34.3366, Review: The Grammar of Hate: Knoblock (ed.) (2022)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-34-3366. Thu Nov 09 2023. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 34.3366, Review: The Grammar of Hate: Knoblock (ed.) (2022)

Moderators: Malgorzata E. Cavar, Francis Tyers (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Justin Fuller
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Steven Franks, Everett Green, Daniel Swanson, Maria Lucero Guillen Puon, Zackary Leech, Lynzie Coburn, Natasha Singh, Erin Steitz
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Maria Lucero Guillen Puon <luceroguillen at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: 10-Nov-2023
From: Yat Ho Wong [yannisyhwong at gmail.com]
Subject: Discourse Analysis, Morphology: Knoblock (ed.) (2022)


Book announced at https://linguistlist.org/issues/33.2861

EDITOR: Natalia Knoblock
TITLE: The Grammar of Hate
SUBTITLE: Morphosyntactic Features of Hateful, Aggressive, and
Dehumanizing Discourse
PUBLISHER: Cambridge University Press
YEAR: 2022

REVIEWER: Yat Ho Wong

Summary

“The Grammar of Hate” is a comprehensive volume comprising an
introduction, 13 individual chapters, and an index. It offers an
exploration of verbal aggression expressed through morphosyntactic
means across seven Indo-European languages: Ukrainian, Russian,
English, Greek, Czech, German, and Danish.

Chapter 1, authored by Natalia Knoblock, illustrates how linguistic
communities tend to invent new slurs when the old ones become
outdated. The two slurs analysed in her study serve to create a
homogeneous out-group during times of conflict between two nations,
interestingly, both are related to plants. What is particularly
innovative is that, in response to these new layers of semantic
meaning, there have been changes in morphosyntactic features. For
example, in Ukrainian, the mass noun “vata” has transformed into a
collective noun and is now used with verbs in plural forms. Similarly,
in Russian, the term “Ukrop” has witnessed changes in animacy, leading
to irregular declension patterns. Unfortunately, this form of
linguistic creativity has been employed for derogatory purposes and
has contributed to the propagation of hateful discourse. Nevertheless,
this chapter illustrates how political conflicts can trigger semantic
and morphosyntactic innovations within languages.

Chapter 2, authored by Elisa Mattiello, delves into the use of the -o
suffix in English. Her research reveals that the -o suffix serves
three distinct functions: mockery, criticism, and offence. Mattiello
employs collocation analysis to demonstrate that words with the -o
suffix (e.g., weirdo) are more likely to be used in contexts with
derogatory intent compared to their base forms (e.g., weird).
Additionally, she conducts qualitative analyses by examining authentic
usages of these slangs, sourced from Green’s Dictionary of Slang. By
applying the theory of Morphopragmatics, Mattiello illustrates that
the -o suffix systematically contributes to independent pragmatic
meanings within language.

Chapter 3, authored by Elizaveta Tarasova and José Antonio Sánchez
Fajardo, examines the negative implications of the English suffix
-ie/y from a cognitive linguistic perspective. They analyse its
evaluative characteristics and how alterations in word meanings relate
to conceptual processes using evaluative morphological forms. The
chapter demonstrates that when the semantic components [+human] and
[+adult] are activated, diminution takes on a pejorative connotation.
Beyond the influence of context and initial meanings, the ellipted
noun plays a significant role in semantic shifts and new pragmatic
functions. Semantic attributes inherited from the base, including race
and ethnicity, contribute to the transition from diminution to
pejoration. Their research also reveals that non-Western nationality
or ethnicity-based nominalisations with the +ie/y suffix tend to have
a single derogatory meaning, while Western ones are often polysemous.
This underscores that pejorative language is not solely rooted in
linguistic elements but also anthropological attitudes.

In Chapter 4, Katerina Christopoulou, George Xydopoulos, and
Anastasios Tsangalidis investigate the correlation between grammatical
gender and slang offensiveness in Greek. They focus on diminutive
suffixes and misgendering in their research, summarising their
findings using two continua, one for masculine words and one for
feminine words. Their main discovery is that when a masculine word is
changed to a feminine form, it becomes offensive, especially with
augmentative prefixes and suffixes. However, making a feminine word
appear masculine does not increase its offensiveness. This suggests a
misogynistic perspective in Greek, where likening someone to the
feminine gender is seen as derogatory.

Chapter 5, by Jonáš Thál and Irene Elmerot, delves into the
misgendering of transgender individuals in Czech. It examines
variations in grammatical suffixes in expressions of dislike,
revealing infrahumaniation when preferred gender identities are
ignored. Hate speech in Czech does not heavily manipulate
morphosyntactic patterns, but rather through the following linguistic
constructions: subject-predicate agreement discrepancies in gender
(evident in pronouns, adjectival and participle suffixes),
gender-mismatched attributes (seen in adjectival suffixes and
possessive pronouns), predicative nouns such as “trans men are women,”
and conflicts in gender assignment for direct objects, primarily
reflected in personal pronouns. The authors thus suggest combining
morphosyntactic and semantic analyses with more extensive data for a
comprehensive assessment.

