1. I agree with Hornsby that context is an important consideration for the full evaluation of the meaning of a statement, especially when considering slurs. The various gestures that are expressed by individuals appear to add something to meaning or intent beyond what is explicitly stated, and in some cases, can completely alter how the listener interprets our statements.
2. I don't believe that derogatory words are 'useless' as Hornsby suggests. To say that there are neutral counterparts to all derogatory words seems counter intuitive because many would argue that derogatory words seem to possess their own distinct meaning or intent (all variations of intent) that is specific to their utterance. The utterance of a derogatory statement may invoke change in the emotions of the listener, regardless of the context or the intent of the speaker.
3. I object to the idea of words being only a result of the context of the practices of embodied speakers. It seems if when looking at the time before words, we could imagine that gestures would be necessary to rely meaning, however, words were meant to overcome the limits that are imposed on communication when we rely on gestures alone, so it seems hard to argue that words require gestures or expressions in order to possess any meaning. It would seem that we would rely upon direct meanings of words in order to relay something beyond what gestures could accomplish by any extension.
Hi, Rigo! I am totally on your side when it comes to the uselessness of slurs as Hornsby suggests in her paper. I spent quite some time on my own post talking about how all the derogatory words do not fit in the useless category, and people argued that then those words were not derogatory. Alright, so if I can interpret all the words in a useful way, which I probably can, does that mean useless words do not exist? I argued that if all so called "derogatory words" are used in positive ways, accidental/neutral ways (e.g. I only try to express the neutral meaning without knowing the word I use is offensive to people), or actually offensive ways, of course, depending on the context and situation. So, I can only ask the people who agree with Hornsby to give me a sentence, see if I can interpret it. Do not say I interpret the sentence wrong, people, considering you have equal chances to say it wrong. Do you truly know what you mean when you say something? I might just know it better. ;-)
ReplyDeleteIn regards to your third point, I am taking that you are referring to Hornsby's gestural approach to derogatory words. I agree that gestures shouldn't be considered a necessary mechanism in creating the meaning of a word. However, I think they do still have some role to play in phrases. In your post it seems that you are acknowledging the ability of gestures to contain meaning. When talking with others (face-to-face), we pick up the nuances of their speech acts with some attention being paid to their motions. From the most demonstrative gestures to basic eye contact, we do glean some meaning (intended or not) from the physical acts (during a conversation) of others. This meaning can often be removed from the content of the words, which supports your position, but I do think gestures operate in some key meaning "superstructure" of an utterance. This is a rough interpretation of their role, but I believe that Hornsby's notion of gesture works when we expand it's role in meaning from a single word, to a single utterance.
ReplyDelete