Cover not available
Article published In:
Corpus approaches to telecinematic language
Edited by Monika Bednarek, Valentin Werner and Marcia Veirano Pinto
[International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 26:1] 2021
► pp. 95–126

Innovation on screen

Marked affixation as characterization cue in Buffy the Vampire Slayer

| Universität Greifswald

This study explores marked affixation as a possible cue for characterization in scripted television dialogue. The data used here is the newly compiled TV Corpus, which encompasses over 265 million words in its North American English context. An initial corpus-based analysis quantifies the innovative use of affixes in word-formation processes across the corpus to allow for comparison with a following character analysis, which investigates how derivational word-formation supports characterization patterns within a specific series, Buffy the Vampire Slayer. For this, a list of productive prefixes (e.g. de-, un-) and suffixes (e.g. -y, -ish) is used to elicit relevant contexts. The study thus combines two approaches to word-formation processes in scripted contexts. On a large scale, it shows how derivational neologisms are spread across TV dialogue and on a much smaller scale, it highlights particular instances where these neologisms are used to aid character construction.

Keywords: characterization, non-codified language, affixation, suffixation, social networks
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Word-formation processes in English
  • 3.Data
    • 3.1TV Corpus: Repertoire analysis
    • 3.2 Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Character analysis data
  • 4.Method
  • 5.Derivational affixation in the TV Corpus: A repertoire analysis
    • 5.1General distribution
    • 5.2Contextual distribution
  • 6.Derivational affixation in Buffy the Vampire Slayer: A character analysis
  • 7.Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 December 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.00038.rei
References
Adams, M.
(2003) Slayer Slang: A Buffy the Vampire Slayer Lexicon. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2018) Vignette 13b – Working with scripted data: Variations among scripts, texts, and performances. In C. Mallinson, B. Childs, & G. Van Herk (Eds.), Data Collection in Sociolinguistics: Methods and Applications (pp. 230–232). Routledge.Google Scholar
Androutsopoulos, J.
(2012) Repertoires, characters and scenes: Sociolinguistic difference in Turkish-German comedy. Multilingua, 31(2–3), 301–326.Google Scholar
(2014) Beyond ‘media influence’. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(2), 242–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anthony, L.
(2019) AntConc (Version 3.5.8) [Computer software]. Tokyo: Waseda University. Available from [URL]
Bednarek, M.
(2010) The Language of Fictional Television: Drama and Identity. Continuum.Google Scholar
(2018) Language and Television Series: A Linguistic Approach to TV Dialogue. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beers Fägersten, K.
(2016) What’s the deal with morphemes? Doing morphology with Seinfeld . In K. Beers Fägersten (Ed.), Watching TV with a Linguist (pp. 181–201). Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Bubel, C. M.
(2006) The Linguistic Construction of Character Relations in TV Drama: Doing Friendship in Sex and the City [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M.
(1999) “Why be normal?” Language and identity practices in a community of nerd girls. Language in Society, 28(2), 203–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheshire, J.
(2004) Sex and gender in variationist research. In J. Roberts, J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), The Handbook of Language Variation and Change (p. 423–443). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Coupland, N.
(2001) Dialect stylization in radio talk. Language in Society, 30(3), 345–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, J.
(2001) Language and Characterisation: People in Plays and other Texts. Longman.Google Scholar
Dion, N., & Poplack, S.
(2007, October 11–14 2007) Linguistic mythbusting: The role of the media in diffusing change [Paper presentation]. New Ways of Analyzing Variation 36 (NWAV36), Philadelphia, USA. [URL]
Dixon, R. M. W.
(2014) Making New Words: Morphological Derivation in English. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dovchin, S., Pennycook, A., & Sultana, S.
(2017) Popular Culture, Voice and Linguistic Diversity: Young Adults On- and Offline. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Eckert, P.
(2000) Language Variation as Social Practice: The Linguistic Construction of Identity in Belten High. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
(2008) Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(4), 453–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018) Meaning and Linguistic Variation: The Third Wave in Sociolinguistics. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S.
(1992) Think practically and look locally: Language and gender as community-based practice. Annual Review of Anthropology, 21(1), 461–488. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1999) New generalizations and explanations in language and gender research. Language in Society, 28(2), 185–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, L.
