I was once talking with a friend of mine, who happened to be an older African American, a retired dentist, about how I had been jumped and knifed in Dorchester, a somewhat nasty section of Boston.
As the mugger approached me out of the shadows brandishing a big knife, he announced to me, "I'm gonna kill you, nigger. I'm gonna take all your fuckin' money, nigger. I'm gonna kill you." I said to my friend that it struck me as funny that my would-be murderer was calling me "nigger", whereas I was white and he was black. "Oh that," he said. "That just means. . ." And we both said in unison, "worthless person". For any who may be interested, here's the account I wrote of that mugging for the Kuro5hin public-diary site. In the comments there's a fair amount of talk about the varied meanings, depending on all kinds of context, of "nigger" and similar words. http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/5/14/215015/780 jrs On Apr 14, 2012, at 3:23 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Deepak Shenoy [14 April 2012 12:50]: > >>> Can people here provide examples of strong curse/swear words in any >>> language (i.e, these mean something beyond just punctuation or verbal >>> tics) that DO NOT involve female relatives? Extra bonus point if they >>> also DO NOT involve sexual acts of varying degrees of improbability. >> >> A common one in Konkani pronounced "muh-dya" means "dead body". Many of > the >> konkani ones I know are benign - meaning "mad fellow", "your head has > dried >> up", "burnt fellow" etc. > > Well well .. I sort of suspected someone would have written a paper on this. > > http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/rev/8/2/113/ > > Citation > Database: PsycARTICLES > [ Journal Article ] > The psychology of profanity. > Patrick, G. T. W. > Psychological Review, Vol 8(2), Mar 1901, 113-127. doi: 10.1037/h0074772 > Abstract > > Discusses the use of profane words with reference to the origin of language > and the relation between emotion and expression. Two kinds of swearing, > assertive and ejaculatory; and 7 classes of profane swearing are enumerated. > In regard to a theory of profanity, it is an expression of emotion, > especially of anger. However, the James-Lange and the Sutherland theories > show that it is to be understood by the genetic method. By a process of > selection, profanity chooses those forms of phonation best adapted to shock > the opponent. Originally used in combat, at present it is used when > well-being of the individual is threatened. It does not generate emotion but > allays it. Profanity provides catharsis, helping one cope during intolerable > periods of inner conflict, repression and readjustment. It is considered > immoral due to the emphasis on inhibition and repression, and the religious > connection between the sacred and the profane. > > (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) > > >
