中，卻沒有顯著的差異。

The study aims to investigate linguistic use of males and females in different kinds of computer-mediated communication (CMC). Three types of CMC are selected: weblogs, Bulletin Board System (BBS), and instant messaging. The collected data included 60 weblogs (30 male writers, 30 female writers), 60 BBS articles (30 male writers, 30 female writers), and 60 instant messaging talks (20 male-to-male talks, 20 female-to-female talks, and 20 male-to female talks). Seven linguistic variables include code-mixing, language creativity, question, vulgarity, intensifier, politeness, and minimal response. Moreover, fifteen ways of interaction among CMC users are also analyzed: offering related experiences, criticisms with fun, encouragement, agreement, feeling fun, compliments, comforts, appreciations, corrects, advice, empathy, blessings, questions as facilitators, questions as information seeking device, and expressing love/feelings of missing someone .Both quantitative and qualitative analyses are conducted to see if there is significant difference in linguistic use between genders, and if functions of linguistic features vary in different contexts.
　　It is found that the use of linguistic features and interaction between males and females has insignificant difference in weblogs and BBS (asynchronous CMC). On the contrary, significant difference exists between males and females in instant messaging (synchronous CMC). We can infer that synchronous CMC is more similar to oral conversation, thus gender difference in linguistic use is salient. As for asynchronous CMC, it may be a gender-free environment.

Adam, K. L. and Ware, N. C. 1995. Sexism and the English language: The linguistic implications of being a woman. In J. Freemen (ed.), Women: A Feminist Perspective. Mayfield, CA: Mountain View.
Arnold, J., Miller, H. 1999. Gender and web home pages. from: http://ess.ntu.ac.uk/miller/cyberpsych/cal99.htm.
Baron, Naomi S. 2008. Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World.
Bell, Allan. 1984. Language Style as Audience Design: Language in Society, 13(2). 145-204.
Bell, Allan. 1984. Back in style: Re-working Audience Design. In Penelope Eckert & John R Rickford (eds), Style and Sociolinguistic Variation. New York: Cambridge University Press. 139-69.
Bilous, F. R.& Krauss, R. M. 1988: Dominance and accommodation in the conversational behaviors of same- and mixed- gender dyads. Language and Communication, 8, 183-194.
Black, S. D., Levin, J. A., Mehan, H. and C. N. Quinn. 1983. Real and non-real time interaction: Unraveling the multiple threads of discourse. Discourse Processes, 6, 59--75.
Blood, Rebecca. 2002. "Weblog Ethics", The Weblog Handbook: Practical Advice on Creating and Maintaining Your Blog. Cambridge: Perseus Publishing.
Bokamba, Eyamba G. 1989. Are there syntactic constraints on code-mixing? World Englishes, 8.3:277-92.
Brown, Penelope and Levinson, Stephen. 1978. Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena, in Goody, Esther (ed.) Questions and Politeness. London: Cambridge University Press.
Bucholts, Mary and Hall Kira. 2004. Language and identity. In Alessandro Duranti (ed.), A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology. Massachusetts: Blackwell.
Butler, Judith P. 1990. Gender Trouble. USA: Routledge.
Calvert, S. L. 2002. Identity Construction on the Internet: In S. L. Calvert, A. B. Jordan and R. R. Cocking (ed.), Children in the Digital Age: Influences of Electronic Media on Development. Wesport, Connecticut: Praeger.
Cameron, D., McAlinden, F., & K. O’Leary, K. 1989. Lakoff in context: The social and Linguistic Functions of Tag Questions. In J. Coates & D. Cameron (eds.), Women in Their Speech Communities: New Perspectives on Language and Sex. New York: Longman.
Cameron, Deborah. 1997. Performing Gender Identity: Young Men’s Talk and the Construction of Heterosexual Masculinity. In Johnson, S. and Meinhof, U. H. (ed.) Language and Masculinity. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Carli, L. L. 1990: Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941-951.
