Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The hate that dare not speak its name?

Research

Associated organisational units

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

The hate that dare not speak its name?

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Special issue › peer-review

Published

Standard

The hate that dare not speak its name? / Love, Robbie; Baker, Paul.
In: Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, Vol. 3, No. 1, 10.2015, p. 57-86.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Special issue › peer-review

Harvard

Love, R & Baker, P 2015, 'The hate that dare not speak its name?', Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 57-86. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.3.1.03lov

APA

Love, R., & Baker, P. (2015). The hate that dare not speak its name? Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, 3(1), 57-86. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.3.1.03lov

Vancouver

Love R, Baker P. The hate that dare not speak its name? Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict. 2015 Oct;3(1):57-86. doi: 10.1075/jlac.3.1.03lov

Author

Love, Robbie ; Baker, Paul. / The hate that dare not speak its name?. In: Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict. 2015 ; Vol. 3, No. 1. pp. 57-86.

Bibtex

@article{6ae022a5b43e452fbea6393a100bef8c,
title = "The hate that dare not speak its name?",
abstract = "This paper uses corpus-based methods to explore how British Parliamentary arguments against LGBT equality have changed in response to decreasing social acceptability of discriminatory language against minority groups. A comparison of the language of opposition to the equalisation of the age of consent for anal sex (1998–2000) is made to the oppositional language in debates to allow same-sex marriage (2013). Keyword, collocation and concordance analyses were used to identify differences in overall argumentation strategies, assessing the extent to which previously explicit homophobic speech (e.g. homosexuality as unnatural) has been replaced by more indirect strategies (e.g. less use of personalised argumentation via the pronoun I). We argue that while homophobic language appears to be on the decrease in such contexts, there is a mismatch between words and acts, requiring analysts to acknowledge the presence of more subtle indications of homophobic discourse in the future.",
keywords = "parliament, debate, corpus linguistics, homophobia",
author = "Robbie Love and Paul Baker",
year = "2015",
month = oct,
doi = "10.1075/jlac.3.1.03lov",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
pages = "57--86",
journal = "Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict",
issn = "2213-1272",
publisher = "John Benjamins Publishing Company",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The hate that dare not speak its name?

AU - Love, Robbie

AU - Baker, Paul

PY - 2015/10

Y1 - 2015/10

N2 - This paper uses corpus-based methods to explore how British Parliamentary arguments against LGBT equality have changed in response to decreasing social acceptability of discriminatory language against minority groups. A comparison of the language of opposition to the equalisation of the age of consent for anal sex (1998–2000) is made to the oppositional language in debates to allow same-sex marriage (2013). Keyword, collocation and concordance analyses were used to identify differences in overall argumentation strategies, assessing the extent to which previously explicit homophobic speech (e.g. homosexuality as unnatural) has been replaced by more indirect strategies (e.g. less use of personalised argumentation via the pronoun I). We argue that while homophobic language appears to be on the decrease in such contexts, there is a mismatch between words and acts, requiring analysts to acknowledge the presence of more subtle indications of homophobic discourse in the future.

AB - This paper uses corpus-based methods to explore how British Parliamentary arguments against LGBT equality have changed in response to decreasing social acceptability of discriminatory language against minority groups. A comparison of the language of opposition to the equalisation of the age of consent for anal sex (1998–2000) is made to the oppositional language in debates to allow same-sex marriage (2013). Keyword, collocation and concordance analyses were used to identify differences in overall argumentation strategies, assessing the extent to which previously explicit homophobic speech (e.g. homosexuality as unnatural) has been replaced by more indirect strategies (e.g. less use of personalised argumentation via the pronoun I). We argue that while homophobic language appears to be on the decrease in such contexts, there is a mismatch between words and acts, requiring analysts to acknowledge the presence of more subtle indications of homophobic discourse in the future.

KW - parliament

KW - debate

KW - corpus linguistics

KW - homophobia

U2 - 10.1075/jlac.3.1.03lov

DO - 10.1075/jlac.3.1.03lov

M3 - Special issue

VL - 3

SP - 57

EP - 86

JO - Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict

JF - Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict

SN - 2213-1272

IS - 1

ER -