1887
image of The role of metonymy in social identity

Abstract

Abstract

In this study the role of metonymy in relation to social identity is investigated in naturally occurring internet discourse of social groups. Two Reddit subreddits banned for promoting hate based on identity are compared with two unbanned subreddits that predominantly relate to the same gender-focused concerns. It is found that metonymies to reference social identity are more prevalent in the two banned subreddits, where they represent both social in-groups, and out-groups. Analysis of their use in conjunction with other variables identified as having psychological significance finds that each metonymy has a particular role and psychological characterisation. And consideration of diachronic change in the prevalence and cooccurrence of the metonymies provides insights into the evolution of the identity and concerns of the groups. It is concluded that metonymies at the group level support access to and reification of evolving group-specific conceptualisations, and that this in turn supports group identity. Considering metonymies of social groups in large corpora may thus support understanding of group-specific attitudes, and their evolution over time, including in relation to potential hatefulness of discourse.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/msw.23029.dil
2025-01-27
2025-02-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/msw.23029.dil/msw.23029.dil.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/msw.23029.dil&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aarts, B.
    (2011) Oxford Modern English Grammar. OUP Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anthony, L. [Google Scholar]
  3. BAAL
    BAAL (2021) Recommendations on Good Practice in Applied Linguistics. 4th Edition. https://www.baal.org.uk/who-we-are/resources/BAAL-Good-Practice-Guidelines-2021.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baumgartner, J.
    (2022) Pushshift.io. Pushshift.Io. https://pushshift.io/
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Biggs, J.
    (2024) factor-analyzer: A Factor Analysis tool written in Python (Version 0.5.0) [Python; MacOS, Microsoft :: Windows, POSIX, Unix]. https://pypi.org/project/factor-analyzer/
    [Google Scholar]
  6. BPS
    BPS (2017) Ethics Guidelines for Internet-mediated Research. https://www.bps.org.uk/news-and-policy/ethics-guidelines-internet-mediated-research
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L.
    (1994) Collective self-esteem consequences of outgroup derogation when a valued social identity is on trial. European Journal of Social Psychology, (), –. 10.1002/ejsp.2420240603
    https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420240603 [Google Scholar]
  8. Brewer, M. B.
    (1999) The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?Journal of Social Issues, (), –. 10.1111/0022‑4537.00126
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00126 [Google Scholar]
  9. Briffault, R.
    (1931) The Mothers: The Matriarchal Theory of Social Origins. Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. cardiffnlp
    cardiffnlp (2022) Cardiffnlp/twitter-roberta-base-sentiment-latest · Hugging Face. https://huggingface.co/cardiffnlp/twitter-roberta-base-sentiment-latest
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cervone, C., Augoustinos, M., & Maass, A.
    (2021) The Language of Derogation and Hate: Functions, Consequences, and Reappropriation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, (), –. 10.1177/0261927X20967394
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20967394 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9780203771587
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E.
    (2014) Figurative Language. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. DeWilde, B.
    (2024) Textacy Documentation [Computer software]. https://textacy.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Feyaerts, K.
    (1999) Metonymic Hierarchies: The Conceptualization of Stupidity in German Idiomatic Expressions. InMetonymy in Language and Thought (p.). John Benjamins. https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027299376-hcp.4.18fey. 10.1075/hcp.4.18fey
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.18fey [Google Scholar]
  16. Gustafsson Sendén, M., Lindholm, T., & Sikström, S.
    (2014) Selection Bias in Choice of Words: Evaluations of “I” and “We” Differ Between Contexts, but “They” Are Always Worse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, (), –. 10.1177/0261927X13495856
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X13495856 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hagberg, A., Swart, P. J., & Schult, D. A.
    (2008) Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX (LA-UR-08-05495; LA-UR-08-5495). Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States). https://www.osti.gov/biblio/960616. 10.25080/TCWV9851
    https://doi.org/10.25080/TCWV9851 [Google Scholar]
  18. Honnibal, M., & Montani, I.
    (2021) spaCy · Industrial-strength Natural Language Processing in Python. spaCy. https://spacy.io/
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2024) English · spaCy Models Documentation. English. https://spacy.io/models/en
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hovy, D., & Spruit, S. L.
    (2016) The Social Impact of Natural Language Processing. Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers), –. 10.18653/v1/P16‑2096
    https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P16-2096 [Google Scholar]
  21. Johannßen, D., & Biemann, C.
    (2018) Between the Lines: Machine Learning for Prediction of Psychological Traits — A Survey. InA. Holzinger, P. Kieseberg, A. M. Tjoa, & E. Weippl (Eds.), Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction (pp.–). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑99740‑7_13
