Abstract
Using corpus-assisted semantic analysis, conducted in the NSM framework (Wierzbicka, Semantics: primes and universals. OUP, New York, 1996a; Goddard, Semantic analysis: a practical introduction, 2nd rev edn. OUP Oxford, 2011), this chapter explores the meanings and uses of two closely-related secondary interjections, namely, Jesus! and Christ!, in Australian English. The interjections Shit! and Fuck! are touched on briefly. From a methodological point of view, the chapter can be read as a study in how corpus techniques and semantic analysis can work in tandem; in particular, how interaction with a corpus can be used to develop, refine and test fine-grained semantic hypotheses. From a content point of view, this study seeks to demonstrate two key propositions: first, that it is possible to identify semantic invariants, i.e. stable meanings, even for highly context-bound items such as interjections; second, that it is possible to capture and model speakers’ awareness of the degree and nature of the “offensiveness” of secondary interjections, in a Metalexical Awareness component that attaches, so to speak, to particular words. Both these propositions challenge conventional assumptions about the nature and interfacing between semantics and pragmatics. A final question raised in the study is how linguists can come to terms with the fact that people use interjections not only orally but also mentally, in “inner speech”.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The historical priority of the religious domain has a lexical echo in the fact that the speech-act verbs swear and AmEng curse/cuss (in their “bad language” senses) have descended from speech acts that involved invoking God (cf. Wierzbicka 1987). Incidentally, it can be noted that the relevant meanings of swear and AmEng curse/cuss are not identical but represent somewhat different (i.e. differently construed) speech acts (Goddard Forthcoming).
- 2.
NSM explications can also include semantic molecules, i.e. non-primitive concepts, definable in terms of semantic primes, that function as intermediate-level semantic building blocks. Although semantic molecules are an important part of the NSM approach, and indeed, are crucial to successfully explicating some lexical domains, they play only a minor role in the current study. Interested readers can consult Goddard (2010, 2011: 375–384, 2012a), Goddard and Wierzbicka (2014).
- 3.
Also allowed in NSM explications are language-specific morphosyntactic devices that are necessary to implement the valency and complementation possibilities of exponents of primes in a given language. For example, in English NSM the prepositions to and about are allowed in combinations such as ‘do something to something’ and ‘think about something’.
- 4.
McEnery (2006: 35–36, cf. Note 66, p. 236) makes an interesting observation about the assumptions behind numerical scales, wondering whether it would be fair to assume that the scale is linear, i.e. that there is a steady and even increase in offensiveness as one moves up the scale. For example, would a “bad language word” in category 5 be five-times as offensive as one in category 1? The question highlights the artificiality of taking rating scales literally. Such issues do not arise with subjective-qualitative assessments such as those used in [A] and [B].
- 5.
For example, words known to be potentially offensive to a minority of people could be tagged with the idea that ‘some people, not many people’ can react negatively to them. At the other end of the scale, extremely taboo words could be tagged with the idea that ‘it is very bad if someone says this word’.
- 6.
Using the AusNC search function [3 Dec 2012], we initially located 189 and 268 files that contained the words jesus or christ, respectively. We then manually inspected the files to exclude referential uses in religious texts and contexts, and also to exclude false positives turned up by the failure of the search function to identify word boundaries (thus, words like Christian and Christmas were included in the initial hits for christ). The vast majority of the initial hits turned out to be referential uses or false positives.
- 7.
Collins (2004), Wiley (1994) and others are very much aware that thinking is often a multi-modal “mash”, with visual imagery, sounds, feelings, remembered snatches of conversation, songs, and the like, all competing and/or interacting with vocal self-talk. Inner conversation, furthermore, is often fragmentary and grammatically elliptical. This prompts the thought that interjections, being grammatically self-contained and semantically “of the moment”, may be easier to access and compare across individuals than other aspects of vocal thinking.
- 8.
- 9.
