Search

Five studies examined implicit (IAT) attitudes toward the slurs n***er and n***a among Black and White Americans (total N = 3,226). Both groups showed strong implicit negativity toward n***er/a combined relative to socially acceptable contrast terms such as Black or African American. Controlling for baseline Black-White race attitudes, Black Americans who engaged in conscious reappropriation exhibited similar implicit negativity toward n***er/a as White Americans. When the rhotic and non-rhotic forms were directly contrasted, n***er was more implicitly negative than n***a, with Black Americans distinguishing the two more strongly than did White Americans. However, even Black American reappropriators showed implicit negativity toward n***a relative to Black. In sum, both n***er and n***a evoke automatic negative meaning in a broad sample of Americans today. At the same time, the relatively more positive meaning of n***a over n***er demonstrates the power of reappropriation to wrest control of word meaning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kukho ingcinga ephosayo, neyalatha ukuba amagama ocalucalulo nathoba isidima sabaNtsundu kwimeko yoMzantsi Afrika omtsha, anokuqondwa ngeenkcazobungcali zesimantiki nepragmatiki kuphela. Loo nto yenza kubekho ukuqhwalela ekuqondeni iintsingiselo ezondele nzulu kwimbali nocalucalulo olwalugquba eMzantsi Afrika. Oku, kungaphezu kokuba kusekho iimpawu nemikhwa yokusetyenziswa kolwimi olucalucalulayo kuMzantsi Afrika omtsha, nto leyo ethi ithibaze kwaye ithintele intsebenziswano nokubumbana phakathi kweentlanga ngeentlanga. Ngesi sizathu, eli nqaku lijolise ekuphicotheni nzulu nasekucubunguleni iintsingiselo eziminxiselwe kwigama elithi kaffir elisetyenziswa kakhulu kwimeko yoMzantsi Afrika ukubulala isidima nokutshabalalisa ubuntu kwisizwe somgquba. Ukuchongwa kweli gama kutyhalwa kukungaqondakali kobunzulu beentsingiselo ezincathame kulo, into ke leyo ethi ikhokelele ekubeni abaMhlophe bangabonakalisi kurhoxa nganeno ngokungqamene nokusebenzisa ulwimi oluthoba isidima sabaNtsundu. Ukuphalisa iingxoxobunzululwazi zeli nqaku, inkcazobungcali yobuhlanga isetyenziswa njengegqwesileyo ukuze kuvele iintsingiselo ezincathame kwigama elithi kaffir kwimeko yoMzantsi Afrika. Iziphumo kunye neengxoxobunzululwazi zeli nqaku zibonisa ukuba eli gama lithi lithunuke, livuselele iinkumbulo kwaye lisebenze njengesithuko kwisizwe sabaNtsundu ngenxa yezenyeliso elizimumethileyo. Phakathi kwezinye iintsingiselo, kuvela ngakumbi nangakumbi ukuba igama eli linentsingiselo ejolise ekwenzeni abaNtsundu izicamba zokuxangxathwa. Ngamazwi aqukumbelayo, kuyabonakala ukuba ulwimi olucalucalulayo lumumethe imbali etyebileyo. Loo nto ibonise ukuba olu lwimi kusafuneka ukuba luphicothwe ngokubanzi kuxhathiswe ngeembonobunzululwazi zaseAfrika. Okungamandla, kugxininiswa ukuba asingombono omhle ukuyeka imbali yabaNtsundu emumethwe lulwimi icime, njengoko ubani enokuqaphela ukuba ulwimi lusisisele senyathi. A critical examination of interwoven meanings in the word 'kaffir' using critical race theory There is a misconception which underlines that the linguistic terms of discrimination for the Ntsundu people in the new South African context can only be understood through the theories of semantics and pragmatics. This makes it challenging to understand the meanings that are interwoven in the history of apartheid that prevailed in South Africa. This is more than the reality that there are still lingering signs and behaviours where discriminatory language is used in the new South Africa. This delays and prevents cooperation and inclusivity among different races. For this reason, this article aims to critically examine the profoundly entrenched meanings attached to the word kaffir which has been widely used in the South African context to distort and degrade the nobility and humanity of the Ntsundu people. The preference for this word is motivated by the ambiguity of the depth of the meanings concealed in it. This is what leads to the fact that white people do not seem to discontinue its use, and this degrades the dignity of the Ntsundu people. To advance the discussions of this article, critical race theory is used as a lens to uncover the meanings hidden in the word kaffir in the context of South Africa. The results and discussion in this article underscore that this word is painful, evokes memories of colonialism and serves as an insult to the Ntsundu nation. Among other meanings, it becomes clear that this word has a meaning aimed at making Ntsundu people the target of mockery and humiliation. In closing, it is obvious that discriminatory language has a rich history. This is indicative that this language still needs to be exhaustively critiqued by scholarship and supported by African theoretical perspectives. In addition to this, it is underscored here that it is not an appropriate idea to let the history of the Ntsundu people reproduced by language be erased, as one may observe that language serves as a part of knowledge and history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Longstanding philosophical debate over the semantics of proper names has yet to examine the distinctive behavior of deadnames, names that have been rejected by their former bearers. The use of these names to deadname individuals is derogatory, but deadnaming derogates differently than other kinds of derogatory speech. This paper examines different accounts of this behavior, illustrates what going views of names will have to say to account for it, and articulates a novel version of predicativism that can give a semantic explanation for this derogation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modelling the distributional semantics of such a morphologically rich language as Arabic needs to take into account its introflexive, fusional, and inflectional nature attributes that