A drawback for substitutional arguments.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: A drawback for substitutional arguments.
Authors: Diaz-Legaspe, Justina1,2 (AUTHOR) jdiazlegaspe@gmail.com, Sennet, Adam3 (AUTHOR) amsennet@ucdavis.edu
Source: Language Sciences. Nov2021, Vol. 88, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Subject Terms: *Linguistic context, Dilemma, Argument, Discriminatory language, Group theory
Abstract: Competing theories on the semantics of group pejorative terms (also known as 'slurs') comprise both advocates and opponents to the Identity Thesis (IT), according to which these terms and their neutral counterparts do not differ in semantic value. In the opponents' camp, Christopher Hom has offered an argument based on substitution of slurs and neutral counterparts that both supports his semanticist approach and cast doubts on all IT-based approaches to slurs. We aim to point to a dilemma triggered by this argument based on evidence showing that substitution of some words (including but not restricted to slurs) for non-problematically co-referential pairs may fail to preserve truth-values in some linguistics contexts. • We undermine an argument for an approach to the semantics of slurring terms. • The argument involves substitution of slurring terms for neutral ones. • We show the argument over-generates by presenting similar cases. • We support a 'register' based approach to the semantics of slur terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Language Sciences is the property of Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Description
Abstract:Competing theories on the semantics of group pejorative terms (also known as 'slurs') comprise both advocates and opponents to the Identity Thesis (IT), according to which these terms and their neutral counterparts do not differ in semantic value. In the opponents' camp, Christopher Hom has offered an argument based on substitution of slurs and neutral counterparts that both supports his semanticist approach and cast doubts on all IT-based approaches to slurs. We aim to point to a dilemma triggered by this argument based on evidence showing that substitution of some words (including but not restricted to slurs) for non-problematically co-referential pairs may fail to preserve truth-values in some linguistics contexts. • We undermine an argument for an approach to the semantics of slurring terms. • The argument involves substitution of slurring terms for neutral ones. • We show the argument over-generates by presenting similar cases. • We support a 'register' based approach to the semantics of slur terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:03880001
DOI:10.1016/j.langsci.2021.101431