A metapragmatic stereotype‐based account of reclamation

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Analytic Philosophy Pub Date : 2024-05-29 DOI:10.1111/phib.12345
Nicolás Lo Guercio, Fernando Carranza
{"title":"A metapragmatic stereotype‐based account of reclamation","authors":"Nicolás Lo Guercio, Fernando Carranza","doi":"10.1111/phib.12345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Group‐based slurs are words that express derogatory attitudes toward some group demarcated by a property that has historically caused social antagonism, for example, gender or ethnicity, among others. Reclamation, in turn, is the process whereby a slur starts being used non‐derogatorily by members of the target group to express a positive attitude. Some content‐based theories of slurs (which pin the derogatory force of such terms on their conventional meaning) account for reclamation by arguing that it involves a change in meaning so that reclaimed slurs are ambiguous. But these theories face a challenge, namely to account for the difference between reclaimed slurs and run‐of‐the‐mill ambiguous terms, whose felicitous uses do not seem to be restricted to in‐group speakers. In this article, we argue that the Reclamation Worry is not a problem for content‐based theories of slurs by advancing an account of reclamation that is compatible with such views. As we shall argue, such a theory must rely on the sociolinguistic dimension of such terms.","PeriodicalId":45646,"journal":{"name":"Analytic Philosophy","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/phib.12345","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Group‐based slurs are words that express derogatory attitudes toward some group demarcated by a property that has historically caused social antagonism, for example, gender or ethnicity, among others. Reclamation, in turn, is the process whereby a slur starts being used non‐derogatorily by members of the target group to express a positive attitude. Some content‐based theories of slurs (which pin the derogatory force of such terms on their conventional meaning) account for reclamation by arguing that it involves a change in meaning so that reclaimed slurs are ambiguous. But these theories face a challenge, namely to account for the difference between reclaimed slurs and run‐of‐the‐mill ambiguous terms, whose felicitous uses do not seem to be restricted to in‐group speakers. In this article, we argue that the Reclamation Worry is not a problem for content‐based theories of slurs by advancing an account of reclamation that is compatible with such views. As we shall argue, such a theory must rely on the sociolinguistic dimension of such terms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于陈规定型观念的开垦元论
基于群体的污言秽语是对某些群体表达贬损态度的词语,这些群体以某种属性为界,在历史上曾引起社会对立,如性别或种族等。而 "改良"(reclamation)则是指目标群体成员开始以非贬义的方式使用污言秽语来表达积极态度的过程。一些基于内容的污言秽语理论(将这些词语的贬损力归咎于其传统含义)认为,"开垦 "涉及含义的改变,因此 "开垦 "出来的污言秽语是模糊的,从而解释了 "开垦"。但是,这些理论面临着一个挑战,即如何解释被开垦的污言秽语与普通的歧义用语之间的区别。在本文中,我们通过提出一种与基于内容的污言秽语理论相容的 "开垦 "解释,来论证 "开垦之忧 "并不是基于内容的污言秽语理论的问题。正如我们将要论证的那样,这种理论必须依赖于这些词语的社会语言维度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Analytic Philosophy
Analytic Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Categorial versus naturalized epistemology Naked statistical evidence and verdictive justice Issue Information Bringing the deep self back to the racecourse: Rethinking accountability and the deep self
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1