Vortrag: A Puzzle about the Extension of Slurs

Defending a Conventional Implicature Approach

This talk is a report of my BA thesis about the meaning dimensions of slurs.
I dealt with novel data that suggest that possible targets of a slur are not always equivalent to the set of the derogated group, thereby contrasting with current theories.

I will discuss three examples where the extension of a slur is:

(i) the set of the derogated group
(ii) people that have at least one stereotypical property of the derogated group (according to the speaker)
(iii) a combination of both

The purpose of this talk is to investigate the mechanisms involved in the predication of a slur and to introduce a theory that allows for their varying extensions.
Additionally, the theory should also explain how slurs behave under negation, as a common problem in the study of slurs is to account for their hyper-projection; there is rarely a context where a slur is not offensive.
To achieve this, I compare existing theories by analysing where they place the derogative content (in the literal content or via a non-truth-conditional mechanism) and if they can account for the projection behaviour (why and how do slurs remain derogative under negation?).

Referring to Potts (2015) for the analysis of implicatures and Simons et al. (2010) for insight on projection, I found that an account that combines a modified conventional implicature approach (Camp 2018) with a prototype-based characterisation (Croom 2015, Foster 2020) of the implicated content represents slurs the most accurately.

Literature:
Camp, Elisabeth. 2018. A dual act analysis of slurs. ๐˜‰๐˜ข๐˜ฅ ๐˜ธ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ฅ๐˜ด: ๐˜—๐˜ฉ๐˜ช๐˜ญ๐˜ฐ๐˜ด๐˜ฐ๐˜ฑ๐˜ฉ๐˜ช๐˜ค๐˜ข๐˜ญ ๐˜ฑ๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ๐˜ด๐˜ฑ๐˜ฆ๐˜ค๐˜ต๐˜ช๐˜ท๐˜ฆ๐˜ด ๐˜ฐ๐˜ฏ ๐˜ด๐˜ญ๐˜ถ๐˜ณ๐˜ด 1.
Cepollaro, Bianca. 2015. In defence of a presuppositional account of slurs. ๐˜“๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜จ๐˜ถ๐˜ข๐˜จ๐˜ฆ ๐˜š๐˜ค๐˜ช๐˜ฆ๐˜ฏ๐˜ค๐˜ฆ๐˜ด 52. 36-45.
Croom, Adam M. 2015. The semantics of slurs: a refutation of coreferentialism. ๐˜ˆ๐˜ฎ๐˜ฑ๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ๐˜ด๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ฅ (2). 30-38.
Foster, Jennifer. 2020. Beyond "neutral counterparts": towards an overlap theory of derogatory terms.
Hom, Christopher. 2012. A puzzle about pejoratives. ๐˜—๐˜ฉ๐˜ช๐˜ญ๐˜ฐ๐˜ด๐˜ฐ๐˜ฑ๐˜ฉ๐˜ช๐˜ค๐˜ข๐˜ญ ๐˜š๐˜ต๐˜ถ๐˜ฅ๐˜ช๐˜ฆ๐˜ด 159(3). 383-405.
Neufeld, Eleonore. 2019. An essentialist theory of the meaning of slurs. ๐˜—๐˜ฉ๐˜ช๐˜ญ๐˜ฐ๐˜ด๐˜ฐ๐˜ฑ๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ๐˜ด' ๐˜๐˜ฎ๐˜ฑ๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜ต 19 (35).
Nunberg, Geoffrey. 2018. The social life of slurs. ๐˜•๐˜ฆ๐˜ธ ๐˜ธ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ฌ ๐˜ฐ๐˜ฏ ๐˜ด๐˜ฑ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฆ๐˜ค๐˜ฉ ๐˜ข๐˜ค๐˜ต๐˜ด. 237-293.
Potts, Christopher. 2015. Presupposition and implicature. ๐˜›๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ ๐˜ฉ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ฅ๐˜ฃ๐˜ฐ๐˜ฐ๐˜ฌ ๐˜ฐ๐˜ง ๐˜ค๐˜ฐ๐˜ฏ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ฎ๐˜ฑ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ข๐˜ณ๐˜บ ๐˜ด๐˜ฆ๐˜ฎ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ต๐˜ช๐˜ค ๐˜ต๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜บ 2. 168-202.
Simons, Mandy, Judith Tonhauser, David Beaver & Craige Roberts. 2010. What projects and why. In ๐˜š๐˜ฆ๐˜ฎ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ต๐˜ช๐˜ค๐˜ด ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ฅ ๐˜ญ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜จ๐˜ถ๐˜ช๐˜ด๐˜ต๐˜ช๐˜ค ๐˜ต๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜บ, vol. 20, 309-327.

Info

Tag: 18.11.2021
Anfangszeit: 14:00
Dauer: 00:30
Raum: ๐Ÿง‰
Track: Theoretical Linguistics
Sprache: en

Links:

Dateien

Feedback

Uns interessiert Ihre Meinung! Wie fanden Sie diese Veranstaltung?

Gleichzeitige Events