This paper takes up the question of definitions in general and definitions as related to research on language and conflict in particular. I anchor my discussion in the proceedings of the panel ‘Researching and Understanding the Language of Aggression and Conflict’ held at the recent IPrA conference (Antwerp, July 2015). However, I also refer to a selection of articles in the Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict (JLAC) and books on language and conflict. I point to the fact that disagreements about what words such as ‘conflict’’, ‘aggression’, and ‘hate’ mean often lead to unrewarding debates. I trace such disagreements to the philosophical commitments that researchers make (consciously or subliminally). Subsequently, I argue against the essentialist philosophical position, which encourages seeking one satisfactory definition of any concept/term/word. As an alternative, I try to promote a non-essentialist position that encourages us to proceed only with working definitions. Moreover, I advocate working definitions that relate to objects and activities that are as tangible as possible. This way we can avoid unrewarding disputes and contribute to making our research more meaningful and convincing.
1982Categories and Cognitive Models. LAUT (Series A, No. 96)
Lakoff, George
1987Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
La Porte, Joseph
1997 “Essential Membership.” Philosophy of Science 64(1): 96–112.
Maitra, Ishani, and Mary Kate McGowan
2012 “Introduction and Overview”. In Speech and Harm: Controversies over Free Speech, edited by Ishami Maitra, and Mary Kate McGowan, 1–23. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2005 Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Popper, Karl
1945The Open Society and Its Enemies. Volume 21. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Popper, Karl
1979Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach. Revised edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Rorty, Richard
1999Philosophy and Social Hope. London: Penguin Books.
Rosch, Eleanor
1978 “Principles of Categorization”. In Cognition and Categorization, edited by Eleonor Rosch and Barbara Lloyd, 28–46. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Taylor, John R.
2003 Third edition. Linguistic Categorization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Teller, Paul
1975 “Essential Properties. Some Problems and Conjectures.” The Journal of Philosophy 72(9):233–248.
Ungerer, Friedrich, and Hans-Jörg Schmid
2006 Second edition. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. London: Routledge.
Waldron, Jeremy
2012The Harm in Hate Speech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2018. Globalization, transnational identities, and conflict talk: The superdiversity and complexity of the Latino identity. Journal of Pragmatics 134 ► pp. 120 ff.
Bozsik, Tamara
2023. A verbális agresszió megnyilvánulási formái politikai tartalmú Facebook-kommentekben. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 10:1 ► pp. 57 ff.
2022. Exploring the grammar of othering and antagonism as enacted in terrorist discourse: verbal aggression in service of radicalisation. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 9:1
2020. “The Great Australian Pastime”: Pragmatic and Semantic Perspectives on Taking the Piss. In Studies in Ethnopragmatics, Cultural Semantics, and Intercultural Communication, ► pp. 95 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 april 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.