The Impact of Power Distance and Gender on the Choice of Disagreement Strategies in Saudi Colloquial Arabic

The purpose of this study was to examine the potential impact of power distance and gender on the choice of disagreement strategies by speakers of Saudi colloquial Arabic (henceforth “SCA”) in same- and cross-gender interactions. A Discourse Completion Test (DCT) consisting of three situations reflecting the three different combinations of power status (high-low, low-high, and equal) was used to collect the data. To have a comprehensive account of the impact of gender, four groups of participants (Male®Male, Male®Female, Female®Female and Female®Male) were included. Each group consisted of 40 participants. The collected data were compared and analyzed using Maíz-Arévalo’s (2014) taxonomy of disagreement strategies. The data analysis revealed two patterns; firstly, when there was no power distance between interlocuters or when the speaker expressing disagreement had a higher power position than the addressee, gender appeared to have an impact on the choice of disagreement strategies by the speakers of SCA. When disagreeing with the same gender, both male and female speakers of SCA tended to use strong disagreement strategies but mitigated disagreement strategies when disagreeing with the other gender; and secondly, when the speaker expressing disagreement had a lower power position than the addressee, the gender of either the speaker or the addressee did not seem to have an impact on the choice of disagreement strategies. In this pattern, power appeared to be the decisive factor which both male and female speakers of SCA tended to use in mitigated disagreement strategies regardless of the gender of the addressee.