Chen, Chiu-Ju. 1997: The Differences between Men and Women in Written Chinese Narratives. Thesis: Taipei: Fu Jen Catholic University.
Chen, N. S., H.-C. Ko, Kinshuk, and T. Lin. 2005. A model for synchronous learning using the Internet. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 42 (2): 181-194.
Chesebro, J.W., & Bonsall, D.G.. 1989. Computer-Mediated Communication: Human Relationships in a Computerized World. Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press.
Chuang, Po-Kai 2006: A Study on Chinese Grade Children’s Conversational Styles in Same-sex vs. Mixed-sex Dyads. Thesis: Tainan: National Cheng Kung University.
Coates, Jennifer. 1993. Women, men and language: A sociolinguistic account of gender differences in language. New York: Longman.
Collot, Milena, and Belmore, Nancy. 1996. Electronic Language: A New Variety of English. In Susan C. Herring (Ed), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultral perspectives. USA: John Benjamins B. V.
Constantin, C., Kalyanaraman, S., Stavrositu, C., and Wagoner, N. 2002: Impression Formation Effects in Moderated Chatrooms: An Experimental Study of Gender Differences. Paper presented at the 88th annual meeting of the National Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.
Crosby, F. and Nyquist, L. 1977: The female register: An empirical study of Lakoff’s hypotheses: Language in Society, 6, 313-22.
Crystal, D. 2001: Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Klerk, Vivian. 1997. How taboo are taboo words for girls? Language in Society, 21: 277-289.
Duncan, S. 1974. On the structure of speaker-auditor interaction during speaking turns. Language in Society, 2, 161-180.
Eckert, Penelope. 1989. Jocks & Burnouts: Social Categories and Identity in the High School. Teacher College Press: New York.
Erikson, E. H. 1993: Childhood and Society. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Fishman, P. 1978. Interaction: the work women do. Social Problems 25:397-406.
Fishman, Pamela. 1983. Interaction: The work women do. In Thorne, Kramarae and Henley (Eds.): Language, Gender and Society. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Fellegy, Anna. 1995. Patterns and Functions of Minimal Response. American Speech 70(2):186-99.
Festa, Paul. 2003. Blogging comes to Harvard. CNET News.com. from http://news.com.com/2008-1082-985714.html?tag=fd_nc_1.
Freed, Alice and Alice Greenwood. 1996: Women, men, and type of talk: What makes the differences? Language in Society, 25, 1-26.
Freud, S. 1989. Civilization and Its Discontents: New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
Giles, H. and Powestand, P. F. 1975. Speech Style and Social Evaluation. London: Academic Press.
Goellnicht, Donald C. 1992. Tang Ao in America: Male Subject Positions in China Men. In Amy Ling (Eds.): Reading the Literatures of Asian America: Philadelphia: Temple University.
George, R. 1995. Open and distance education as social practice. Distance Education. v16. 24-42.
Graddol, D. & Swann, J. 1989. Gender Voices. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.
Guernsey, L. 2001. Message to Marketers: RU4 Real? New York: The New York Times.
Guiller, Jane& Durndell Alan 2006: Students’ linguistic behavior in online discussion groups: Does gender matter? Computers in Human Behavior 23: 2007. 2240-2255.
Gumperz, John J., and Eleanor Herasimchuk. 1972. The conversational analysis of social meaning: A study of classroom interaction. Sociolinguistics: Current Trends and Prospects, GURT 1972, ed. by Roger W. Shuy, 99-134. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Harasim, L. 1990: Introduction to Online Education. In Harasim L. (Ed.), Online Education: perspectives on a new environment: New York, Praeger Publishers.
Hass, A. 1979: Male and Female Spoken Language Differences: Stereotypes and Evidence: Psychological Bulletin, 3, 616-26.
Henley, N. M., and Kramarae, C. 1994: Gender, power and miscommunication. In C. Roman, S. Juhasz, & C. Miller (eds.), The Women in Language Debate: A Sourcebook. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
Henning, J. 2003. The Blogging Iceberg: Of 4.12 Million Weblogs, Most Little Seen and Quickly Abandoned. Braintree, MA: Pursues Development Corporation. London: Arnold.
