The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The pragmatics of swearing
Abstract
The main purpose of swearing is to express emotions, especially anger and frustration. Swear words are well suited to express emotion as their primary meanings are connotative. The emotional impact of swearing depends on one's experience with a culture and its language conventions. A cognitive psychological framework is used to account for swearing in a variety of contexts and provide a link to impoliteness research. In support of this framework, native and non-native English-speaking college students rated the offensiveness and likelihood of hypothetical scenarios involving taboo words. The ratings demonstrated that appropriateness of swearing is highly contextually variable, dependent on speaker-listener relationship, social-physical context, and particular word used. Additionally, offensiveness ratings were shown to depend on gender (for native speakers) and English experience (for non-native speakers). Collectively these data support the idea that it takes time for speakers to learn where, when, and with whom swearing is appropriate.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Swearwords influence social evaluation of a speaker in a variety of ways depending on social context (Jay & Janschewitz (2008), The pragmatics of swearing.”
From Swear(ING) ain't play(ING): The interaction of taboo language and the sociolinguistic variable (2023) · cites this paper as Jay & Janschewitz (2008)
In the citing paper
“How swearing is perceived also varies as a function of contextual factors, with speaker gender (Beers Fägersten, 2012), ethnicity (Jacobi, 2014), and social status (Jay & Janschewitz, 2008) influencing how swearing is perceived.”
From Swear(ING) ain't play(ING): The interaction of taboo language and the sociolinguistic variable (2023) · cites this paper as Jay & Janschewitz, 2008
Citations
Cites
Two routes to emotional memory: Distinct neural processes for valence and arousal
Kensinger, E. A., & Corkin, S. (2004) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0306408101 · Cited by 848 · cited 1×
“Enhanced amygdala activity (a neurophysiological marker of arousal) is found during initial processing of taboo words, and is associated with enhanced attention and superior memory for taboo words (Kensinger and Corkin 2004).”
Background
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- 10.1111/1467-9280.00126 · DOI
- 10.1515/iral.1985.23.1-4.281 · DOI
- 10.1177/0272431690102003 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.005 · DOI
- 10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00118-2 · DOI
- 10.1023/B:JOBA.0000013656.68429.69 · DOI
- 10.1080/01434630408666529 · DOI
- Schwab D. Warden, 1996, Neurology, 46, 1231, 10.1212/WNL.46.5.1231 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/S0142716403000286 · DOI
- Jay Timothy B, 1981, Language and Speech, 24, 29, 10.1177/002383098102400102 · DOI
- Jay Timothy B, 1977, Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 9, 405, 10.3758/BF03337038 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11199-006-9064-5 · DOI
- 10.1016/0378-2166(90)90080-W · DOI
- Lakoff Robin, 1989, Multilingua, 8, 101, 10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.101 · DOI
- 10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.9 · DOI
- Martin Matthew, 1997, Western Journal of Communication, 61, 299, 10.1080/10570319709374579 · DOI
- Martin Matthew, 1996, Communication Research Reports, 13, 19, 10.1080/08824099609362066 · DOI
- 10.1093/applin/4.2.91 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF01543119 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF01542228 · DOI
- 10.1080/13676260120111742 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
It's complicated: the relationship between user trust, model accuracy and explanations in AI
Papenmeier, A., Kern, D., Englebienne, G., & Seifert, C. (2022) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3495013 · Cited by 144
Instagram-Based Benchmark Dataset for Cyberbullying Detection in Arabic Text
ALBayari, R., & Abdallah, S. (2022) · Data · doi:10.3390/data7070083 · Cited by 30
Swear(ING) ain't play(ING): The interaction of taboo language and the sociolinguistic variable
Hunt, M., Cotter, C., Pearson, H., & Stockall, L. (2023) · Journal of Sociolinguistics · doi:10.1111/josl.12588 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Jay, T., & Janschewitz, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 1612-5681
- 1613-4877
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 1
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