In Chapter 6, Miriam Lind and Damaris Nübling’s analysis reveals that
the German grammatical gender system has preserved a patriarchal
perspective of women. Women who depart from the idealised notion of
saintly motherhood due to characteristics such as immaturity,
excessive sexuality, assertiveness, or promiscuity are labelled using
neuter gender nouns, pronouns, or articles. This linguistic pattern
extends into contemporary hateful discourse, targeting both women and
non-binary individuals. When referring to female public figures, the
use of neuter gender serves to diminish their power and agency.
Additionally, when referring to non-binary individuals, it functions
as a derogatory label, relegating them to a status beneath that of
humans.

Natalia Knoblock and Yaroslava Sazonova, in Chapter 7, explore
alterations in grammatical gender within Ukrainian political
discourse, particularly when referring to male politicians, using
grammatically neuter forms. Viewed through the concept of grammatical
metaphor, their study demonstrates how gender can effectively convey
expressive and evaluative elements. The utilisation of neuter
linguistic features, such as verbs and adjectives marked with neuter
inflexions, becomes especially influential when employing the neuter
pronoun ‘it’ to express disapproval in reference to male politicians.
By linking the neuter grammatical gender to the domain of humanity,
where the expectation is either masculine or feminine forms, it
diminishes the standing of the politician being referred to.

In Chapter 8, Linda Flores Ohlson explores how the shift from ‘he’ or
‘she’ to ‘it’ represents a potent dehumanising tactic. She contends
that the selection of a pronoun can reveal much about one's attitude
towards and relationship with the subject. The choice of a specific
pronoun holds the power to either portray the entity as part of the
human realm or to exclude it from it. Using the neuter pronoun to
reference a human in English yields an extremely negative pragmatic
outcome. By examining both fictional and real-life situations, Ohlson
asserts that the use of the neuter pronoun serves to debase the target
of verbal attacks within the hierarchy of existence.

In Chapter 9, Natalia Beliaeva demonstrates the potential of blending
with names for manipulative purposes, particularly within media and
political discourse. While lexical blends are typically associated
with humour, Beliaeva’s research uncovers their darker side as
derogatory terms. Her study investigates the various triggers that
prompt the use of blending as a means of verbal aggression. Among
these triggers, personal names emerge as a significant factor. When a
personal name is blended with another word, it significantly heightens
the chances of conveying derogatory meanings and fostering pejorative
effects. However, she also posits that blending across distinct
domains may carry varying connotations, some of which could be
positive.

In Chapter 10, Katharina Korecky-Kröll and Wolfgang Dressler delve
into the examination of adjective compounds in the German language.
Expressive compounds, typically composed of a derogatory noun and a
predominantly pejorative adjective, carry a strong negative
connotation. In these compounds, both the first and second elements
mutually amplify and intensify each other, thus bestowing the compound
with potent offensive potential. These expressive adjective compounds
are predominantly encountered in assertive speech acts within
aggressive discourse, serving functions such as insults, curses,
threats, and aggressive commands. The authors contribute to research
on German adjective compounds by offering a more detailed
classification with illustrative examples.

In Chapter 11, Robert Bianchi examines the use of imperative verbs in
Brent Tarrant's hate-filled manifesto posted on Facebook. This
analysis uncovers a significant frequency of aggressive verbs such as
"kill," "destroy," and "attack" within the text. Importantly, the
study reveals that these verbs are often directed towards actual human
beings, as opposed to a neutral reference corpus where these actions
are not typically associated with specific individuals. The paper
explores how these selected grammatical elements function to position
the author as a de facto leader within an envisioned radical white
supremacist revolutionary movement characterised by violence,
environmentalism, and anti-establishment sentiments.

Chapter 12, authored by Klaus Geyer, Eckhard Bick, and Andrea Kleene,
delves into the examination of two common constructions utilised in
hate speech within Danish and German social media discussions. These
constructions, namely the "I am no racist but..." and "oh so +
adjective + noun" forms, are thoroughly explored beyond the scope of
individual word forms and lexemes to encompass their overall
structural composition. The chapter also provides insights into the
frequent targets of these constructions, including foreigners,
refugees, Muslims, and individuals with Middle Eastern backgrounds. It
highlights the methodological innovation that, through meticulous
annotation, researchers can move beyond the lexical level to
investigate the formulation patterns and construction of hate speech,
which might facilitate hate speech management online.

In Chapter 13, David Peterson utilises the systemic functional
linguistic approach to dissect homophobic discourse. His specific
focus lies in how text creators deploy interpersonal resources to
shape the perception of spatio-temporal aspects in Western America,
consistently portraying them in connection with heteronormative
masculinity. This often contrasts with depictions of metropolitan or
cosmopolitan spaces and individuals. Drawing inspiration from the
Hallidayan concept of Mood^Residue clause structure, the chapter
delves into the intricate relationship between space-time, grammatical
mood, speech function, and the representation of both queer and
heteronormative participants within clauses. This analysis unveils
that queer cowboys are marginalised both in spatial and temporal
dimensions.