(2018, July 20). ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer’ Inclusive reboot in the works with Joss Whedon. The Hollywood Reporter. [URL]
Kirchner, J. S.
(2006) And in some language that’s English? Slayer slang and artificial computer generation. Slayage: The Online International Journal of Buffy Studies, 5(4).Google Scholar
Labov, W.
(1990) The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change, 2(2), 205–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehrer, A.
(1995) Prefixes in English word formation. Folia Linguistica, 29(1–2), 133–148.Google Scholar
Lieber, R.
(2014) Methodological issues in studying derivation. In R. Lieber & P. Štekauer (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology (pp. 84–94). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lieber, R., & Štekauer, P.
(2014) Introduction: The scope of the handbook. In R. Lieber & P. Štekauer (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology (pp. 3–9). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mandala, S.
(2007) Solidarity and the Scoobies: An analysis of the -y suffix in the television series Buffy the Vampire Slayer . Language and Literature, 16(1), 53–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Masson, C.
(2006) “Is that just a comforting way of not answering the question?” Willow, questions, and affective response in Buffy the Vampire Slayer . Slayage: The Online International Journal of Buffy Studies, 5(4).Google Scholar
McKee, R.
(2016) Dialogue: The Art of Verbal Action for Page, Stage, Screen. Twelve.Google Scholar
Mendlesohn, F.
(2002) Surpassing the love of vampires: Or why (and how) a queer reading of the Buffy/ Willow relationship is denied. In D. Lavery & R. Wilcox, (Eds.), Fighting the Forces: What’s at Stake in Buffy the Vampire Slayer (pp. 45–60). Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Milroy, L.
(1980) Social network and language maintenance. In B. Mayor & A. K. Pugh (Eds.), Language, Communication and Education (pp. 70–81). Open University.Google Scholar
Mittell, J.
(2015) Complex TV: The Poetics of Contemporary Television Storytelling. New York University Press.Google Scholar
Percillier, M.
(2016) Cunning linguistics: The semantics of word play in South Park . In K. Beers Fägersten (Ed.), Watching TV with a Linguist (pp. 139–160). Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Piazza, R., Bednarek, M., & Rossi, F.
(Eds.) (2011) Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Queen, R.
(2015) Vox Popular: The Surprising Life of Language in the Media. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
R Core Team
(2019) R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 3.6.2). [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [URL]
Reichelt, S., & Durham, M.
(2017) Adjective intensification as a means of characterization: Portraying in-group membership and Britishness in Buffy the Vampire Slayer . Journal of English Linguistics, 45(1), 60–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reichelt, S.
(2018) The Sociolinguistic Construction of Character Diversity in Fictional Television Series [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Cardiff University.Google Scholar
Richardson, K.
(2010) Television Dramatic Dialogue: A Sociolinguistic Study. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruddell, C.
(2006) “I am the Law” “I am the Magics”: Speech, power and the split identity of Willow in Buffy the Vampire Slayer . Slayage: The Online International Journal of Buffy Studies, 5(4).Google Scholar
Sams, J.
(2016) Word formation in HIMYM. In K. Beers Fägersten (Ed.), Watching TV with a Linguist (pp. 161–180). Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Sayers, D.
(2014) The mediated innovation model: A framework for researching media influence in language change. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(2), 185–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Štekauer, P., Valera, S., & Kőrtvélyessy, L.
(2012) Word-formation in the World’s Languages: A Typological Survey. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stuart-Smith, J., Pryce, G., Timmins, C., & Gunter, B.
(2013) Television can also be a factor in language change: Evidence from an urban dialect. Language, 89(3), 501–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. A., & Roberts, C.
(2005) So weird; so cool; so innovative: The use of intensifiers in the television series Friends . American Speech, 80(3), 280–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. A.
(2014) Situating media influence in sociolinguistic context. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(2), 223–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, P.
(1974) Linguistic change and diffusion: Description and explanation in sociolinguistic dialect geography. Language in Society, 3(2), 215–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VanDerWerff, E. T., & Framke, C.
(2017, March 10). How Buffy the Vampire Slayer transformed TV as we know it. Vox. [URL]
Wilcox, R., & Lavery, D.
(Eds.) (2002) Fighting the Forces: What’s at Stake in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Wilcox, R.
(2005) Why Buffy Matters: The Art of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar