You called her a what?! Experimental evidence for
Description: You called her a what?! Experimental evidence for the expressive and descriptive dimensions of slurs Talia Lang Rutgers University New Brunswick Undergraduate Senior Honors Thesis Muggleborn parents are Muggles Draco (Pureblood) slurs
Related Topics
Download Presentation
"You called her a what?! Experimental evidence for" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this website for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Presentation Transcript
slide1. You called her a what?! Experimental evidence for the expressive and descriptive dimensions of slurs Talia Lang
Rutgers University – New Brunswick
Undergraduate Senior Honors Thesis<br>
slide2. Muggleborn = parents are Muggles Draco (Pureblood) slurs Derogatory term that refers to a target group
bitch (woman)
nigger (African American)
kike (Jewish)
faggot (LGBT+) 2 Croom (2013), Pullum (2018) Hermione (Muggleborn) target group slur Mudblood<br>
slide3. Mudblood Muggleborn = parents are Muggles Draco (Pureblood) Slurs are descriptive Slurs entail truth-conditional, descriptive content
Draco: #Hermione is a Mudblood, but I deny saying that her parents are Muggles.
Draco: I broke my damn broomstick, but I deny saying anything about the broomstick besides that it is broken. 3 Croom (2013) Hermione (Muggleborn) target group slur<br>
slide4. Mudblood slur Muggleborn = parents are Muggles target group Draco (Pureblood) Slurs are expressive Projective, speaker-oriented, expressive, not-at-issue content
Draco: Hermione’s mom said that Mudblood Hermione is a good witch.
Draco: Hermione’s mom said that moron Hermione is a good witch. 4 Croom (2013), Tonhauser, Roberts, Beaver & Simons (2013), Karttunen (1973a), Karttunen (2016), Potts (2015), Potts (2007a) Hermione (Muggleborn)<br>
slide5. Mudblood slur Muggleborn = parents are Muggles target group Draco (Pureblood) Slurs are expressive Projective, speaker-oriented, expressive, not-at-issue content
Draco: Hermione’s mom said that Mudblood Hermione is a good witch.
Draco: Hermione’s mom said that moron Hermione is a good witch. 5 Croom (2013), Tonhauser, Roberts, Beaver & Simons (2013), Karttunen (1973a), Karttunen (2016), Potts (2015), Potts (2007a) Hermione (Muggleborn) scopal operator<br>
slide6. Mudblood = Muggleborn and despicable because of it 6 Croom (2013), Spotorno & Bianchi (2015), Cepollaro (2015),
Hom (2008), Hom & May (2018) nonpejorative correlate Draco: Hermione is a Muggleborn and despicable because of it. Draco: Hermione is a Mudblood. Hermione (Muggleborn) Draco (Pureblood) target group Muggleborn = parents are Muggles slur Mudblood<br>
slide7. 7<br>
slide8. 8<br>
slide9. 9 Appropriation
Hermione: I’m proud of being a Mudblood!
Insults
Draco: Hermione is a bastard.<br>
slide10. 10<br>
slide11. 11 Appropriation
Hermione: I’m proud of being a Mudblood!
Negation
Hermione is a Mudblood = Hermione is a Muggleborn and therefore despicable
¬ Hermione is a Mudblood =/= ¬ Hermione is a Muggleborn and therefore despicable
still derogatory not derogatory<br>
slide12. 12<br>
slide13. 13<br>
slide14. Current study 14<br>
slide15. Research questions 15<br>
slide16. Experiments 1 & 2 16<br>
slide17. Sample trial Background: ‘Mudblood’ is a derogatory term that frequently refers to Muggleborns.
Person A is not a Muggleborn. Person A’s neighbor is not a Muggleborn.
Person A: My friend knows that my neighbor is a Mudblood.
Evaluate this statement: [Agree/Disagree]
Person A is committed to a belief that certain people are despicable because they are Muggleborns. 17<br>
slide18. Sample trial Background: ‘Mudblood’ is a derogatory term that frequently refers to Muggleborns.
Person A is not a Muggleborn. Person A’s neighbor is not a Muggleborn.
Person A: My friend knows that my neighbor is a Mudblood.
Evaluate this statement: [Agree/Disagree]
Person A is committed to a belief that certain people are despicable because they are Muggleborns. 18 expressive content projects<br>
slide19. Sample trial Background: ‘Mudblood’ is a derogatory term that frequently refers to Muggleborns.
Person A is not a Muggleborn. Person A’s neighbor is not a Muggleborn.
Person A: My friend knows that my neighbor is a Mudblood.