make up its combinatorial sequences and substitutional paradigms. To evaluate such word distributional models, the benchmarks that have been used thus far in Arabic have mimicked those in English. This paper reports on a benchmark that we designed to reflect linguistic patterns in both Contemporary Arabic and Classical Arabic, the first being a cover term for written and spoken Modern Standard Arabic, while the second for pre-modern Arabic. The analogy items we included in this benchmark are chosen in a transparent manner such that they would capture the major features of nouns and verbs; derivational and inflectional morphology; high-, middle-, and low-frequency patterns and lexical items; and morphosemantic, morphosyntactic, and semantic dimensions of the language. All categories included in this benchmark are carefully selected to ensure proper representation of the language. The benchmark consists of 45 roots of the trilateral, all-consonantal, and semivowel-inclusive types; six morphosemantic patterns ('af'ala; ifta'ala; infa'ala; istaf'ala; tafa"ala; and tafā'ala); five derivations (the verbal noun, active participle, and the contrasts in Masculine-Feminine; Feminine-Singular-Plural; Masculine-Singular-Plural); and morphosyntactic transformations (perfect and imperfect verbs conjugated for all pronouns); and lexical semantics (synonyms, antonyms, and hyponyms of nouns, verbs, and adjectives), as well as capital cities and currencies. All categories include an equal proportion of high-, medium-, and low-frequency items. For the purpose of validating the proposed benchmark, we developed a set of embedding models from different textual sources. Then, we tested them intrinsically using the proposed benchmark and extrinsically using two natural language processing tasks: Arabic Named Entity Recognition and Text Classification. The evaluation leads to the conclusion that the proposed benchmark is truly reflective of this morphologically rich language and discriminatory of word embeddings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this article is to analyze the critical language of racism in political communication reflected through online media. The analysis is focused on the elements of meaning and content structure of political statements and the context in which they are used. The analysis highlights the use of words with an intensity of meaning toward negative connotation, which manages to produce the harsh language of racism. Political communication develops an interactive discourse, which is simultaneously related not only to linguistic behavior but also to human behavior. Various political statements regarding immigration issues, the intensity of news published by media on the statements of politicians, as well as the influence they have on public opinion will be at the center of the discussion. Through descriptive and analytical methods, the article will argue and highlight the hostile, racial, and discriminatory language used by politicians, which is contradictory to the international framework on human rights and policies of the European Parliament which are focused on eliminating this approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 'prohibitionist' idea that slurs have the same linguistic properties as their neutral counterparts hasn't received much support in the literature. Here I offer a modified version of prohibitionism, according to which the taboo on using slurs is part of their conventional meaning. I conclude with explanations of the behaviour of slurs in embedded constructions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bianca Cepollaro's book "Slurs and thick terms: When language encodes values" explores the semantics and pragmatics of thick terms and slurs. Cepollaro argues that these expressions can be treated as a unified class called "hybrid evaluatives" and that their evaluation is encoded in presuppositions. She applies this view to non-standard uses of thick terms and slurs, using the echoic view to explain ironic uses. However, critics argue that the echoic view is insufficient to explain all non-standard uses, particularly in the case of reclaimed slurs. The article suggests that further research is needed to develop a more complete account of non-standard uses of hybrid evaluatives. [Extracted from the article]

According to nearly all theorists writing on the subject, a certain derogatory content is regularly and systematically communicated by slurs. So united, the theorists disagree sharply on the elements of this content, on its provenance, and on its mechanism. I argue that the basic premiss of all these views, that there is any such derogatory content conveyed with the use of slurs, is highly dubious. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I plot accounts of slurs on a [semanticist – non-semanticist] spectrum, and then I give some original arguments in favor of semanticist approaches. Two core, related pro-semanticist considerations which animate this work are: first, that the pejorative dimension of a slur is non-cancellable; and, second, that ignorance of the pejorative dimension should be counted as ignorance of literal, linguistic meaning, as opposed to (say) a mistake about conditions for appropriate usage. I bolster these considerations via cases in which slurs are embedded within complex constructions, in which cases the pejorative dimension of a slur gets ensnared within the compositional semantic machinery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Generic stereotypes are generically formulated generalizations that express a stereotype, like "Mexican immigrants are rapists" and "Muslims are terrorists." Stereotypes like these are offensive and should not be asserted by anyone. Yet when someone does assert a sentence like this in a conversation, it is surprisingly difficult to successfully rebut it. The meaning of generic sentences is such that they can be true in several different ways. As a result, a speaker who is challenged after asserting a generic stereotype can often simply dismiss the objection and maintain that the stereotype is true in a way that is compatible with the challenger's objection. In this paper, a semantic theory for generics is presented that accounts for this type of defensive shifting in upholding generic stereotypes. This theory is then used to develop two strategies to object more efficiently. The first strategy is to immediately deny that either of the two possible ways in which a generic can be true obtains. The second strategy is to deny the satisfaction of an additional condition that is necessary for a generic sentence to be true. