In this paper I discuss the potential that corpus linguistics approaches have to make in terms of enabling research on language and sexuality. After giving some background relating to my involvement in the development of this approach and discussion of some of the benefits of using corpus linguistics, I then outline some potential areas for concern, including: misconceptions of the field as only quantitative, the danger of reading only concordance lines, over-reliance on the idea of removing bias, the tendency of corpus approaches to focus on difference or easily searchable features and issues with copyright and ethics. I then discuss potential future directions that the approach could take, focussing on work in non-western and non-English contexts, the development of new tools such as Lancsbox, and the integration of multimodal analyses, using examples from my own work and others.
{"title":"Language, sexuality and corpus linguistics","authors":"Jack Baker","doi":"10.1075/JLS.17018.BAK","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/JLS.17018.BAK","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In this paper I discuss the potential that corpus linguistics approaches have to make in terms of enabling research on language and\u0000 sexuality. After giving some background relating to my involvement in the development of this approach and discussion of some of\u0000 the benefits of using corpus linguistics, I then outline some potential areas for concern, including: misconceptions of the field\u0000 as only quantitative, the danger of reading only concordance lines, over-reliance on the idea of removing bias, the tendency of\u0000 corpus approaches to focus on difference or easily searchable features and issues with copyright and ethics. I then discuss\u0000 potential future directions that the approach could take, focussing on work in non-western and non-English contexts, the\u0000 development of new tools such as Lancsbox, and the integration of multimodal analyses, using examples from my own work and\u0000 others.","PeriodicalId":36680,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Sexuality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2018-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46430503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The paradigmatic transgender woman is often negatively oversexualised, pornographised and fetishised in mainstream conceptualisations and discourses. However, self-sexualisation by transgender individuals is often portrayed as a (sex-)positive social phenomenon. Little research has been conducted that analyses the self-sexualisation strategies of the multiple instantiations of gender-variant identity, including transmasculine and non-binary social actors. This paper uses a corpus-informed socio-cognitive approach to critical discourse studies to identify differences between the self-sexualisation strategies and underpinning cognitive models of different gender-variant user-groups on Twitter. 2,565 users are coded into five categories: (1) transfeminine; (2) transmasculine; (3) transsexual; (4) transvestite; (5) non-binary. Findings show that transvestite- and transsexual-identifying users most closely fit the pornographised and fetishised conceptualisation, whilst non-binary users are the least self-sexualising user-group.
{"title":"“I wanna be a toy”","authors":"Lexi Webster","doi":"10.1075/JLS.17016.WEB","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/JLS.17016.WEB","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The paradigmatic transgender woman is often negatively oversexualised, pornographised and fetishised in mainstream\u0000 conceptualisations and discourses. However, self-sexualisation by transgender individuals is often portrayed as a (sex-)positive\u0000 social phenomenon. Little research has been conducted that analyses the self-sexualisation strategies of the multiple\u0000 instantiations of gender-variant identity, including transmasculine and non-binary social actors. This paper uses a corpus-informed\u0000 socio-cognitive approach to critical discourse studies to identify differences between the self-sexualisation strategies and\u0000 underpinning cognitive models of different gender-variant user-groups on Twitter. 2,565 users are coded into five categories: (1)\u0000 transfeminine; (2) transmasculine; (3) transsexual; (4) transvestite; (5) non-binary. Findings show that transvestite- and\u0000 transsexual-identifying users most closely fit the pornographised and fetishised conceptualisation, whilst non-binary users are the\u0000 least self-sexualising user-group.","PeriodicalId":36680,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Sexuality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2018-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46318612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：