Evaluate this statement: [Agree/Disagree]
Person A is committed to a belief that certain people are despicable because they are Muggleborns. 19 expressive content does not project<br>
slide20. 20 Karttunen (1973a), Karttunen (2016), Potts (2015), Potts (2007a) hypotheses<br>
slide21. results 21<br>
slide22. Percentages of speaker-orientation<br>
slide23. 23 Percentages of speaker-orientation<br>
slide24. Percentages of speaker-orientation<br>
slide25. 25 Percentages of agreement<br>
slide26. Percentage 26<br>
slide27. conclusions Slurs and insults were comparably speaker-oriented
Propositional negation was misunderstood
Verb of saying hypotheses were nearly at-chance
Control items were comparable because of within-category variability
Bitch was close to appropriation
Slurs were more offensive than insults 27<br>
slide28. Experiments 3 & 4 28<br>
slide29. Sample trial Background: ‘Mudblood’ is a derogatory term that frequently refers to Muggleborns.
Person A is talking to Person B about Person A's coworker.
Person A: That Mudblood mowed her lawn yesterday.
If you were Person B, what would you say to disagree with Person A? [I would say/I would not say] 29<br>
slide30. Response options 30 Croom (2013), Syrett & Koev (2015) Use-focus: You can’t use that word, that’s a slur. (metalinguistic negation)
Application-focus: Hermione isn’t a Mudblood, but my neighbor is. (propositional negation)<br>
slide31. hypotheses If slurs’ derogatory content is not-at-issue, then indirect responses will be preferred
If slurs are ineffable, then no repetition responses will be preferred
If there is a desire to be unambiguously socially correct, then use-focus responses will be preferred 31 Croom (2013), Syrett & Koev (2015), Anderson & Lepore (2013)<br>
slide32. results 32<br>
slide34. conclusions Slurs elicited more direct, use-focus, repetition rejection than insults
Control items were comparable in eliciting more indirect, use-focus, no repetition rejection 34<br>
slide35. General discussion 35<br>
slide36. implications Slurs are as speaker-oriented as insults, but more offensive
Verb of saying hypotheses require more study
Despite their derogatory content being not-at-issue, slurs are so derogatory as to warrant direct rejection
Repetition rejections may be different if spoken aloud
Propositional and metalinguistic negation are distinguishable but misunderstood
Slurs closer to appropriation elicit different responses
Unfamiliar slurs should be weeded out prior to study 36<br>
slide37. some open questions How does this fit in with appropriation?
Are slurs of different demographics, different linguistically?
Do Mudbloods exist?
Do slurs have family resemblance categories? 37<br>
slide38. Thank you 38 Rutgers university – new brunswick linguistics department
Thesis advisor Dr. Kristen syrett
Statistical analysis Yisha yao
Culc14 Cornell university department of linguistics<br>
slide39. 39<br>
slide40. Experiment 1: stimuli, slur 40 Diaz Legaspe (2018)<br>
slide41. Experiment 1: stimuli, insult 41<br>
slide42. Experiment 2: stimuli 42<br>
slide43. Experiment 3: stimuli, slur 43 Diaz Legaspe (2018)<br>
slide44. Experiment 3: stimuli, insult 44<br>
slide45. Experiment 4: stimuli 45<br>
Rutgers University – New Brunswick
Undergraduate Senior Honors Thesis<br>
slide2. Muggleborn = parents are Muggles Draco (Pureblood) slurs Derogatory term that refers to a target group
bitch (woman)
nigger (African American)
kike (Jewish)
faggot (LGBT+) 2 Croom (2013), Pullum (2018) Hermione (Muggleborn) target group slur Mudblood<br>
slide3. Mudblood Muggleborn = parents are Muggles Draco (Pureblood) Slurs are descriptive Slurs entail truth-conditional, descriptive content
Draco: #Hermione is a Mudblood, but I deny saying that her parents are Muggles.
Draco: I broke my damn broomstick, but I deny saying anything about the broomstick besides that it is broken. 3 Croom (2013) Hermione (Muggleborn) target group slur<br>
slide4. Mudblood slur Muggleborn = parents are Muggles target group Draco (Pureblood) Slurs are expressive Projective, speaker-oriented, expressive, not-at-issue content
Draco: Hermione’s mom said that Mudblood Hermione is a good witch.
Draco: Hermione’s mom said that moron Hermione is a good witch. 4 Croom (2013), Tonhauser, Roberts, Beaver & Simons (2013), Karttunen (1973a), Karttunen (2016), Potts (2015), Potts (2007a) Hermione (Muggleborn)<br>
slide5. Mudblood slur Muggleborn = parents are Muggles target group Draco (Pureblood) Slurs are expressive Projective, speaker-oriented, expressive, not-at-issue content
Draco: Hermione’s mom said that Mudblood Hermione is a good witch.
Draco: Hermione’s mom said that moron Hermione is a good witch. 5 Croom (2013), Tonhauser, Roberts, Beaver & Simons (2013), Karttunen (1973a), Karttunen (2016), Potts (2015), Potts (2007a) Hermione (Muggleborn) scopal operator<br>
slide6. Mudblood = Muggleborn and despicable because of it 6 Croom (2013), Spotorno & Bianchi (2015), Cepollaro (2015),
Hom (2008), Hom & May (2018) nonpejorative correlate Draco: Hermione is a Muggleborn and despicable because of it. Draco: Hermione is a Mudblood. Hermione (Muggleborn) Draco (Pureblood) target group Muggleborn = parents are Muggles slur Mudblood<br>
slide7. 7<br>
slide8. 8<br>
slide9. 9 Appropriation
Hermione: I’m proud of being a Mudblood!