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99740-7_13 [Google Scholar]
  22. Judd, C. M., & Park, B.
    (1988) Out-group homogeneity: Judgments of variability at the individual and group levels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, , –. 10.1037/0022‑3514.54.5.778
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.778 [Google Scholar]
  23. Lakoff, G.
    (2008) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Langacker, R. W.
    (2000) Grammar and Conceptualization. Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Littlemore, J.
    (2015) Metonymy. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107338814
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338814 [Google Scholar]
  26. Merriam-Webster: America’s Most Trusted Dictionary
    Merriam-Webster: America’s Most Trusted Dictionary (2024) https://www.merriam-webster.com/
  27. OED
    OED (2024) terf — Quick search results | Oxford English Dictionary. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/terf_n?tab=meaning_and_use#1358958210
    [Google Scholar]
  28. ovarit.com
    ovarit.com (2020) Welcome to o/GenderCritical! Please read this before posting! | Info & Rules. Ovarit. https://ovarit.com/o/GenderCritical/17802/welcome-to-o-gendercritical-please-read-this-before-posting-info-rules
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z.
    (1999) Towards a Theory of Metonymy. InMetonymy in Language and Thought (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.4.03rad
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.03rad [Google Scholar]
  30. Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Haslam, S. A.
    (2010) The social identity approach in social psychology. InThe SAGE Handbook of Identities (pp.–). SAGE. 10.4135/9781446200889.n4
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200889.n4 [Google Scholar]
  31. R/Feminism
    R/Feminism (2023) R/Feminism. https://www.reddit.com/r/Feminism/
  32. Ribeiro, M. H., Blackburn, J., Bradlyn, B., Cristofaro, E. D., Stringhini, G., Long, S., Greenberg, S., & Zannettou, S.
    (2021) The Evolution of the Manosphere across the Web. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, , –. 10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18053
    https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18053 [Google Scholar]
  33. R/MensRights
    R/MensRights (2023) [R/MensRights]. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/
  34. Rothermel, A.-K.
    (2023) The role of evidence-based misogyny in antifeminist online communities of the ‘manosphere’. Big Data & Society, (), 20539517221145671. 10.1177/20539517221145671
    https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517221145671 [Google Scholar]
  35. Schlueter, E., Schmidt, P., & Wagner, U.
    (2008) Disentangling the Causal Relations of Perceived Group Threat and Outgroup Derogation: Cross-national Evidence from German and Russian Panel Surveys. European Sociological Review, (), –. 10.1093/esr/jcn029
    https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcn029 [Google Scholar]
  36. scikit-learn
    scikit-learn (2024) Sklearn.neural_network.MLPClassifier. Scikit-Learn. https://scikit-learn/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.neural_network.MLPClassifier.html
    [Google Scholar]
  37. SciPy
    SciPy (2022) scipy.stats.linregress — SciPy v1.9.3 Manual. https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.stats.linregress.html
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Serrà, J., Leontiadis, I., Spathis, D., Stringhini, G., Blackburn, J., & Vakali, A.
    (2017) Class-based Prediction Errors to Detect Hate Speech with Out-of-vocabulary Words. InZ. Waseem, W. H. K. Chung, D. Hovy, & J. Tetreault (Eds.), Proceedings of the First Workshop on Abusive Language Online (pp.–). Association for Computational Linguistics. 10.18653/v1/W17‑3005
    https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W17-3005 [Google Scholar]
  39. Sunstein, C. R.
    (2009) Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide. Oxford University Press, Incorporated. ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/open/detail.action?docID=431309. 10.1093/oso/9780195378016.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195378016.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  40. Sweetser, E.
    (2022) Pronouns, metonymy, and identity. Cognitive Semiotics, (), –. 10.1515/cogsem‑2022‑2009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2022-2009 [Google Scholar]
  41. Tajfel, H.
    (1978) Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp., ). Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W.
    (2010) The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, (), –. 10.1177/0261927X09351676
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676 [Google Scholar]
  43. Traugott, E. C.
    (2012) Chapter 27 Pragmatics and language change. InThe Cambridge handbook of pragmatics (pp.–). 10.1017/CBO9781139022453.030
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139022453.030 [Google Scholar]
  44. u/worstnerd
    u/worstnerd (2020, August20). Understanding hate on Reddit, and the impact of our new policy [Reddit Post]. R/Redditsecurity. www.reddit.com/r/redditsecurity/comments/idclo1/understanding_hate_on_reddit_and_the_impact_of/
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Wachowski, L., & Wachowski, L.
    (Directors) (1999) The Matrix [Video recording].
    [Google Scholar]
  46. White, R. S.
    (2024) Interpellation and group polarization: Aspects of group hatred. International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, . 10.1002/aps.1873
    https://doi.org/10.1002/aps.1873 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/msw.23029.dil
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/msw.23029.dil
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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