Insults, offence and words that wound: why language needs to be handled with intendance

Mic

Our linguistic and legal obsession with "insult" and "offence" is nothing new. In 1832, Sydney resident William McLoughlin was given 50 lashes for using the word "damned" against his master.

Just what does McLoughlin's case tell usa near today?

Welsh Rabbit and lashes from pretty fellows

The word insult tin can exist traced to the Latin insultāre "to leap upon" or "assail". Information technology possibly entered English language via a Middle French discussion insulter, meaning "to insult, crow, vaunt, or triumph over; to wrong, reproach, affront".

These historical underpinnings persist in insult's modernistic sense. British philosopher David Archard points out that an insult conveys an stance (it has semantic content or "meaning") but it often serves as a social act to "belittle".

In other words, insults don't just "hateful", they as well "do" and that "doing" often relates to power. For example, poor Bill McLoughlin had the nervus to utilize an obscene word to his primary and got l whacks for not knowing his identify in the pecking order.

Focusing on today'south debate, nosotros're still novices at flagging, discussing and debating taboo words associated with groups and people. Until recently, and courtesy of the Victorian era, we accept been obsessed with sexuality and words denoting bodily parts and fluids.

Linguists Keith Allan and Kate Burridge tell us that from the 19th century, people eating cooked fowl spoke of white meat and night meat rather than have to utter the "offensive" breast and leg respectively.

Before Victorian concerns arose, our taboos largely revolved around gods and religion. For instance, the Sydney Herald, reporting on poor old McLoughlin, censored his insolence:

… on beingness desired to make a Welch (sic) rabbit, he exclaimed, 'You're a d—-d pretty young man, ain't you? I'll run into you genteely d—-d showtime.'

In modern times, the notion of a chicken leg or craven chest is less offensive.

But an insult tin can be hard to pin down across time and space. A 1975 Fawlty Towers episode included a scene where the aloof Major Gowen uses the words "niggers" and "wogs". The BBC deleted this scene in 2013 and this was met with collective outrage.

After all, the betoken of the scene was to present Major Gowen every bit arrogant, aloof and out-of-touch.

Understanding the liberty of speech camp

Many people see attempts to ban insults and offensive language every bit a violation of their freedom of speech or action. These concerns are man and understandable.

I noted above that "insults" don't just "mean" but too "exercise", and accept a existent-world impact. Nosotros can say the same about "speech acts" such as "ordering", "advising" and "warning" (and the accompanying fines). These acts violate general Anglo-Australian desires for freedom of action and from imposition.

Many in this "freedom" camp also decry the aggressiveness of the political correctness "police", "disciples" and then on.

For instance, many men and women bristled at the Diversity Council of Australia's proffer that 1 shouldn't say hey guys at work.

And these kinds of kerfuffles are hardly unique.

In 1999, the discussion niggardly (which is unrelated to nigger) famously led to the firing of a staffer in the Washington, D.C. mayor's office. The University of California (Santa Cruz) banned students from the saying the phrases chink in one's armour and a nip in the air for fear of offending Asian students.

Also, if we're to police force words, how far back in a word's history should nosotros get? For case, the often used phrase it sucks likely finds its origins in the homophobic jibe he sucks.

The liberty camp besides flags the futility of policing language. For example, attempts to police internet language accept resulted in sometimes laughable results.

Perhaps well-nigh famously, residents of Scunthorpe, England, have encountered issues with net filters because of a certain iv-letter discussion in the town'due south name. Canada's National History Society had to change its mag's name, The Beaver, when information technology as well ran into difficulties with internet filters.

Not just words and hurt feelings

The above cases or oversteps don't negate the fact that we need to have an open and honest, but respectful, discussion of insult and offence. And we need to listen to people affected by offensive words.

It's possible for many of u.s.a. to know about racism, sexism and other -isms. But many of the states don't know in the sense that we take experienced them ourselves.

Words linked to these -isms practise more than merely invoke pregnant. They call to listen an often emotional narrative, aggress with inequities and sometimes violence. This is one of the reasons the release of the book Nigger: The Strange Example of a Troublesome Word led to such furore (even though it was written by an African American police professor).

The emotional and lived experience of a word is also why it can be and so heartbreaking to see debates around "insult" and "offence" hijacked or belittled.

For instance, Geoffrey Nunberg points out the word color-bullheaded (in relation to society) was conspicuously absent-minded from the bourgeois dictionary during the American civil rights motility. Even so, in recent decades, conservatives have gladly taken to colour-blind to fight against affirmative action, equal opportunity regulations and academy admissions processes.

In a similar vein, much of the press effectually the Variety Council of Commonwealth of australia's #wordsatwork campaign sadly went to hey guys (referred to above) while the wider campaign was quite noble, sound and supported by empirical enquiry.

For case, the campaign sought to reduce use of words like abo, retard, and and so gay. The entrada also sought to highlight sexism in the workplace and, among other things, empirically informed observations that women are frequently interrupted and spoken over by men.

The successful negotiation of taboos is important for social cohesion. In comparative historical terms, we're still getting used to taboo linguistic communication around "people and groups". We should, as much as possible, be empathetic in our discussions.

Dr Howard Manns works in the School of Languages, Literatures, Cultures and Linguistics inside the Faculty of Arts.

This article appeared in The Conversation.