Affiliation:
1. Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (Brescia) , via Trieste 17, 25121 Brescia , Italy .
Abstract
Summary
Slurs are pejorative epithets that express negative attitudes toward a class of individuals sharing the same race, country of origin, sexual orientation, religion, and the like. The aim of this paper is to show what happens in communication when slurs are reported. It focuses on the derogatory content of such expressions and on the persistence of their performative effects in reported speech. In this respect, the question concerning the attribution of responsibility for the derogatory content conveyed by the slurs is relevant. Indeed, reporting a slur involves quoting not only the content but also the speaker’s personal commitment and (negative) attitude. Different theories on the status of the derogatory component of slurs make different predictions about their offensiveness in reported speech and about the speaker’s “responsibility” for the attitude and feelings conveyed by that word, be she the original speaker or the reporter. The results of a questionnaire show empirically that no single theory can provide a conclusive statement on this matter.
Reference42 articles.
1. Allan, K. (2016). The reporting of slurs. In A. Capone, F. Lo Piparo, & M. Carapezza (Eds.), Perspectives on Linguistic Pragmatics (pp. 211–232). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
2. Anderson, L. (2016). When reporting others backfires. In A. Capone, K. Ferenc, & F. Lo Piparo (Eds.), Indirect Reports and Pragmatics: Interdisciplinary Studies (pp. 253–264). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
3. Anderson, L., & Lepore, E. (2013a). Slurring words. Nous, 47(1), 25–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00820.x
4. Anderson, L., & Lepore, E. (2013b). What did you call me? Slurs as prohibited words. Analytic Philosophy, 54(1), 350–363. doi: 10.1111/phib.12023
5. Arendholz, J., Bublitz, W., & Kirner-Ludwig, M. (Eds.). (2015). The Pragmatics of Quoting Now and Then. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.