1887
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2542-3851
  • E-ISSN: 2542-386X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigates the interplay between commenters’ gender and their language use in Slovene socially unacceptable Facebook comments by inspecting the frequency of opinion markers and impoliteness triggers, and the pragmatic functions of opinion markers which were investigated according to a newly developed typology. The analysis shows statistically significant differences between men and women in their formulation of opinions and use of impoliteness triggers. Comments written by men are characteristically formed as fact-like covert opinions and contain explicit impoliteness triggers (e.g., insults). Comments written by women are formed as overt opinions explicitly encoding subjectivity and include implicit impoliteness triggers (e.g., tropes). A common feature is the use of opinion markers as self-oriented face-saving devices. But while men use opinion markers to explicitly communicate their desire to save face, women use them to perform face-saving implicitly.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00093.pah
2023-10-03
2024-06-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atelsek, Jean
    1981 “An anatomy of opinions.” Language in Society10(2): 217–225. 10.1017/S0047404500008642
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500008642 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bach, Kent
    2006 “Speech acts and pragmatics.” InBlackwell Guide to the philosophy of language, ed. byMichael Devitt, and Richard Hanley, 147–167. Malden: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470757031.ch8
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757031.ch8 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barker, Chris, and Emma A. Jane
    2016Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice (5th edn.). Glasgow: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Breitkopf-Siepmann, Anna
    2012 “Hedging in German and Russian conference presentations: A cross-cultural view.” InSubjectivity in Language and in Discourse, ed. byNicole Baumgarten, Inke Du Bois, and Juliane House, 295–318. Bingley: Emerald.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
    1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cameron, Deborah
    2021 “Women, civility and the language of politics: Realities and representations.” The Political Quarterly93(1): 25–31. 10.1111/1467‑923X.13050
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.13050 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chalupnik, Malgorzata, Christine Christie, and Louise Mullany
    2017 “(Im)politeness and gender.” InThe Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ed. byJonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Daniel Z. Kádár, 517–537. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7_20
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_20 [Google Scholar]
  8. Costello, Matthew, and James Hawdon
    2018 “Who are the online extremists among us? Sociodemographic characteristics, social networking, and online experiences of those who produce online hate materials.” Violence and Gender5(1): 55–60. 10.1089/vio.2017.0048
    https://doi.org/10.1089/vio.2017.0048 [Google Scholar]
  9. Culpeper, Jonathan
    2011Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511975752
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975752 [Google Scholar]
  10. Fortuna, Paula, and Sérgio Nunes
    2018 “A survey on automatic detection of hate speech in text.” ACM Computing Surveys51(4): 1–30. 10.1145/3232676
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3232676 [Google Scholar]
  11. Franza, Jasmin, Bojan Evkoski, and Darja Fišer
    2022 “Emotion analysis in socially unacceptable discourse.” Slovenščina 2.0: empirične, aplikativne in interdisciplinarne raziskave10(1): 1–22. 10.4312/slo2.0.2022.1.1‑22
    https://doi.org/10.4312/slo2.0.2022.1.1-22 [Google Scholar]
  12. Gąsior, Weronika
    2015 “Cultural scripts and the speech act of opinions in Irish English: A study amongst Irish and Polish university students.” ELOPE: English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries12(1):11–28. 10.4312/elope.12.1.11‑28
    https://doi.org/10.4312/elope.12.1.11-28 [Google Scholar]
  13. Herring, Susan C., and Ashley R. Dainas
    2018 “Receiver interpretations of emoji functions: A gender perspective.” InProceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Emoji Understanding and Applications in Social Media (Emoji2018), ed. byS. Wijeratne, E. Kiciman, H. Saggion, A. Sheth. Stanford, CA, 25June.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Holmes, Janet
    1984 “Modifying illocutionary force.” Journal of Pragmatics8(3): 345–365. 10.1016/0378‑2166(84)90028‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(84)90028-6 [Google Scholar]
  15. 1995Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Hyland, Ken
    1998Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.54
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54 [Google Scholar]
  17. Kienpointner, Manfred, and Maria Stopfner
