COLOUR COMPONENT IN THE SEMANTICS OF ETHNOPHOBIC TERMS (the case of non-standard American English)

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.155214

Keywords:

ethnophobic terms, slang, colour categories, conceptual opposition, metaphor, metonymy

Abstract

The study aimed to identify the semantic and structural characteristics of ethnophobic terms with a colour component, as well as the conceptual basis and extralinguistic factors that have a role in their formation. Ethnophobic terms tend to emerge in the non-standard language, with slang making its core. Although often marked as derogatory or impolite, ethnicity-laden slang expressions form a dynamic and productive part of non-standard vocabulary, largely due to their pragmatic power. Ethnophobic terms used with reference to the largest ethnic minorities in the USA (Black, Latin and Native Americans) became the focus of our research. Given their prototypical nature and a wide spectrum of connotations, basic colour terms have shown the highest potential for integration with the ethnicity concept: an overwhelming number of ethnophobic terms contain explicit or implicit colour components in their semantic structure encoding the following colour categories: black, brown, red, yellow, and white. We have also suggested that in American ethnophobic slang, the universal opposition of black and white may have transformed into a conceptual opposition of "white" vs. "non-white" that has a variety of verbal representations. In addition, semantic configuration and evaluative power of colour categories are determined by the speaker’s point of reference affected by the stereotypes dominating their ethnic groups. Data analysis has shown that the morphological means of word formation typical of ethnophobic terms, including suffixation, compounding, blending, and abbreviation, are mainly combined with metonymy, metaphor, or both.

 

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Ihor Honta, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine

Honta Ihor is currently PhD in Linguistics, Professor Associate with Foreign Languages for Chemistry and Physics Department at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine.

Scientific interests: Comparative Characteristics of Slang in English, Ukrainian, Russian; Compounding in English, Ukrainian, Russian; Ethnophobic terms in different languages. 

Tatiana Pastushenko, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine

Pastushenko Tatiana is currently PhD in Linguistics, Professor Associate and Head of Foreign Languages for Natural Sciences at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine.

Scientific interests: Comparative Characteristics of colour nominations in different languages; vocabulary in terminologies.