My point is that although occurrences of interjections in literary texts are not examples of interjections being used in real interactions, they are real, authentic examples of how these words are used in the community of discourse and, as such, relevant input for semantic analysis.
References
Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (1991). Euphemism and dysphemism. Language used as shield and weapon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (2006). Forbidden words. Taboo and the censoring of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ameka, F. K. (1992a). Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 18(2/3), 101–118.
Ameka, F. K. (ed.). (1992b). Interjections [Special issue]. Journal of Pragmatics, 18(2/3).
Ameka, F. K., & Wilkins, D. P. (2006). Interjections. In Handbook of pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary. (2004). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Beers Fägersten, K. (2012). Who’s Swearing now? The social aspects of conversational swearing. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Besemeres, M. (2002). Translating one’s self: Language and selfhood in cross-cultural autobiography. Oxford: Peter Lang.
Bromhead, H. (2009). The reign of truth and faith: Epistemic expressions in 16th and 17th century English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Collins, R. (2004). Interaction ritual chains. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Donald, M. (2001). A mind so rare: The evolution of human consciousness. New York: Farrar Strauss and Giroux.
Gladkova, A. (2013). A cultural semantic and ethnopragmatic analysis of the Russian praise words molodec and umnica (with reference to English and Chinese). In J. Romero-Trillo (Ed.), Yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics 2013: New domains and methodologies (pp. 249–274). Dordrecht: Springer.
Gladkova, A., Vanhatalo, U., & Goddard, C. (Forthcoming). The semantics of interjections: an experimental study with natural semantic metalanguage.
Goddard, C. (Ed.). (2006). Ethnopragmatics: Understanding discourse in cultural context. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Goddard, C. (2007). A “lexicographic portrait” of forgetting. In M. Amberber (Ed.), The language of memory in a cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 119–137). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goddard, C. (2009). Not taking yourself too seriously in Australian English: Semantic explications, cultural scripts, corpus evidence. Intercultural Pragmatics, 6(1), 29–53.
Goddard, C. (2011). Semantic analysis: A practical introduction (2nd rev. ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goddard, C. (2012a). Semantic primes, semantic molecules, semantic templates: Key concepts in the NSM approach to lexical typology. Linguistics, 50(3), 711–743.
Goddard, C. (2012b). ‘Early interactions’ in Australian English, American English, and English English: Cultural differences and cultural scripts. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1038–1050.
Goddard, C. (2013a). The semantic roots and cultural grounding of “social cognition”. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 33(3), 245–256.
Goddard, C. (2013b, November). Semantics meets pragmatics (meets sociolinguistics): “Swearing” and “cursing” in Australian English and American English. Keynote address at Pragmatics Meets Semantics Symposium, Griffith University, Brisbane.
Goddard, C. (2014a). Interjections and emotions (with special reference to “surprise” and “disgust”). Emotion Review 6(1): 53–63. doi:10.1177/1754073913491843. (Published online 13/09/2013)
Goddard, C. (2014b). On “Disgust”. In F. Baider & G. Cislaru (Eds.), Linguistic approaches to emotions in context (pp. 73–98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goddard, C. (Forthcoming). “Swearing” and “cursing” in Australian English and American English. Semantic, pragmatic and cultural perspectives.
Goddard, C. (in press). Ethnopragmatics. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), Routledge handbook of language and culture. New York: Routledge.
Goddard, C., & Wierzbicka A. (Eds.). (2004). Cultural scripts [Special Issue]. Intercultural Pragmatics 1(2).
Goddard, C., & Wierzbicka, A. (2014). Words and meanings. Lexical semantics across domains, languages and cultures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haugh, M., Burridge, K., Mulder, J., & Peters, P. (Eds.). (2009). Selected proceedings of the 2008 HCSNet workshop on designing the Australian national corpus: Mustering languages. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Hill, D. (1992). Imprecatory interjectional expressions: Examples from Australian English. Journal of Pragmatics, 18, 209–223.
Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M. (2003). Power and politeness in the workplace: A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work. London: Pearson.
Hughes, G. (1998). Swearing: A social history of foul language, oaths, and profanities in English. Oxford: Blackwell.
Jay, T. (1992). Cursing in America. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jay, T. (2000). Why we curse. A Neuro-psycho-social theory of speech. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jay, T., & Janschewitz, K. (2008). The pragmatics of swearing. Journal of Politeness Research, 4, 267–288.
Kidman, A. (1993). How to do things with four-letter words: A study of the semantics of swearing in Australia. BA honours thesis. University of New England. http://www.gusworld.com.au/nrc/thesis/intro.htm
Levisen, C. (2012). Cultural semantics and social cognition. A case study on the Danish universe of meaning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ljung, M. (2011). Swearing: A cross-cultural linguistic study. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (LDOCE). (2003). Harlow: Longman.
Mair, C. (2007). Varieties of English around the world: Collocational and cultural profiles. In P. Skandera (Ed.), Phraseology and culture in English (pp. 437–468). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
McEnery, T. (2006). Swearing in English: Bad language, purity and power from 1586 to the present. London: Routledge.
Mohr, M. (2013). Holy shit!: A brief history of swearing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Musgrave, S. (2012). An introduction to the Australian national corpus project. Humanities Australia, 3, 29–34.
Norrick, N. R. (2009). Interjections as pragmatic markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 866–891.
Pavlenko, A. (2006). Bilingual selves. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Bilingual minds: Emotional experience, expression, and representation (pp. 1–33). Tonawanda: Multilingual Matters.
Stapleton, K. (2010). Swearing. In M. Locher & S. L. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics, Vol. 9 (Interpersonal pragmatics) (pp. 289–306). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Travis, C. (2002). La Metalengua Semántica natural: The natural semantic metalanguage of Spanish. In C. Goddard & A. Wierzbicka (Eds.), Meaning and universal grammar – Theory and empirical findings (Vol. 1, pp. 173–242). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Van Lancker, D., & Cummings, J. L. (1999). Expletives: Neurolinguistic and neurobehavioral perspectives on swearing. Brain Research. Brain Research Reviews, 31(1), 83–104.
Wierzbicka, A. (1987). English speech act verbs: A semantic dictionary. Sydney: Academic.
Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction [expanded 2nd ed., 2003]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wierzbicka, A. (1992). Australian b-words (bloody, bastard, bugger, bullshit): An expression of Australian culture and national character. In André Clas (Ed.), Le mot, les mots, les bons mots/Word, words, witty words. A Festschrift for Igor A. Mel’cuk (pp. 21–38). Montreal: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal.
Wierzbicka, A. (1996a). Semantics: Primes and universals. New York: OUP.
Wierzbicka, A. (1996b). Między modlitwą a prekleństwem: O Jezu! i podobne wyrażenia na tle porównawczym [Between praying and swearing: A comparative study of O Jezu! ‘Jesus!’ and other expressions] Etnolingwistyka [Ethnolinguistics], 8 25–39.
Wierzbicka, A. (2002). Australian cultural scripts – bloody revisited. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1167–1209.
Wierzbicka, A. (2006). English: Meaning and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wierzbicka, A. (2011). Experience, evidence, sense. The hidden cultural legacy of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wierzbicka, A. (2014). Imprisoned in English. The hazards of English as a default language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wiley, N. (1994). The semiotic self. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Acknowledgements
The explications were co-developed with Anna Wierzbicka. For helpful comments I would like to thank Bert Peeters and Lara Weinglass. Lara also provided research assistance with the AusNC. Thanks also to Mee Wun Lee for research assistance with the Australian novels. This work was supported in part by the Australian Research Council.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Goddard, C. (2014). Jesus! vs. Christ! in Australian English: Semantics, Secondary Interjections and Corpus Analysis. In: Romero-Trillo, J. (eds) Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2014. Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06007-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06007-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-06006-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-06007-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)