Dysphemism - WikiHQ

A dysphemism is an expression with connotations that are derogatory either about the subject matter or to the audience. Dysphemisms contrast with neutral or euphemistic expressions. For example, expressing disapproval by calling a person a snake is a dysphemism. Dysphemism may be motivated by fear, distaste, hatred, contempt, humour and abuse.

Etymology

The word dysphemism was composed from the Greek elements and in the late 19th century. Related terms include malphemism (from the Latin ), cacophemism (from the Greek ) and pyrophemism (from the Greek )

Usage

A dysphemism is a marked form (standing out as unusual or divergent) which expresses a speaker's view or attitude towards the listener or group.

Types

Dysphemistic epithets

Animal names are frequently used as dysphemistic epithets. By using one, the speaker attempts to offend or antagonize the listener by targeting their humanity. Examples include bitch, pig, swine, chicken, weasel, sheep, snake, rat, and jackass.

Name dysphemism

Used when someone uses another's given name, disrespectfully or otherwise inappropriately, rather than a kinship term, style of office, or honorific to address someone specifically." The speaker uses a more casual or lower style than is appropriate given the social context. One example is calling one's mother by her first name rather than Mom.

"Peter, what are you doing?" (rather than Dad/Father)
"How are you doing, Bill?" (rather than Uncle Bill)

Many languages, to a greater extent than in English, indicate respect with verb tenses and thus provide more scope for such dysphemism and require care by non-native speakers to avoid causing offence by unintentional dysphemism.

This use of language may not constitute dysphemism if the choice of words used by the speaker is welcomed by the listener, such as a father who prefers being called by his given name as opposed to Dad/Father. In that case it would appeal to the listener's positive face rather than damage it and would thus not be a dysphemism.

Similarly, being more formal with someone than expected may be a type of dysphemism. For example, if a child usually calls their father dad or papa, calling him father may be a way of offending or antagonizing him, through coldness or distance (in other words, one might formally refer to one's father as father, but when speaking to him one would use a particularly endearing term), or that he is merely his role, if a child usually called Billy is addressed by a parent as William.

Dysphemism may also be indicated by the disuse or substitution of someone's name or title. For instance, someone named Teresa who made overstated claims for a company-paid trip could be described as "the little witch who charmed the boss into approving that phony expense report".

Anger or dissatisfaction with the listener (or group of people) may compel a speaker to use a name dysphemism or term of address dysphemism. Likewise, the word fanny when used in American English is a euphemism for one's buttocks, so benign that children use it. However, in British, Australian, New Zealand, and South African English, the word fanny is slang for vulva and is considered to be vulgar.

Context and drift

Some phrases that are euphemisms in certain contexts can be considered dysphemistic in others. These are often referred to as X-phemisms: whether the utterance is dysphemistic or not depends on the context of the utterance. For example, many X-phemisms regarding sexual intercourse could be considered euphemistic within peer groups yet dysphemistic in certain audiences. One might be more likely to say that one "got laid" to a friend than to one's grandparents. It was their belief that by calling their organization a terrorist organization they were being directly compared to Al-Qaeda, with whom they claim no connection. Naming groups in this way has been described, "A name will place emphasis on certain aspects and characteristics of an object, while neglecting or omitting other key areas". Certain lexical items can be used to activate these representations, conjuring stereotypical images which then become the prototype in the listener's mind. Dysphemic terms activate negative stereotypes present in the listener's memory and affect their interpretation of the given text.

Move from euphemism to dysphemism

The process of pejoration leads to words that were once considered euphemisms to now be considered dysphemisms. In American culture, words like colored were once considered euphemisms, but have since been replaced by terms like Black and African American. Sometimes slight modifications of dysphemisms can make them acceptable: while colored people is considered dysphemistic, people of color does not carry the same connotations. The words idiot and moron were once polite terms to refer to people with mental disabilities, but they are now rarely used without dysphemism. Likewise, the word retarded was introduced as a new polite form once the previous terms became dysphemistic; since then, retarded has itself become dysphemistic. Often a word with both euphemistic and dysphemistic uses becomes restricted to the dysphemistic use alone. The term euphemism treadmill, coined by Steven Pinker, describes this process, in which terms with an emotionally charged referent that were once euphemisms become dysphemistic by association with the referent.

Reclamation of dysphemisms

Nigger would typically be dysphemistic; however, if used between African Americans it may be seen as neutral (although extremely casual) by the listener, depending on their social distance from the speaker and perceived status relative to the other party;

Notes

References

Sources

Allan, Keith., Burridge, Kate. Euphemism and Dysphemism: Language Used As Shield and Weapon. United States: Replica Books, 2000.
Brown, E. K.. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics: Spe-Top. Netherlands: Elsevier, 2006.
Allan, Keith., Burridge, Kate. Forbidden Words: Taboo and the Censoring of Language. N.p.: Cambridge University Press, 2006.