Nataliia Borysenko, Washington State University, WA

PhD, Adjunct Faculty, Department of Teaching and Learning, College of Education

References

  1. Altwaiji, M. (2019). American Orientalist Discourse: the Linguistic Formation and Transformation. International Journal of English Linguistics, 1, 9, 261-268. https://doi10.5539/ijel.v9n1p261
  2. Antonchenko, T. (1999). Linhvoprahmatycni osoblyvosti funktsionuvannia etnonimiv ta etnophobizmiv (na materiali amerykanskoho variantu anhliyskoyi movy) [Linguopragmatic peculiarities of functioning of ethnonyms and ethnophobic terms (based on the American variant of the English language]. Visnyk Ukrainskoho Linhvistychnoho universytetu. Seriya: Filolohiya, 2 (1), 95-103.
  3. Berlin, B. & Kay, P. (1969). Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution. Berkeley: Reed.
  4. Bobrovnyk, S. (2014). Ethnic stereotypes and their reflection in English and Russian languages. Advanced Education, 2, 20-26. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.39381
  5. Brdar, M. & Brdar-Szabo, R. (2013). Some reflections on metonymy and word-formation. Explorations in English Language and Linguistics, 1 (1), 40-62. Retrieved July, 25 from https://hrcak.srce.hr/117775
  6. Thompson, D. (Ed.) (1998). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English (Ninth edition). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  7. COD. (1998). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Ninth edition. Ed. by D. Thompson. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  8. Dalzell, T. (ed.). (2018). The Routledge Dictionary of Modern American Slang and Unconventional English. New York, NY: Routledge.
  9. Davies, E. (2003). A Goblin or a Dirty Nose? The Treatment of Culture-specific References in Translations of Harry Potter. The Translator, 9 (1), 65-100. Retrieved from https://doi.org//10.1080/13556509.2003.10799146
  10. Dixon, T. (2015, April 2). Good Guys Are Still Always in White? Positive Change and Continued Misrepresentation of Race and Crime on Local Television News. Communication Research, 44 (6), 775-792. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215579223
    |
  11. Embree, L. (1997). American Ethnophobia, e.g., Irish_American in Phenomenological Perspective. Human Studies, 20 (2), 271-286. https://doi.org/10.1023/A: 1005332819914
    |
  12. Gates, H. (2014, January 6). How many slaves landed in the US. The Root. Retrieved from https://www.theroot.com/how-many-slaves-landed-in-the-us-1790873989
  13. Habke, A. & Sept, R. (1993). Distinguishing group and cultural influences in interethnic conflict: a diagnostic model. Canadian Journal of Communication, 18 (4). Retrieved September, 12 from http://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/773/679
  14. Honta, I. (2018). Extralingvistychni chynnyky v utvorenni etnofobizmiv v amerykanskomu movnomu substandarti [Extralinguistic reasons for the creation of ethnophobic terms in American language non-standard]. Naukovyi visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu. Seriya: Perekladoznavstvo ta mizhnarodna kommunikatsiya, 1, 31-36. http://tsj.kherson.ua/archive/2018/1/part_2/7.pdf
  15. Jay, K. & Jay, T. (2015, November). Taboo word fluency and knowledge of slurs and general pejoratives: deconstructing the poverty-of-vocabulary myth. Language Sciences, 52, 251-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.12.003
    |
  16. Jones, W. J. (2013). German Color Terms: A Study in their Historical Evolution from Earliest Time to the Present. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
  17. Lai, H.-L. & Chung, S.-F. (2018). Color Polysemy: Black and White in Taiwanese Languages. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 16 (1), 95-130. Doi: 10.6519/TJL.2018.16(1).4
  18. Lakoff, G. (2012). Explaining Embodied Cognition Results. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(4), 773-785. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01222.x
    |
  19. Liutianska, N. (2005). Vidtvorennia sytuatsiy mizhetnichnoyi vzayemodiyi u mas-mediinyh brytanskyh ta amerykanskyh dyskursyvnyh praktykah [Reproduction of situations of inter-ethnic interaction in mass media British and American discourse practice]. Unpublished candidate dissertation, Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University, Mykolaiv, Ukraine.
  20. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary (n.d.). Retrieved 11.12.2018 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary
  21. Owczarek, D. (2015). The female experience of the Other. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia, 50 (2-3), 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1515/stap-2015-0026
  22. English Oxford Living Dictionaries (n.d.). Retrieved 14.12.2018 from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com
  23. Popov, S. (2016, September 23). Metonimiya i metafora kak koreliaty dvuh etapov vynuzhdennogo vospriyatiya vozmozhnosti sozdat’ novoie leksitcheskoie znacheniye [Metonymy and metaphor as correlates of two stages of enforced perception of capacity in creating a new lexical meaning]. Jazykovedny Casopis, 67, 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1515/jazcas-2016-0009
  24. Porshnev, B. F. (1978). Opposition as a Component of Ethnic Self-consciousness. In Regina E. Holloman et al (Eds.), Perspectives on Ethnicity (pp.139-146). The Hague: Mouton Publishers.
  25. The Racial Slur Database Dictionary (n.d.). Retrieved 22.12.2018 from http://www.rsdb.org.
  26. Rosch, E. (1975). The Nature of Mental Codes for Color Categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Perception and Performance, 1(4), 303-322. Retrieved 11.12.2018 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.1.4.303
    |
  27. Saleem, M., Prot, S., Anderson, C., & Lemieux, A. (2015, December 9). Exposure to Muslims in Media and Support for Public Policies Harming Muslims. Communication Research, 44, 841-869. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215619214
  28. Spears, R. A. (1991). Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions. Lincolnwood: National Textbook Company, Illinois, USA.
  29. Sviatyuk, Yu. (2005). Semantyka ta funktsionuvannya etnonominatsiy u suchasniy anhliyskiy movi [Semantics and functioning of ethnic terms in the modern English language]. Unpublished candidate dissertation, Donetsk National University, Donetsk, Ukraine.
  30. Sviatyuk, Yu. (2015). Etnichna identychnist’ ta natsional’na tolerantnist’ v anhliyskiy movi [Ethnic identity and national tolerance in English]. Linhvistychni doslidzhennia, 39, 182-187. Retrieved 22.12.2018 from http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/znpkhnpu_lingv_2015_39_30.
  31. Turner, V. (1975). Symbolic Studies. Annual Review of Anthropology, 4, 145-161.
  32. UT. (n.d.). Urban Thesaurus [Electronic dictionary]. Retrieved 17.12.2018 from https://urbanthesaurus.org/
  33. Wierzbicka, A. (1996). Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford University Press.
  34. Wentworth, H. & Flexner, S. (1975). Dictionary of American Slang. New York, USA: Thomas Y. Growell Publishers.
  35. Widawski, M. (2013). Semantic change in African American slang. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia, 48(1), 29-44. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2478/stap-2013-0002
  36. YourDictionary.com (n.d.). UC Santa Barbara Library. Retrieved 11.12.2018 from https://www.library.ucsb.edu/ research/db/1019

Downloads

Published

2019-07-03

How to Cite

Honta, I., Pastushenko, T., & Borysenko, N. (2019). COLOUR COMPONENT IN THE SEMANTICS OF ETHNOPHOBIC TERMS (the case of non-standard American English). Advanced Education, 6(12), 226–235. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.155214

Issue

2019: Issue 12

Section

ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2019 Ihor Honta, Tatiana Pastushenko, Nataliia Borysenko

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).