    2017 “Ideology and (im)politeness.” InThe Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, edited byJonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Daniel Z. Kádár. 61–87. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7_4
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_4 [Google Scholar]
  18. Krasnova, Hanna, Natasha F. Veltri, Nicole Eling, and Peter Buxmann
    2017 “Why men and women continue to use social networking sites: The role of gender differences.” The Journal of Strategic Information Systems26(4): 261–284. 10.1016/j.jsis.2017.01.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2017.01.004 [Google Scholar]
  19. Lakoff, Robin
    1975Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Lee, Sungbom
    2012 “A pragmatic analysis of defamation and slanderous remarks.” Korean Journal of Linguistics371: 401–416. 10.18855/lisoko.2012.37.2.008
    https://doi.org/10.18855/lisoko.2012.37.2.008 [Google Scholar]
  21. Ljubešić, Nikola, Darja Fišer, and Tomaž Erjavec
    2019 “The FRENK datasets of socially unacceptable discourse in Slovene and English.” InText, Speech, and Dialogue: 22nd International Conference, TSD 2019, Ljubljana, Slovenia, September 11–13, 2019, Proceedings, ed. byKamil Ekštein, 103–114. Cham: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Luukka, Minna-Riitta, and Raija Markkanen
    1997 “Impersonalization as a form of hedging.” InHedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, ed. byRaija Markkanen, and Hartmut Schroder, 168–187. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110807332.168
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110807332.168 [Google Scholar]
  23. Mathew, Binny, Ritam Dutt, Pawan Goyal, and Animesh Mukherjee
    2018 “Spread of hate speech in online social media.” InWebSci’18: Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on Web Science, 173–182. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Mills, Sara
    2005 “Gender and impoliteness.” Journal of Politeness Research1(2): 263–280. 10.1515/jplr.2005.1.2.263
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.2.263 [Google Scholar]
  25. Mugair, Sarab Kadir, and Amthal Mohammed Abbas
    2018 “A sociolinguistic analysis of hedging in Facebook comments: A sex-and age-based approach.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature7(7): 196–201. 10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.7p.196
    https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.7p.196 [Google Scholar]
  26. Mullan, Kerry, and Susanna Karlsson
    2012 “Subjectivity in contrast: A cross-linguistic comparison of ‘I think’ in Australian English, French and Swedish.” InSubjectivity in Language and Discourse, ed. byNicole Baumgarten, Inke Du Bois, and Juliane House, 271–294. Bingley: Emerald.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Musolff, Andreas
    2015 “Dehumanizing metaphors in UK immigrant debates in press and online media.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict3(1): 41–56. 10.1075/jlac.3.1.02mus
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.3.1.02mus [Google Scholar]
  28. Neurauter-Kessels, Manuela
    2011 “Im/polite reader responses on British online news sites.” Journal of Politeness Research7(2): 187–214. 10.1515/jplr.2011.010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2011.010 [Google Scholar]
  29. Newman, Matthew, Carla Groom, Lori Handelman, and James Pennebaker
    2008 “Gender differences in language use: An analysis of 14,000 text samples.” Discourse processes45(3): 211–236. 10.1080/01638530802073712
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530802073712 [Google Scholar]
  30. Paz, María Antonia, Julio Montero-Díaz, and Alicia Moreno-Delgado
    2020 “Hate speech: A systematized review.” SAGE Open. 10.1177/2158244020973022
    https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020973022 [Google Scholar]
  31. Poletto, Fabio, Valerio Basile, Manuela Sanguinetti, Cristina Bosco, and Viviana Patti
    2021 “Resources and benchmark corpora for hate speech detection: A systematic review.” Language Resources and Evaluation55(2): 477–523. 10.1007/s10579‑020‑09502‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-020-09502-8 [Google Scholar]
  32. Prokofieva, Anna, and Julia Hirschberg
    2014 “Hedging and speaker commitment.” Paper presented at the5th International Workshop on Emotion, Social Signals, Sentiment & Linked Open Data. Reykjavik, Iceland, 26–27 May 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Schiffrin, Deborah
    1987Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611841
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611841 [Google Scholar]
  34. Schwartz, H. Andrew, Johannes C. Eichstaedt, Margaret L. Kern, Lukasz Dziurzynski, Stephanie M. Ramones, Megha Agrawal, Achal Shah, David Stillwell, Martin E. P. Seligman, and Lyle H. Ungar
    2013 “Personality, gender, and age in the language of social media: The open-vocabulary approach.” PloS one8(9), e73791. 10.1371/journal.pone.0073791
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073791 [Google Scholar]