Herbert, R., 1991, “The sociology of compliment work in Polish and English: An ethnocontrastive study of Polish and English compliments,” Multilingua, 10 (4): 381-402.
Herring, Susan C. 1993. Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication: Electronic Journal of Communication, 3(2).
Herring, Susan C. 2000. Gender differences in CMC: Findings and implications. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Journal (formerly Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Newsletter), 18 (1).
Herring, Susan C. 2001. Computer-mediated discourse. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
Herring, Susan C. 2002. Computer-mediated communication on the Internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 109-168.
Herring, Susan C., Scheidt, L. A., Bonus, S. & Wright, E. 2004. Bridging the gap: A genre analysis of weblogs. Proceedings of the Thirty-seventh Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-37). Los Alamitos: IEEE Press.
Hirschamn, L. 1994: Female-male differences in conversational interaction. Language in Society, 23, 427-442.
Holmes, Janet. 1988. Paying Compliments: a Sex-preferential Politeness Strategy. Journal of Pragmatics: 12. 445-65.
Holmes, Janet. 1992. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York: Longman.
Holmes, Janet. 1995. Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman.
Hosman, L. A. 1989. The evaluative consequences of hedges, hesitations, and intensifiers: Powerful and powerless speech styles. Human Communication Research, 15, 383-406.
Hu, Chingchi. 2002. Question Tags in Taiwan Mandarin: Discourse Functions and Grammaticalization. Thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Hu, Y., Smith, V., Westbrook, N., & Wood, J. F. 2003. Friendships through IM: Examining the Relationship between Instant Messaging and Intimacy. Paper presented at the Communication Technology and Policy Division of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC), Kansas City, MO.
Huff, Cynthia A. 1996. Textual boundaries: Space in Nineteenth-century women's manuscript dairies. In Suzanne L. Bunkers & Cynthia A. Huff (eds.). Inscribing the Daily: Critical Essays on Women's Diaries. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Huffaker, David. A. 2004. Spinning yarns around a digital fire: Storytelling and dialogue among youth on the Internet: Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 1.
Huffaker, David. A and Calvert, Sandra L. 2005: Gender, identity, and language use in teenage blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2), article 1.
Huffaker, David. A. 2006. Teen Blogs Exposed: The Private Lives of Teens Made Public. Presented at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in St. Louis, Mo., February 16-19.
from:http://www.davehuffaker.com/papers/Huffaker-2006-AAAS-Teen_Blogs.pdf.
Hughes, S. 1992. Expletives of lower working-class women. Language in Society 21: 291-303.
Jaffe, J. M., Lee, Y., Huang, L., & Oshagan, H. 1995. Gender, Pseudonyms, and CMC: Masking Identities and Baring Souls. Paper presented at the 45th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association (ICA) in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA; May 1995. Presently submitted for publication.
James, D., & Clarke, S. 1993. Women, men, and interruptions: A critical review. In D. Tannen (ed.), Gender and Conversational Interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Johnson. 1980. Questions and role responsibility in four professional meetings. Anthropological Linguistics: 22. 66-76.
Joinson, Adam N. 2002. Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: the role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology. v31. 177-192.
Kramarae, Cheris. 1981. Women and men speaking: Frameworks for analysis. Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers
Kunsmann, Peter. 1998. Gender, Status and Power in Discourse Behavior of Men and Women. Linguistik online 5, 1/00.
from http://www.linguistik-online.com/1_00/KUNSMANN.HTM
Labov, William. 1966. The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguisticds.
Lakoff, Robin. 1975. Language and women’s place. New York: Harper and Row.
Lakoff, Robin. 1990. Talking power: The politics of language in our lives. New York: Basic Books.
Lee, C. 2003. How does instant messaging affect interaction between the genders? : The Mercury Project for Instant Messaging Studies at Stanford University.
Li, Yi-hui. 2004. Gender Differences in Conversational Styles among Senior High School Students in Taiwan. Thesis: Taipei: Fu Jen Catholic University.
