Cover not available
Article published In:
Sex, Death & Politics: Taboos in Language
Edited by Melanie Keller, Philipp Striedl, Daniel Biro, Johanna Holzer and Benjamin Weber
[Pragmatics & Cognition 28:1] 2021
► pp. 193–221

Word norms and measures of linguistic reclamation for LGBTQ+ slurs

| University of Salford
While databases of taboo language word norms exist, none focus specifically on slurs as a category of taboo language. Furthermore, no existing databases include measures of linguistic reclamation, a phenomenon which may specifically affect the processing of slurs. I produced a database in which 155 native or near-native speakers of British English rated 41 LGBTQ+ slurs for a number of word properties and measures of linguistic reclamation. I then ran correlation and demographic group comparison analyses on the resulting database. I found a clear correlation pattern between properties and reclamation behaviours. I also found that there were age-related differences in age of acquisition and familiarity ratings; that gender identity and sexual identity differences were affected by being the target of slurs; and that sexual identity particularly affected differences in reclamation ratings.
Keywords: taboo language, slurs, word norms, linguistic reclamation, sexual identity, gender identity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Research background
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Respondents
    • 3.2Design
    • 3.3Procedure
    • 3.4Data analysis
      • 3.4.1Producing the database
      • 3.4.2Correlation analyses
      • 3.4.3Demographic group analyses
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Correlations between word properties and reclamation behaviours
    • 4.2Results of demographic group comparisons
      • 4.2.1Age group (16–29 vs. 30+) comparisons
      • 4.2.2Gender identity (women vs. men) comparisons
      • 4.2.3Sexual identity (non-heterosexual vs. heterosexual) comparisons
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Patterns of correlation between word properties and reclamation behaviours
    • 5.2Age group differences: Age of acquisition and familiarity ratings
    • 5.3Gender identity differences and the gendering of slurs
    • 5.4Sexual identity differences and reclamation
    • 5.5Differences in ratings for the transphobic slur tranny
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 16 March 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.00023.edm
References (40)
References
Allan, Keith & Kate Burridge. 2006. Forbidden words: Taboo and the censoring of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allan, Keith. 2019. Taboo Words and Language: An Overview. In Keith Allan (ed.), The Oxford Book of Taboo Words and Language. 1–27. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Adam K. & Elizabeth A. Phelps. 2002. Is the human amygdala critical for the subjective experience of emotion? Evidence of intact dispositional affect in patients with amygdala lesions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 14(5). 709–720. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Paul. 2008. Sexed texts: Language, gender and sexuality. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Bayer, Mareike, Werner Sommer & Annekathrin Schacht. 2012. P1 and beyond: Functional separation of multiple emotion effects in word recognition. Psychophysiology 491. 959–969. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, Claudia. 2014. Slurs and appropriation: An echoic account. Journal of Pragmatics 661. 35–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bradley, Margaret M. & Peter J. Lang. 1999. Affective Norms for English Words (ANEW): Instruction Manual and Affective Ratings (Technical Report C-1). Gainesville, FA: University of Florida.Google Scholar
Brontsema, Robin. 2004. A queer revolution: Reconceptualizing the debate over linguistic reclamation. Colorado Research in Linguistics 171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope. 1980. How and why are women more polite: Some evidence from a Mayan community. In Sally McConnell-Ginet, Ruth Borker & Nelly Furman (eds.), Women and language in literature and society, 111–136. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Brown, Roger & James Kulik. 1977. Flashbulb memories. Cognition 51. 73–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, Marc & Michael J. Cortese. 2011. Do the effects of subjective frequency and age of acquisition survive better word frequency norms? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 641. 545–559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Callahan, Matthew P. & Kyle T. Zukowski. 2019. Reactions to transgender women and men in public restrooms: Correlates and gender differences. Journal of Homosexuality 66(1). 117–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Deborah. 2006. On language and sexual politics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chen, Melinda Y-C. 1998. ‘“I am an Animal!”: Lexical Reappropriation, Performativity, and Queer’. Engendering Communication: Proceedings from the Fifth Berkeley Women and Language Conference, 128–140.Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1988. Gossip revisited: Language in all female groups. In Jennifer Coates & Deborah Cameron (eds.), Language & Gender: A Reader (2nd ed.) 263–274. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Coleman-Fountain, Edmund. 2014. Lesbian and gay youth and the question of labels. Sexualities 17(7). 802–817. