Chapter 3
The moral taste of food
A discourse analysis of social media discussions about
vegetarianism and veganism
This paper analyses discussions about vegetarianism and
veganism in francophone social media groups where moral statements
play an important role. It sketches a communicative conception of
morality as ‘doing ethics’ that zooms in on how
morality emerges and is negotiated in interaction by concentrating
on linguistic practices that key morality. Based on two case
studies, it examines controversies about moral values of food which
offer insights in the more general machinery of moral discourse. The
data reveal different linguistic techniques which are frequent in,
although not specific to, moral discourse. In particular, these are
evaluations, pejorative or upgrading lexicon, deontic modality,
generalisations, typical speech acts like advice or instruction as
well as semantic and structural forms of intensification.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Vegetarianism and veganism
- 3.Doing ethics
- 4.Data
- 4.1Data collection
- 4.2Contextualization of the social media discussions
- 5.Two case studies:
Honey and French fries
- 5.1Is honey health food?
- 5.2Are French fries junk food?
- 6.Conclusion
-
Acknowledgement
-
Notes
-
References
References (23)
References
Bergmann, J. 2004. Moralisierung und Moralisierungsdistanz. Über
einige Gefahren der moralischen Kommunikation in der
modernen Gesellschaft. In Moral als Gift oder Gabe? Zur Ambivalenz von Moral und
Religion [Interpretation Interdisziplinär 1], B. Boothe & P. Stoellger (eds), 24–44. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bergmann, J. & Luckmann, T. 1999. Moral und Kommunikation. In Struktur und Dynamik der Formen moralischer
Kommunikation [Kommunikative Konstruktion von Moral 1], J. Bergmann & T. Luckmann (eds), 13–36. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Das, V. 2012. Ordinary ethics. In A Companion to Moral Anthropology [Blackwell Companions to Anthropology 20], D. Fassin (ed.), 133–149. Malden MA: Blackwell. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Drescher, M. 2000. La réduplication: Formes et
fonctions. In Diskursanalyse. Untersuchungen zum gesprochenen
Französisch. Akten der gleichnamigen Sektion des 1.
Kongresses des Franko-Romanisten-Verbands, B. Wehr & H. Thomaßen (eds), 57–74. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Drescher, M. 2003. Sprachliche Affektivität: Darstellung emotionaler
Beteiligung am Beispiel von Gesprächen aus dem
Französischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Drescher, M. 2010. Contextualizing local knowledge: Reformulations
in HIV/AIDS prevention in Burkina Faso. In Language and HIV/AIDS [Critical Language and Literacy Studies 5], C. Higgins & B. Norton (eds), 197–213. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Farge, S. 2019. Le discours végétal des chefs: Vers une nouvelle
légitimité? In La gastronomie à l’ère numérique. Regards linguistiques
et économiques sur l’Allemagne, la France et
l’Italie [Stauffenburg Romanistik 3], J. Cadeddu, M. Kauffer & Y. Keromnes (eds), 243–260. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fassin, D. 2012. Introduction: Toward a critical moral
anthropology. In A Companion to Moral Anthropology [Blackwell Companions to Anthropology 20], D. Fassin (ed.), 1–17. Malden MA: Blackwell. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fischler, C. 1990/2001. L’Homnivore. Paris: Odile Jacob.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fischler, C. 1996. Alimentation morale et société. In Identités des mangeurs. Images des aliment, I. Giachetti (ed.), 31–54. Paris: Polytechnica.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Food Porn. n.d. Wikipedia, <[URL]> (22 October
2019).
Günthner, S. 2000. Vorwurfsaktivitäten in der Alltagsinteraktion.
Grammatische, prosodische, rhetorisch-stilistische und
interaktive Verfahren bei der Konstitution kommunikativer
Muster und Gattungen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Keppler, A. & Luckmann, T. 1991. ‘Teaching’: Conversational transmission of
knowledge. In Asymmetries in Dialogue, I. Marková & K. Foppa (eds), 143–165. New York NY: Harvester Wheatsheaf/Barnes & Noble Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lambek, M. 2015. The Ethical Condition. Essays on Action, Person &
Value. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lardellier, P. 2014. Cuisiner, manger, et en parler… Le Discours et la Langue 6(2): 7–14.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Luhmann, N. 2008. Soziologie der Moral. In Die Moral der Gesellschaft [Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch 1871], N. Luhmann (ed.), 56–162. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mariscal, V. & Aucuit, N. 2014. Du mangeur vertueux au ‚locavore’. Un panorama
des discours prescriptifs sur les pratiques alimentaires du
XIVème au XXIème siècle. Le Discours et la Langue 6(2): 49–62.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ouédraogo, A. 2005. Crise sociale, crise du goût: Le végétarisme
comme issue. Une étude de cas en région
parisienne. INRA Sciences Sociales 3: 1–4.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paveau, M.-A. 2013. Langage et morale: Une éthique des vertus
discursives. Limoges: Éditions Lambert-Lucas.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Riepl, W. 2013. Verbreitung des Vegetarismus in ausgewählten
Ländern. Statistik Dresden, 26 September 2013. <[URL]> (4 April
2018).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sidnell, J. 2011. The ordinary ethics of everyday
talk. In Ordinary Ethics, Anthropology, Language, and
Action, M. Lambek (ed.), 123–139. New York NY: Fordham University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Spencer-Bennett, J. 2018. Moral Talk: Stance and Evaluation in Political
Discourse. London: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Traïni, C. 2012. Entre dégoût et indignation morale, sociogenèse
d’une pratique militante. Revue Française de Science Politique 62: 559–581. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Drescher, Martina, Oumarou Boukari & Liliane Carline Ngawa Mbaho
2023.
So Much Fear and Questioning: A Comparative Study of Discourses on Covid-19 in Côte d’Ivoire and Cameroon. In
Covid-19 in Africa: Societal and Economic Implications [
African Histories and Modernities, ],
► pp. 17 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.