Lin, Rung-zi. 2007. Synchronous and Asynchronous CMC: Textual Features and Effects on Writing. Thesis. HsinChu: National Chiao Tung University.
Lin, Shin-Yi. 2006. Response Tokens in Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from MSN Talk. Thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University
Lindsey, L. L. 1997: Gender Roles: a Sociological perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: prentice Hall.
Liu, Wen-lan. 1996. Intensity Devices in BBS Postings and in Forums of Printed Newspapers: A Comparative Study. Master Thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Maltz, D. N. and Borker, R. A. 1982: A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication. In J. J. Gumperz (Ed.): Language and social identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Matheson and Zanna. 1990. Computer-mediated communications: the focus is on me. Social Science Computer Review. v8. 1-12.
McGinnis, Theresa, Goodstein-Stolzenberg, Andrea, and Saliani, Elisabeth Costa 2007. Online Spaces of Transnational Youth as Sites of Creative and Sophisticated Literacy and Identity Work. Linguistic and Education: 18. 283-304.
McMillan, J. R., Clifton, A. K., McGrath, D. and Gale, W. S. 1977: Women’s language: Uncertainty or interpersonal sensitivity and emotionality? Sex Roles, 3, 545-559.
Michaelson, Greg and Margit Pohl. 2001. Gender in email based co-operative problem solving. In: Green, E., Adams, A. (eds.), Virtual Gender, Routledge, London.
Miller, J. & A. Durndell. 2004. Gender, language and computer-mediated communication. In: Morgan, K., Brebbia, C.A., Sanchez, J., Voiskounsky, A. (eds.). Human perspectives in the Internet society: culture, psychology and gender, WIT Press, Southampton.
Mulac, A., Studley, L. B. & Blau, S. 1990. The gender-linked language effect in primary and secondary students’ impromptu essays: Sex Roles, 23, 439-469.
Mulac, A., Wiemann, J. M., Widenmann, S. J. & Gibson, T. W. 1988: Male/female language differences and effects in same-sex and mixed-sex dyads: The gender-linked language effect. Communication Monographs, 55, 315-335.
Murray, D. E. 2000. Protean communication: The language of computer-mediated communication. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 397-421.
Nishimura, Yukiko. 2007. Linguistic Innovations and Interactional Features in Japanese BBS Communication. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), The Multilingual Internet. New York: Oxford University Press.
O’Barr, W. M. 1982. Linguistic evidence: Language, power, and strategy in the courtroom. New York: Academic.
Parsons, Tailcott. 1991. The Social System: with a New Preface by Bryan S. Turner. London: Routledge.
Postmes, T., & Spears, R. 2002. Behavior online: Does anonymous computer communication reduce gender inequality? Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1073-1083.
Quirk, R. & Greenbaum, S. 1973: A Concise Grammar of Contemporary English. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Raven, James. 1992. Judging New Wealth: Popular Publishing and Responses to commerce in England. USA: Oxford University Press.
Reicher, S.D., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161-198.
Reid, Julie. 1995. A study of gender differences in minimal responses. Journal of Pragmatics 24:489-512.
Richardson, Helen J. and Sheila French. 2000. Education On-Line: What's In It for Women?, Proceedings of the IFIP TC9/WG9.1 Seventh International Conference on Woman, Work and Computerization: Charting a Course to the Future. 300. June 08-11.
Rodino, M. 1997. Breaking out of binaries: Reconceptualizing gender and its relationship to language in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(3).
Rosenblum, K. E. 1986. Revelatory or purposive? Making sense of a ‘female register’ Semiotica, 59, 157-170.
Ruble, D. and Martin, C. 1998. Gender development, in W. Damon and N. Eisenberg (ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Social, Emotional, and personality Development, 5th ed., Vol. 3. New York: Wiley.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., and Jefferson, G. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696-735.
Savicki, V., Lingenfelter, D., & Kelley, M., 1996. Gender language style and group composition in Internet discussion groups. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication{online} 2.
from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue3/savicki.html Accessed 14.01.2000.