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chris Hom argued that slurs and pejoratives semantically express complex negative prescriptive properties, which are determined in virtue of standing in external causal relations to social ideologies and practices. He called this view Combinatorial Externalism. Additionally, he argued that Combinatorial Externalism entailed that slurs and pejoratives have null extensions. In this paper, I raise an objection that has not been raised in the literature so far. I argue that semantic theories like Hom's are forced to choose between two alternatives: either they endorse an externalist semantics that determines prescriptive properties, or they endorse the null extensionality thesis, but they can't have both. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is about group slurs, that is, expressions that are I prima facie i associated with the speaker's conveyance of contemptuous or derogatory feelings for the members of a certain group of people identified in terms of their ethnicity ("spic"), race ("nigger"), sexual orientation ("faggot"), religion ("kike"), political ideology ("fascist"), habits or ways of living ("whore"), etc.[1] SP , sp [2] Our purpose is twofold: (i) explaining their expressive meaning in terms of a version of stereotype semantics and (ii) grounding a distinction between predicative/argumental and epithetic occurrences of (some) slur words on the different syntactic configuration of the sentences containing them. Now, there are two main respects in which slurs can be thought to be different from natural kind terms in as far as their respective stereotypes are concerned: first, unlike natural kind stereotypes, slur stereotypes typically include I evaluative concepts i and encode a I negative global value; i second, unlike natural kind stereotypes, slur stereotypes constitute an I expressive meaning dimension. i These two aspects will be further developed in the next two subsections. The stereotype valence is not thus determined by (the valences of) its constitutive concepts but by the prejudicial belief that the target group must be subordinated, on grounds of the existence of well-entrenched discriminatory attitudes.[7] That is why each feature of the semantic stereotype, even the purely descriptive ones (such as, in our previous example, WITH A SPANISH ACCENT) turns out to be regarded as a trace or indicator of the subordinate status in question. [Extracted from the article]

Some non-appropriated uses of slurs seem to be non-derogatory. In this paper, I argue that in a range of cases, the lack of derogation is owed to the term not being genuinely used. I first examine so-called pedagogical uses and show that they can be assimilated to what I call "distancing uses." I then turn to a range of other apparently non-derogatory, non-appropriated uses of slurs - such as non-weapon uses, comedic uses - and argue that they can depart from standard, genuine usage in relevant ways. I finally turn to so-called "affectionate" uses, and show that, if the conditions in which they obtain can be described as standard, then they are derogatory because they are genuine uses, no matter the benevolent feelings of the speaker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most theories of slurs fall into two families: Those which understand slurring terms to involve special descriptive/informational content (however conveyed), and those which understand them to encode special emotive/expressive content. Both offer essential insights, but part of what sets slurs apart is use‐theoretic content. Slurring words belong at the intersection of categories in a sociolinguistic register taxonomy, one that usually includes [+slang, +vulgar] and always includes [‐polite, +derogatory]. What distinguishes "Chinese" from "chink," for example, is neither a peculiar sort of descriptive nor emotional content, but the fact that "chink" is lexically marked as belonging to different registers. Moreover, such facts contribute to slurring being ethically unacceptable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The semantics of slur terms has provoked some debate within the philosophy of language, and different analysis models have been proposed to account for the complex meaning of these terms. The present paper acknowledges the complexity of the matter and presents an analysis model that is inspired by multiple-component approaches to slurs, such as those by Camp (2018) and Jeshion (2018). The Multi-Component Model for the semantic analysis of slurs (MCM) tracks down altogether four meaning components in group-based slur terms: a referential and a pejorative meaning component (being xy and despicable because of it), as well as a scalar component capturing the term's individual degree of offensiveness, and an expressive component indexing heightened emotions in all contexts of use. The notion of individual offensiveness degrees (that are fed by a multitude of semantic, pragmatic, and/or extralinguistic sources) allows us to account for the differences between slurs