The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.

Journal list menu

Noûs
ARTICLE

The Pragmatics of Slurs

Renée Jorgensen Bolinger

University of Southern California

My thanks to Robin Jeshion and Mark Schroeder for working with me on several drafts on this paper. Thanks also to Michael Ashfield, Ashley Atkins, Kent Bach, Maegan Fairchild, Stephen Finlay, Woo Ram Lee, Scott Soames, Gabriel Uzquiano, Peter van Elswyk, Jonathan Wright, and two anonymous referees at this journal, as well as to audiences at the 2013 Princeton‐Rutgers and Texas Tech graduate conferences for their helpful discussion of earlier versions.Search for more papers by this author
First published: 4 March 2015
Cited by: 3

Abstract

I argue that the offense generation pattern of slurring terms parallels that of impoliteness behaviors, and is best explained by appeal to similar purely pragmatic mechanisms. In choosing to use a slurring term rather than its neutral counterpart, the speaker signals that she endorses the term (and its associations). Such an endorsement warrants offense, and consequently slurs generate offense whenever a speaker's use demonstrates a contrastive preference for the slurring term. Since this explanation comes at low theoretical cost and imposes few constraints on an account of the semantics of slurs, this suggests that we should not require semantic accounts to provide an independent explanation of the offense profile.

Number of times cited: 3

  • , Derogation without words: On the power of non-verbal pejoratives, Philosophical Psychology, 30, 6, (784)
  • , Appropriate Slurs, Acta Analytica, 32, 3, (371)
  • , What BigotsDoSay: A Reply to DiFranco, Thought: A Journal of Philosophy, 5, 4, (265)