Scheidt, L. A. 2006. Adolescent diary weblogs and the unseen audience. In Buckingham, D. and Willett, R. (ed.), Digital generations: Children, young people and new media. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Shih, Yu-Hwei. 1995. Socio-pragmatic motivations for code-switching in Taiwan: A research project report for National Science Council, Taiwan.
Simikies-Bullock, J. A. & Wildman, B. G. 1991: An investigation into the relationships between gender and language: Sex role, 24, 149-160.
Stauffer, T. 2002：Blog On: Building Online Communities with Web Logs. McGraw-Hill/Osborne.
Spitzer, M. 1986. Writing style in computer conferences. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications PC 29, 19-22.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. 1986. Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492-1512.
Stubbe, M. 1991: Talking at cross-purposes: The effect of gender on New Zealand primary schoolchildren’s interaction strategies in pair discussion. Wellington: Victoria University.
Stewart, C. M., Shields, S. F., Monolescu, D., & Taylor, J. C., 1999. Gender and participation in synchronous CMC: an IRC case study. Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 7.
Su, Hsi-Yao. 2003. The multilingual and multi-orthographic Taiwan-based Internet: Creative uses of writing systems on college-affiliated BBSs. Journal of computer-mediated communication, 9(1) November.
Su, Hsi-Yao. 2009. Code-switching in managing a face-threatening communicative task: Footing and ambiguity in conversational interaction in Taiwan. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(2), 372-392.
Tannen, Deborah. 1984. Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Tannen, Deborah. 1990. You Just don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Ballantine Books.
Thomson, Rob , Tamar Murachver and James Green. 2001. Where is the gender in gendered language?. Psychological Science. v12. 171-175.
Trudgill, P. and Cheshire, J. 1998. A Reader in Sociolinguistics. Volume1. Multilingualism and Variation. London: Edward Arnold.
Walther, J.B. 1992. Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52-90.
Wang, Yu-Fang, Aya Katz, and Chih-Hua Chen 2003: Thinking as saying: shuo (‘say’) in Taiwan Mandarin conversation and BBS talk. Language Sciences, 25, 457-488.
Wardhaugh, Ronald. 2002. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Weisband, S. P. 1992: Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53, 352-380.
Werry, Christopher C. 1996. Linguistic and Interactional Features of Internet relay Chat. In S. C. Herring (ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives. USA: John Benjamins.
West, C. & Zimmerman, D. H. 1983: Small insults: A study of interruptions in cross sex conversations between unacquainted persons. In B. Thorne, C. Kramarae and N. Henley (ed.), Language, gender and society. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Widjaja, C. S. 1997. A study of date refusal: Taiwanese females vs. American females. University of Hawai’i Working Papers in ESL 15(2), 1-43.
Winer, D 2003: What makes a weblog a weblog? from http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/whatMakesAWeblogAWeblog
Witmer, Diane. F and Katzman, Sandra L. 1997: On-line smiles: Does gender make a difference in the use of graphic accents? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2 (4)
Woods, N. 1988: Talking shop: sex and status as determinants of floor apportionment in a work setting: In Coates, 3. & Cameron, D. (eds) Women in their speech communities, 141- 157. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
Yan, Yun-liang. 2000. Nice "Typing" to You! Gender Differences between Male's and Female's Conversational Styles on BBS in Taiwan: Thesis. Kaohsiung: National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Yates, S. J. 1996. Oral and written linguistic aspects of computer-conferencing. In S. C. Herring (ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives. USA: John Benjamins.
Yates, S. J. 2001. Researching Internet interaction: sociolinguistics and corpus analysis. In: Wetherell, M., Taylor, S., Yates, S.J. (eds.), Discourse as data: a guide for analysis, Sage Publications, London. p93-146.
Yule, George. 2003. The Study of Language. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Zueco, T. 2003. R U 2 Old 4 This?: Get used to it, it’s how kids talk now: St. Petersburg Times.