for the same ethnic group (such as nigger, negro, coon, darkie for Blacks); and the separation of the expressive component from the pejorative component can (1) explain the high frequency of non-pejorative uses, and (2) correctly describe these uses as expressive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Slurs are special. They can be so powerful and harmful that even mentioning them can be offensive. What explains this "toxicity" that many slurs display? Most discussions in the literature on slurs attempt to analyze the derogatory meaning of slurs, differing in where they locate this meaning – in the semantics, pragmatics, etc. In this article, the author argues that these content theories, despite their merits, are unable to account for toxicity. For a content-based approach to toxicity implies that two meaning-equivalent phrases should have the same toxicity. The author argues that this is not the case for the analyses proffered by current content theorists. Instead, he argues that we can only explain toxicity by understanding the special neurolinguistic properties of slurs. The author then draws out the consequences of this view for the issue of non-derogatory uses of slurs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a new style of semantic analysis for (some) slurs : linguistic expressions used to denigrate individuals based on some aspects of their identity. As an illustration, the author will focus on one slur in particular: dyke , which is generally considered to be a derogatory term for lesbians. The author argues that not enough attention in the literature has been paid to the use of dyke by members of the target group, who can often use it in a non-insulting manner; secondly, the author argues not enough attention has been paid to the use of the "neutral" form, lesbian, which is generally treated as having a simple, clear meaning, such as "engage[s] in same-sex sex" (Jeshion, 2013a , 312). Following McConnell-Ginet (2002) , the author argues that taking into account all the uses of both dyke and lesbian requires a new semantics and pragmatics for both terms. More specifically, the author proposes that dyke and lesbian are associated with different sets of personae : abstract identities or stereotypes. Dyke is associated with an anti-mainstream persona, which the vast majority of speakers views negatively; whereas, lesbian is associated with a mainstream persona, which many speakers view favourably. The author proposes that the semantic puzzles associated with dyke and lesbian can be resolved through the combination of a theory of these personae and a theory of how listeners' beliefs about their interlocutors' ideologies affect utterance interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is about group slurs, i.e., expressions that are prima facie associated with the speaker's conveyance of a derogatory feeling for a certain group of people identified in terms of their origin or descent ("spic"), race ("nigger"), sexual orientation ("faggot"), ethnicity or religion ("kike"), political ideology ("snowflake"), habits or ways of living ("whore"), etc. Our purpose is twofold: (i) explaining the non-truth-conditional or expressive meaning dimension in terms of a version of stereotype semantics, and (ii) applying a speech act theory to the original and paradigmatic derogatory uses of such terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to provide arguments based on linguistic evidence that discard a truth-conditional analysis of slurs (TCA) and pave the way for more promising approaches. We consider Hom and May's version of TCA, according to which the derogatory content of slurs is part of their truth-conditional meaning such that, when slurs are embedded under semantic operators such as negation, there is no derogatory content that projects out of the embedding. In order to support this view, Hom and May make two moves: (1) they point to cases where it looks like projection does not occur and (2) they try to explain away cases where projection seems to occur by appealing to a pragmatic phenomenon that they call 'offense'. Pace Hom and May, we argue that the derogatory content of slurs does in fact project and, in advocating for our claim, (1) we show that those cases where it looks like projection does not occur are in fact metalinguistic uses in which slurs are not really used, by relying on three linguistic tests (Sect. 3); and (2) we refute Hom and May's attempt to explain why speakers would entertain the supposedly wrong intuition that the derogatory content of slurs projects out of semantic embedding, by focusing on the case of slurs for fictional entities (Sect. 4). We conclude that Hom and May's strategies to support TCA ultimately fail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competing theories on the semantics of group pejorative terms (also known as 'slurs') comprise both advocates and opponents to the Identity Thesis (IT), according to which these terms and their neutral counterparts do not differ in semantic value. In the opponents' camp, Christopher Hom has offered an argument based on substitution of slurs and neutral counterparts that both supports his semanticist approach and cast doubts on all IT-based approaches to slurs. We aim to point to a dilemma triggered by this argument based on evidence showing that substitution of some words (including but not restricted to slurs) for non-problematically co-referential pairs may fail to preserve truth-values in some linguistics contexts. • We undermine an argument for an approach to the semantics of slurring terms. • The argument involves substitution of slurring terms for neutral ones. • We show the argument over-generates by presenting similar cases. • We support a 'register' based approach to the semantics of slur terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]