vendredi 14 février 2020

Déconstruction par les smart?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S038800011400151X

Abstract

A folk assumption about colloquial speech is that taboo words are used because speakers cannot find better words with which to express themselves: because speakers lack vocabulary. A competing possibility is that fluency is fluency regardless of subject matter—that there is no reason to propose a difference in lexicon size and ease of access for taboo as opposed to emotionally-neutral words. In order to test these hypotheses, we compared general verbal fluency via the Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) with taboo word fluency and animal word fluency in spoken and written formats. Both formats produced positive correlations between COWAT fluency, animal fluency, and taboo word fluency, supporting the fluency-is-fluency hypothesis. In each study, a set of 10 taboo words accounted for 55–60% of all taboo word data. Expressives were generated at higher rates than slurs. There was little sex-related variability in taboo word generation, and, consistent with findings that do not show a sex difference in taboo lexicon size, no overall sex difference in taboo word generation was obtained. Taboo fluency was positively correlated with the Big Five personality traits neuroticism and openness and negatively correlated with agreeableness and conscientiousness. Overall the findings suggest that, with the exception of female-sex-related slurs, taboo expressives and general pejoratives comprise the core of the category of taboo words while slurs tend to occupy the periphery, and the ability to generate taboo language is not an index of overall language poverty.


"Even given the limitations in our present understanding, though, the findings of the studies here suggest that itis possible to use our tools as researchers to help dispel commonly-held but inaccurate ideas about taboo language. While taboo words can obviously be offensive and can be associated with negative states, it would be a mistake to overgeneralize these negatively-toned phenomena to taint all uses of swear words, or ascribe undesirable traits to those who use them. Fluency is fluency, people who swear aren’t necessarily otherwise inarticulate, and, arguably, a good taboo lexicon may be considered a complement to the lexicon as a whole, ideally a mechanism for emotional expression of all sorts: anger, frustration, and derogation, but also surprise and elation."

Aucun commentaire:

 
Paperblog