On the functions of swearing in Persian
- 16 December 2016
- journal article
- Published by John Benjamins Publishing Company in Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict
- Vol. 4 (2), 234-254
- https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.4.2.04sal
Abstract
The burgeoning literature on studies of swearing suggests that any acceptable definition of swearing involves three features: (a) non-literal meanings, (b) taboo subjects, and (c) emotions. It also suggests that swearwords fall into one of the three classes: aggressive, cathartic, or social. Driven by a rich corpus of swearwords from Persian, this paper argues that swearing in Persian does not necessarily involve these three features, and that a redefinition of swearing is needed. It then borrows ideas from ethics to suggest that any precise definition of swearing will have to involve the distinction between teleological and deontological ethics. It further envisages a continuum for swearing, with teleological ethics at one end and deontological ethics at the other, on which different forms of swearing can be arranged based on the degree to which they lean towards either end.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Towards a cross-cultural pragmatic taxonomy of insultsJournal of Language Aggression and Conflict, 2013
- Swearing as a Response to Pain—Effect of Daily Swearing FrequencyThe Journal of Pain, 2011
- Functional mechanisms involved in the internal inhibition of taboo wordsSocial Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2011
- Forbidden WordsPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,2006
- Expletives as solidarity signals in FTAs on the factory floorJournal of Pragmatics, 2004
- Expletives: neurolinguistic and neurobehavioral perspectives on swearingBrain Research Reviews, 1999
- ON CLUES AND CUES: STRATEGIES OF TEXT-UNDERSTANDINGJournal of Literary Semantics, 1991
- A multivariate investigation of profane languageCentral States Speech Journal, 1975
- Dimensions of ProfanityPsychological Reports, 1974
- The psychology of profanity.Psychological Review, 1901