Language and Context

[ItsAChiaotzu]

How much of a big deal do you think context is in interpreting the meaning of words in an utterance?

For example, if someone was frustrated by the A.I. in a game and referred to some of the offending characters as "faggots", does that constitute a slur if based on context and intent it clearly wasn't meant to be one?
I think my opinion is probably pretty clear but unless you didn't catch it, I don't believe for one second that ignoring the idea that words and language are malleable and constantly changing means for one second that you can put the blanket of offensiveness over certain words and tell people they mustn't use them.

Anyway, I'd like to know your opinion. (And yes, this was inspired by the Civ 4 thread)

 

[bobmus]

Some words are offensive for reasons that they imply a person is something, and therefore worse off for it.
Examples: The word '******' is saying that something is gay, and worse off for being so. It is offensive on merit of promoting the idea that gays are lesser than other people.
Using words like '******' and 'jew' does a similar thing.

 

[Chemical Alia]

I think context is important. It's usually not too hard to tell what is meant, given the context of a situation.

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

Some words are offensive for reasons that they imply a person is something, and therefore worse off for it.
Examples: The word '******' is saying that something is gay, and worse off for being so. It is offensive on merit of promoting the idea that gays are lesser than other people.
Using words like '******' and 'jew' does a similar thing.

Once again I'd posit to you that language is malleable and ever changing and although a word originally had connotations relating to homophobia those connotations, especially given the incredibly widespread use of the word (an important factor in why no one uses the word ****** as a generic insult), it doesn't mean that those connotations exist, especially in the minds of the younger generations for whom the word has only existed as a generic insult.

 

[bobmus]

Some words are offensive for reasons that they imply a person is something, and therefore worse off for it.
Examples: The word '******' is saying that something is gay, and worse off for being so. It is offensive on merit of promoting the idea that gays are lesser than other people.
Using words like '******' and 'jew' does a similar thing.

Once again I'd posit to you that language is malleable and ever changing and although a word originally had connotations relating to homophobia those connotations, especially given the incredibly widespread use of the word (an important factor in why no one uses the word ****** as a generic insult), it doesn't mean that those connotations exist, especially in the minds of the younger generations for whom the word has only existed as a generic insult.

I'd argue that word still holds all the connotations it once held. To say that a younger generation doesn't know the meaning behind the word is a further insult to their intelligence.

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

Some words are offensive for reasons that they imply a person is something, and therefore worse off for it.
Examples: The word '******' is saying that something is gay, and worse off for being so. It is offensive on merit of promoting the idea that gays are lesser than other people.
Using words like '******' and 'jew' does a similar thing.

Once again I'd posit to you that language is malleable and ever changing and although a word originally had connotations relating to homophobia those connotations, especially given the incredibly widespread use of the word (an important factor in why no one uses the word ****** as a generic insult), it doesn't mean that those connotations exist, especially in the minds of the younger generations for whom the word has only existed as a generic insult.

I'd argue that word still holds all the connotations it once held. To say that a younger generation doesn't know the meaning behind the word is a further insult to their intelligence.

I never said they didn't know the meaning, don't put words in my mouth. I merely said it wasn't in their minds, as in they don't hold the same connotations to it. Once again you're misinterpreting how language works by saying that they know the "meaning" behind the word, as if the meaning could never change and none of it's connotations could either, which is frankly farcical.