Ronald Macaulay, a professor of linguistics at Pitzer College in Claremont, C.A.; claims that there are no differences between males and females when it comes to speech. Macaulay starts by presenting his opposite view, he first quotes six paragraphs from Otto Jespersen’s book; Language: It’s nature, development and Origin, he then claims that works of fiction are “stereotype reinforcers,” after that, he returns to revealing more opposing views in which he counters, opposing views such as Professor Dorothea McCarthy’s article and an unknown “respected” scholar. Macaulay’s essay lacks coherence and supporting evidence, it also has too much of the opposing views and not enough information about the opposing views. First things first, before Macaulay quoted Jespersen’s book, he…show more content… Also, Otto Jespersen’s book was written in the 1920’s, a time frame that is outdated and lacks research and studies. There might be recent studies that are based on modern science that can either prove or disprove Jespersen’s claims, Macaulay could’ve used a recent study to support that Jespersen’s claims are “nonsense,” or could’ve just used a recent opposing view and counter it with modern evidence. Ronald Macaulay claimed that novelists use different verbs and adjectives for male characters and female characters in order to make the novel seem more realistic, and by doing that, they’re reinforcing the stereotypes of men and women speaking differently. Macaulay never proved that men and women speaking differently is a stereotype, therefore, he can’t claim that the use of novelists to certain verbs and adjectives are reinforcers of stereotype. Macaulay presented some examples from certain novels about the difference between the use of verbs and adjectives but he didn’t mention from where he claimed those examples, for all we know, he could’ve made up the whole