Dr Sylvia Shaw Middlesex University

 An ESRC funded project that aims to investigate gender and linguistic participation in the ‘new’ devolved institutions of the UK: The Scottish parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly  ESRC small grant (£96,000)  October 2009 – April 2011  Application submitted April 2009, decision September 2009

 Previous research (Shaw 2000, 2006)  On linguistic participation: Adams (1992); Edelsky and Adams (1990); Walsh (2001); Wodak (2009) Eckert (1998: 67) argues that women moving into prestigious occupations and especially elite institutions ‘are generally seen as interlopers and are at greater pains to prove that they belong’. She claims that women must pay ‘meticulous attention to symbolic capital’ and must ‘develop authority through continual proof of worthiness’.

The central objective is to further an understanding of the factors affecting the political representation of women in these assemblies by examining the linguistic cultural norms and practices in debates, and to establish the extent to which these are gendered. Data  Observation of debates (and the institutions)  45 Interviews with participants  Quantitative analysis of debate turns (70 hours of debates in each institution)  Close analysis of the debate ‘floor’

 Women and men take part in all different types of speaking turn in the ‘new’ institutions, and break rules (in proportion to their numbers);  The institutions are described by participants as being informal, not overly hierarchical and having some flexibility in debates;  The debating chamber in the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament are characterised by participants as being ‘neither male nor female’, but the Northern Ireland Assembly is characterised as being ‘male dominated’;  Women (and some men) in the institutions report that the negative representation of women politicians in the media is the biggest threat to women’s representation. Women experience ‘hyper-visibility’ in relation to their private lives, public behaviour and appearance.

 1) Subject: Previous ESRC research programmes on ‘Devolution’ (1999 – 2003); and on Women in Public Life ( )  2) Value for Money  3) Impacts  4) Interdisciplinary (linguistics/political science)  5) Operates within a specific time (the end of a parliamentary term of office in 2011)

 Local impacts on practices in institutions, and for professionals within them.  National impacts on policy within a particular profession/ type of institution.  Global impacts and opportunities for comparative studies.  Gender, equality and ‘equal opportunities’ (policy, practices, consultancy).  General public/interest.

Opportunities:  A corpus of linguistic data for future research  ‘track record’ for future funding  Peer review college  Connections with peers and future collaborations Constraints:  The researcher’s role in relation to impacts: Trainer? Publicist?  Giving people the results they don’t want to hear!  Interdisciplinary research (how much do disciplines talk to and more importantly, listen to each other?)

 Comparative work with other researchers internationally;  Linguistic research on the functions of parliamentary committees (scrutiny etc.) with a view to a further gender and language project;  Explore different sources of funding e.g. The Nuffield Foundation.

The Proposal:  Glean as much information from informal networks as possible;  Justify everything;  Attempt to answer: ‘Why this? Why now?’ The Project:  Planning/thinking ahead (e.g. data archives, transcription)  Writing and publications  Think about the details of the budget  The mechanics of the award e.g. project appraised one year later; impact report six months later

Dr Sylvia Shaw Middlesex University