Insults
Draco: Hermione is a bastard.<br>
slide10. 10<br>
slide11. 11 Appropriation
Hermione: I’m proud of being a Mudblood!
Negation
Hermione is a Mudblood = Hermione is a Muggleborn and therefore despicable
¬ Hermione is a Mudblood =/= ¬ Hermione is a Muggleborn and therefore despicable
still derogatory not derogatory<br>
slide12. 12<br>
slide13. 13<br>
slide14. Current study 14<br>
slide15. Research questions 15<br>
slide16. Experiments 1 & 2 16<br>
slide17. Sample trial Background: ‘Mudblood’ is a derogatory term that frequently refers to Muggleborns.
Person A is not a Muggleborn. Person A’s neighbor is not a Muggleborn.
Person A: My friend knows that my neighbor is a Mudblood.
Evaluate this statement: [Agree/Disagree]
Person A is committed to a belief that certain people are despicable because they are Muggleborns. 17<br>
slide18. Sample trial Background: ‘Mudblood’ is a derogatory term that frequently refers to Muggleborns.
Person A is not a Muggleborn. Person A’s neighbor is not a Muggleborn.
Person A: My friend knows that my neighbor is a Mudblood.
Evaluate this statement: [Agree/Disagree]
Person A is committed to a belief that certain people are despicable because they are Muggleborns. 18 expressive content projects<br>
slide19. Sample trial Background: ‘Mudblood’ is a derogatory term that frequently refers to Muggleborns.
Person A is not a Muggleborn. Person A’s neighbor is not a Muggleborn.
Person A: My friend knows that my neighbor is a Mudblood.
Evaluate this statement: [Agree/Disagree]
Person A is committed to a belief that certain people are despicable because they are Muggleborns. 19 expressive content does not project<br>
slide20. 20 Karttunen (1973a), Karttunen (2016), Potts (2015), Potts (2007a) hypotheses<br>
slide21. results 21<br>
slide22. Percentages of speaker-orientation<br>
slide23. 23 Percentages of speaker-orientation<br>
slide24. Percentages of speaker-orientation<br>
slide25. 25 Percentages of agreement<br>
slide26. Percentage 26<br>
slide27. conclusions Slurs and insults were comparably speaker-oriented
Propositional negation was misunderstood
Verb of saying hypotheses were nearly at-chance
Control items were comparable because of within-category variability
Bitch was close to appropriation
Slurs were more offensive than insults 27<br>
slide28. Experiments 3 & 4 28<br>
slide29. Sample trial Background: ‘Mudblood’ is a derogatory term that frequently refers to Muggleborns.
Person A is talking to Person B about Person A's coworker.
Person A: That Mudblood mowed her lawn yesterday.
If you were Person B, what would you say to disagree with Person A? [I would say/I would not say] 29<br>
slide30. Response options 30 Croom (2013), Syrett & Koev (2015) Use-focus: You can’t use that word, that’s a slur. (metalinguistic negation)
Application-focus: Hermione isn’t a Mudblood, but my neighbor is. (propositional negation)<br>
slide31. hypotheses If slurs’ derogatory content is not-at-issue, then indirect responses will be preferred
If slurs are ineffable, then no repetition responses will be preferred
If there is a desire to be unambiguously socially correct, then use-focus responses will be preferred 31 Croom (2013), Syrett & Koev (2015), Anderson & Lepore (2013)<br>
slide32. results 32<br>
slide34. conclusions Slurs elicited more direct, use-focus, repetition rejection than insults
Control items were comparable in eliciting more indirect, use-focus, no repetition rejection 34<br>
slide35. General discussion 35<br>
slide36. implications Slurs are as speaker-oriented as insults, but more offensive
Verb of saying hypotheses require more study
Despite their derogatory content being not-at-issue, slurs are so derogatory as to warrant direct rejection
Repetition rejections may be different if spoken aloud
Propositional and metalinguistic negation are distinguishable but misunderstood
Slurs closer to appropriation elicit different responses
Unfamiliar slurs should be weeded out prior to study 36<br>
slide37. some open questions How does this fit in with appropriation?
Are slurs of different demographics, different linguistically?
Do Mudbloods exist?
Do slurs have family resemblance categories? 37<br>
slide38. Thank you 38 Rutgers university – new brunswick linguistics department
Thesis advisor Dr. Kristen syrett
Statistical analysis Yisha yao
Culc14 Cornell university department of linguistics<br>
slide39. 39<br>
slide40. Experiment 1: stimuli, slur 40 Diaz Legaspe (2018)<br>
slide41. Experiment 1: stimuli, insult 41<br>
slide42. Experiment 2: stimuli 42<br>
slide43. Experiment 3: stimuli, slur 43 Diaz Legaspe (2018)<br>
slide44. Experiment 3: stimuli, insult 44<br>
slide45. Experiment 4: stimuli 45<br>