Slurs as Illocutionary Force Indicators
- PDF / 327,193 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 47 Downloads / 185 Views
Slurs as Illocutionary Force Indicators Chang Liu 1 Received: 18 June 2020 / Revised: 19 October 2020 / Accepted: 22 October 2020 # Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract Slurs are derogatory words and they are used to derogate certain groups. Theories of slurs must explain why they are derogatory words, as well as other features like independence and descriptive ineffability. This paper proposes an illocutionary force indicator theory of slurs: they are derogatory terms because their use is to perform the illocutionary act of derogation, which is a declarative illocutionary act to enforce norms against the target. For instance, calling a Chinese person “chink” is an act of derogation to enforce racist norms that license exclusion of the Chinese, deny their rights to dignity, etc. The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, it offers a more comprehensive explanation of the features of slurs than earlier speech act approaches. Second, it provides a theory that is immune to the problems faced by existing theories, such as wrong predictions of truth-conditions, explaining unacceptability to non-bigots, and explaining slurs against the dominant groups. Keywords Slurs . Speech acts . Illocutionary force . Force indicators . Derogation
1 Introduction At first glance, slurs are derogatory expressions against certain groups. For example, the slur “chink” is a word used to derogate the Chinese.1 Let us call this feature the “derogatory power of slurs” (also called the “derogatory force”). Moreover, slurs’ derogatory power gives rise to more puzzling features. Take non-derogatory utterances of slurs for instance. It is possible for Chinese friends to call each other “chink” as an endearment. If “chink” is a derogatory word, how can it be used in this non-derogatory way? Another example is the descriptive ineffability of slurs. It seems that the derogatory power of “chink” cannot be paraphrased in purely descriptive terms. Why cannot 1
Warning: this paper contains examples of offensive language. I apologize in advance for any potential offense this could cause.
* Chang Liu [email protected]
1
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Peking University, 5 Yiheyuan Rd., Haidian Dist., Beijing 100871, China
Philosophia
“chink” be satisfactorily paraphrased as “slanty-eyed Chinese” or “devious Chinese”? We need theories of slurs to explain puzzling features like these. In this paper, I will develop an illocutionary force indicator theory of slurs. Slurs are derogatory words because they are illocutionary force indicators of derogation. They are analogous to illocutionary force indicators like “I promise,” the job of which is to make the illocutionary force of promising explicit. Likewise, the slur “chink” is a derogatory word for the Chinese because it makes the illocutionary force of derogation explicit. Derogation is a declarative illocutionary act, e.g., to derogate the Chinese is to enforce a norm against them. For instance, calling a Chinese person “chink” is to enforce an anti-Chinese norm that denies their r
Data Loading...