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crissman, Halley P., Christina Czuhajewski, Michelle H. Moniz, Missy Plegue & Tammy Chang. 2019. Youth perspectives regarding the regulating of bathroom use by transgender individuals. Journal of Homosexuality 67(14). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croom, Adam M. 2011. Slurs. Language Sciences 33(3). 343–358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elischberger, Holger B., Jessica J. Glazier, Eric D. Hill & Lynn Verduzco-Baker. 2016. “Boys don’t cry” – or do they? Adult attitudes toward and beliefs about transgender youth. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research 75(5–6). 197–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Field, Andy. 2013. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics, 4th edn. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Fishman, Pamela M. 1980. Conversational insecurity. In Howard Giles, W. Peter Robinson & Philip M. Smith (eds.), Language: Social Psychological Perspectives, 127–132. Amsterdam: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gaucher, Danielle, Brianna Hunt & Lisa Sinclair. 2015. Can pejorative terms ever lead to positive social consequences? The case of SlutWalk. Language Sciences 521. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gramsci, Antonio. 1971. Selections from Prison Notebooks. Trans. Quintin Hoare & Geoffrey Nowell-Smith. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
. 1985. Selections from Cultural Writings. Eds. David Forgacs, & Geoffrey Nowell-Smith, trans. William Boelhower. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
Hart, Anna. 2001. Mann-Whitney test is not just a test of medians: Differences in spread can be important. BMJ 3231. 391–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herbert, Cassie. 2015. Precarious projects: The performative structure of reclamation. Language Sciences 521. 131–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 1995. Women, men and politeness. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Janschewitz, Kristin. 2008. Taboo, emotionally valenced, and emotionally neutral word norms. Behavior Research Methods 40(4), 1065–1074. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jay, Timothy, Catherine Caldwell-Harris & Krista King. 2008. Recalling taboo and nontaboo words. American Journal of Psychology 1211. 83–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Juhasz, Barbara J., Melvin J. Yap, Joanna Dicke, Sarah C. Taylor & Margaret M. Gullick. 2011. Tangible words are recognized faster: The grounding of meaning in sensory and perceptual systems. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 64(9). 1683–1691. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kensinger, Elizabeth A. & Suzanne Corkin. 2003. Memory enhancement for emotional words: Are emotional words more vividly remembered than neutral words? Memory & Cognition 31(8). 1169–1180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaBar, Kevin. S., & Elizabeth A. Phelps. 1998. Arousal-mediated memory consolidation: Role of the medial temporal lobe in humans. Psychological Science 9(6). 490–493. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Erich L. 2006. Nonparametrics: Statistical methods based on ranks. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Madan, Chris R., Andrea T. Shafer, Michelle Chan & Anthony Singhal. 2017. Shock and awe: Distinct effects of taboo words on lexical decision and free recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 70(4). 793–810. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mann, Henry. B. & Donald R. Whitney. 1947. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Annals of Mathematical Sciences 181. 50–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parent, Mike C. & Kevin Silva. 2018. Critical consciousness moderates the relationship between transphobia and “bathroom bill” voting. Journal of Counseling Psychology 65(4). 403–412. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russell, Stephen. T., Thomas J. Clarke, & Justin Clary. 2009. Are Teens “Post Gay”? Contemporary Adolescents’ Sexual Identity Labels. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 38(7). 884–890. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spearman, Charles. 1904. The proof and measurement of association between two things. The American Journal of Psychology 15(1). 72–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Hugh. 2011. Normality and queerness in gay fiction. In Hugh Stevens (ed.), The Cambridge companion to gay and lesbian writing, 81–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
White, Edmund. 1980. The Political Vocabulary of Homosexuality. In Lucy Burke, Tony Crowley, & Alan Girvin (eds.), 2000, The Routledge Language and Cultural Theory Reader, 189–196. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Heritage, Frazer
2023. Language, gender, and (hetero)normativity. In Incels and Ideologies [Palgrave Studies in Language, Gender and Sexuality, ], ► pp. 117 ff. DOI logo
Sturaro, Samuel, Caterina Suitner & Fabio Fasoli
2023. When is Self-Labeling Seen as Reclaiming? The Role of User and Observer's Sexual Orientation in Processing Homophobic and Category Labels’ use. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 42:4 ► pp. 464 ff. DOI logo
Worthen, Meredith G.F.
2023. Queer identities in the 21st century: Reclamation and stigma. Current Opinion in Psychology 49 ► pp. 101512 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.