  35. Searle, John R.
    1975 “A taxonomy of illocutionary acts.” InLanguage, Mind and Knowledge, ed. byKeith Gunderson, 344–369. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Siegel, Alexandra A.
    2020 “Online hate speech.” InSocial Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, Prospects for Reform, ed. byNathaniel Persily, and Joshua A. Tucker, 56–88. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108890960.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108890960.005 [Google Scholar]
  37. Stangroom, Jeremy
    2022 “Chi-square test calculator.” https://www.socscistatistics.com/tests/chisquare2/default2.aspx (accessed16 August 2022).
  38. Sung, Chit Cheung Matthew
    2012 “Exploring the interplay of gender, discourse, and (im)politeness.” Journal of Gender Studies21(3): 285–300. 10.1080/09589236.2012.681179
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2012.681179 [Google Scholar]
  39. Tontodimamma, Alice, Eugenia Nissi, Annalina Sarra, and Lara Fontanella
    2021 “Thirty years of research into hate speech: Topics of interest and their evolution.” Scientometrics1261: 157–179. 10.1007/s11192‑020‑03737‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03737-6 [Google Scholar]
  40. Toprak, Cigdem, Niklas Jakob, and Iryna Gurevych
    2010 “Sentence and expression level annotation of opinions in user-generated discourse.” InProceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 575–584. Uppsala: Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. van Dijk, Teun
    2006 “Ideology and discourse analysis.” Journal of political ideologies11(2): 115–140. 10.1080/13569310600687908
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13569310600687908 [Google Scholar]
  42. Veglis, Andreas, and Andreas Pomportsis
    2012 “The e-citizen in the cyberspace–A journalism aspect.” Paper presented at the25th International Conference on Information Law and Ethics 2012, Corfu, 29–30 June 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Vehovar, Vasja, Blaž Povž, Darja Fišer, Nikola Ljubešić, Ajda Šulc, and Dejan Jontes
    2020 “Družbeno nesprejemljivi diskurz na Facebookovih straneh novičarskih portalov [Socially unacceptable discourse on news media Facebook pages].” Teorija in praksa57(2): 622–645.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Walker, Mason, and Katerina Eva Matsa
    2021 “News consumption across social media in 2021.” https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2021/09/20/news-consumption-across-social-media-in-2021/ (accessed20 August 2022).
  45. Watanabe, Hajime, Mondher Bouazizi, and Tomoaki Ohtsuki
    2018 “Hate speech on Twitter: A pragmatic approach to collect hateful and offensive expressions and perform hate speech detection.” InIEEE Access, vol.61, 13825–13835. 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2806394
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2806394 [Google Scholar]
  46. Wegman, Cornelis
    1994 “Factual argumentation in private opinions: Effects of rhetorical context and involvement.” Text14(2): 287–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Wilamová, Sirma
    2005 “On the function of hedging devices in negatively polite discourse.” Brno Studies in English31(1): 85–93.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00093.pah
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00093.pah
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): gender; hate speech; implicitness; impoliteness; opinion; social media; speech acts
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error