Evaluation

The edited collection brings together a coherent set of articles that
explore the utilisation of morphosyntactic elements in hate speech and
dehumanising language. These chapters are authored by leading experts
in their respective fields, providing authoritative and in-depth
insights into their specific subjects. Notably, this volume goes
beyond the confines of the English language, encompassing a range of
other languages. As the editor highlighted, this book represents an
endeavour to move beyond the examination of lexical and discursive
aspects of hateful discourse. Several chapters, such as Chapters 1, 5,
6, and 7, delve into declension patterns concerning grammatical
gender, Chapters 2, 3, and 4, scrutinise suffixes, particularly
diminutives, Chapter 8, investigates pronouns, and Chapters 9 and 10,
focus on word formation, effectively accomplish this objective. The
chapters within this volume investigate various contexts where hateful
discourse is prevalent. These contexts encompass situations involving
ethnic, racial, or religious bias (Chapters 2, 3, 8, 11, and 12), as
well as discussions related to homophobia and transphobia (Chapters 4,
5, 6, 8, and 13). Furthermore, specific chapters delve into the realm
of sexism (Chapters 4 and 6), while others explore the intricate
relationship between political divides and verbal aggression (Chapters
1, 7, 9, and 10).

Another objective of this edited volume is to contribute to the
identification of hate speech online. However, in certain chapters,
this goal is implicitly addressed, with limited explicit guidance on
how researchers focusing on the automatic detection of online hate
speech can leverage the insights presented in this book. An exception
to this pattern is Chapter 12, where the author dedicates a few lines
in the concluding section to discuss the applicability of the results
in this context. Thál and Elmerot in Chapter 5 also acknowledge that,
particularly in the context of Czech, determining whether an
expression is dehumanising or misgendering solely based on
morphosyntactic features could be misleading (2022: 113). Similarly,
Beliaeva in Chapter 9 underscores that blending itself is not
necessarily an indicator of verbal aggression (2022: 192). The
subtleties in determining its intent often necessitate a more
contextual interpretation for a definitive assessment. Such
complexities further hinder the transferability of the findings to
other domains. The elusive nature of hate speech can make it
challenging to define precisely and quantify its level of
offensiveness. In some instances, operationalising hate speech or
assessing its degree of offensiveness may rely primarily on the
intuitions of native speakers, as suggested by Christopoulou et al. in
Chapter 4 (2022: 87).

In conclusion, this edited volume, with its focus on various languages
and contexts, provides a comprehensive view of the challenges and
nuances involved in addressing hate speech. It also emphasises the
significant scholarly attention given to affixation, compounding, and
other word-formation methods as means of verbal aggression. However,
it also presents a somewhat pessimistic outlook for the effective
identification of hate speech on social media, particularly when
dealing with content that is produced indirectly and subtly.



REFERENCES
Dressler, W. U. and L. Merlini Barbaresi (2017). Pragmatics and
Morphology:Morphopragmatics.
In: Y. Huang (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 493–510.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Halliday’s
Introduction to Functional
Grammar, 4th edn. London: Routledge.

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Yat Ho Wong is currently pursuing his PhD at the University of
Duisburg-Essen, where he is conducting research on the self- and
other-construction of Hong Kong migrants within British public
discourse. His study primarily examines the influence of elite
discourse on migrants through newspaper publications, aiming to
understand the extent to which their representation in public
discourse shapes their lived experiences in their new host country.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please consider donating to the Linguist List https://give.myiu.org/iu-bloomington/I320011968.html


LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

American Dialect Society/Duke University Press http://dukeupress.edu

Bloomsbury Publishing (formerly The Continuum International Publishing Group) http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/

Brill http://www.brill.com

Cambridge Scholars Publishing http://www.cambridgescholars.com/

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

Cascadilla Press http://www.cascadilla.com/

De Gruyter Mouton https://cloud.newsletter.degruyter.com/mouton

Dictionary Society of North America http://dictionarysociety.com/

Edinburgh University Press www.edinburghuniversitypress.com

Elsevier Ltd http://www.elsevier.com/linguistics

Equinox Publishing Ltd http://www.equinoxpub.com/

European Language Resources Association (ELRA) http://www.elra.info

Georgetown University Press http://www.press.georgetown.edu

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Lincom GmbH https://lincom-shop.eu/

Linguistic Association of Finland http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/sky/

MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics / Landelijke (LOT) http://www.lotpublications.nl/

Oxford University Press http://www.oup.com/us

SIL International Publications http://www.sil.org/resources/publications

Springer Nature http://www.springer.com

Wiley http://www.wiley.com


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-34-3366
----------------------------------------------------------