What the Poor do to Survive. (Im)Politeness and Classism in Brazilian Twitter
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2358-3428.2021v25n53p562-585Keywords:
Linguistiic impoliteness, Hashtags, Classism, MockeryAbstract
Research on (im)politeness (CULPEPER; HAUGH; KÁDÁR, 2017) has widely replaced the term ‘culture’ with the concept of ‘community of practice’, or by the umbrella-like term ‘interactional practices’ (MILLS, 2015, p. 30; MILLS; KÁDÁR, 2011). From this view, this study aims at examining hashtags related to the topic #What the poor do to survive, which include #thingspoorpeopledo (#coisasquepobrefaz) and three other variants, #thatispoverty (#pobrezaéissoaí), #poverty (#pobreza), and #poor (#pobre). To do that, data were collected from Twitter posts published in Brazilian Portuguese and listed among the trending topics in 2017 and in 2019. After we collected the posts and their accompanying hashtags, a qualitative analysis was performed, aiming at describing and categorizing the impoliteness strategies identified. In this phase of the research, over 400 tweets containing hashtags were analyzed. We found that the hashtags investigated primarily aimed at exchanging humorous messages, mostly associated with social class division in Brazil. At the same time, our findings also showed that the hashtags signalled a recurrent verbal behavior shared by a community of practice assembled under a tag (BRUNS; BURGESS, 2011; STARBIRD; PALEN, 2011). Additionally, our data demonstrated that hashtags had a dual purpose: while they employed mock impoliteness and sarcasm to reinforce valid social norms, they also promoted a jocular debate on classism and ideology in Brazil.
Downloads
References
BLITVICH, P. G. C. Globalization, transnational identities, and conflict talk: the super-diversity and complexity of the Latino identity. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 134, p. 120-133, 2018.
BOURDIEU, P. La distinction: critique sociale du jugement. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit, 1979.
BOUSFIELD, D. Impoliteness in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 2008.
BROWN, P.; LEVINSON, S. Politeness: some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
BRUNS, A.; BURGESS, J. E. The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics. In: 6TH EUROPEAN CONSORTIUM FOR POLITICAL RESEARCH (ECPR) GENERAL CONFERENCE 2011. Proceedings [...]. New York, 2011, p. 89-104.
CRYSTAL, D. Internet Linguistics. A Student Guide. New York: Routledge, 2011.
CULPEPER, J. Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: The Weakest Link. Journal of Politeness Research, Berlin, v. 1, n. 1, p. 35-72, 2005.
CULPEPER, J. Politeness and impoliteness. Pragmatics of society, Berlin, v. 5, p. 393-467, 2011.
CULPEPER, J. Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 25, n. 3, p. 349-367, 1996
CULPEPER, J.; HARDAKER, C. Impoliteness. In: CULPEPER, J.; KÁDÁR, D. (eds.). The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im) politeness. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. p. 199-225.
CULPEPER, J.; HAUGH, M.; KÁDÁR, D. Z. (org.). The Palgrave handbook of linguistic (im) politeness. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.
CUNHA, G. X.; TOMAZI, M. M. O uso agressivo da linguagem em uma audiência: uma abordagem discursiva e interacionista para o estudo da im/polidez. Calidoscópio, São Leopoldo, v. 17, n. 2, p. 297-319, 2019.
EAGLETON, T. Ideology. New York: Routledge, 2014.
FREYRE, G. Casa-grande & senzala. Rio de Janeiro: Livraria José Olympio, 1973.
GOFFMAN, E. La mise en scène de la vie quotidienne: les relations en public. v. 2. Paris: Les éditions de minuit, 1973.
GOFFMAN, E. Symbols of class status. The British Journal of Sociology, London, v. 2, n. 4, p. 294-304, 1951.
GRAINGER, K. “We’re not in a club now”: a neo-Brown and Levinson approach to analyzing courtroom data. Journal of Politeness Research, Berlin, v. 14, n. 1, p. 19-38, 2018.
HAUGH, M. Impoliteness and taking offence in initial interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 86, p. 36-42, 2015.
KÁDÁR, D. Z.; HAUGH, M. Understanding politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
KÁDÁR, D. Z.; MILLS, S. (org.). Politeness in East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
KIENPOINTNER, M.; STOPFNER, M. Ideology and (Im)politeness. In: CULPEPER, J.; KÁDÁR, D. (org.). The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. p. 61-87.
LABOV, W. Language in the inner city: Studies in the black English vernacular. Oxford: Blackwell, 1972.
LABOV, W. The study of language in its social context. Advances in the Sociology of Language, Berlin, v. 1, p. 152-216, 1971.
LAYTON, M.; SMITH, E. Is it race, class, or gender? the sources of perceived discrimination in Brazil. Latin American Politics and Society, Cambridge, v. 59, n. 1, p. 52-73, 2017.
LEECH, G. The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
LOVELL, P. Race, Gender, and Work in São Paulo, Brazil, 1960–2000. Latin American Research Review, Pittsburgh, v. 41, n. 3, p. 63–87, 2006
MILLS, S. Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
MILLS, S. Language, culture and politeness. SHARIFIAN, F. (org.). The Routledge handbook of language and culture. Abingdon: Routledge, 2015. p. 129-140.
MILLS, S.; KÁDÁR, D. Z. (org.). Politeness in East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
OLIVEIRA, A. L. A. M.; CARNEIRO, M. M. # CAGUEI: agressividade no twitter. Revista (Con) textos Linguísticos, Vitória, v. 12, n. 22, p. 7-20, 2018.
OSTERMANN, A. C. Comunidades de prática: gênero, trabalho e face. In: HEBERLE, V. M.; OSTERMANN, A. C.;
FIGUEIREDO, D. C. (org.) Linguagem e gênero no trabalho, na mídia e em outros contextos. Florianópolis: Editora da UFSC, 2006. p. 15-47.
SILVA, G. M. Folk Conceptualizations of Racism and Antiracism in Brazil and South Africa. Ethnic and Racial Studies, Abington, v. 35, n. 3, p. 506–522, 2012.
SOTO, L. M.; ARANCIBIA, M. C. Descortesía ideológica y construcción de imagen social em uma entrevista polémica. Cadernos de Linguagem e Sociedade, Brasília, v. 18, n. 3, p. 6-32, 2017.
SCOTT, K. The pragmatics of hashtags: Inference and conversational style on Twitter. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 81, p. 8-20, 2015.
STARBIRD, K.; PALEN, L. Voluntweeters: Self-organizing by digital volunteers in times of crisis. In: PROCEEDINGS OF THE SIGCHI CONFERENCE ON HUMAN FACTORS IN COMPUTING SYSTEMS. 2011. Proceedings [...]. London, 2011. p. 1071-1080.
TELLES, E.; BAILEY, S. Understanding Latin American Beliefs About Racial Inequality. American Journal of Sociology, Chicago, v. 118, n. 6, p. 1559-1595, 2013.
YANG, L. et al. We know what@ you# tag: does the dual role affect hashtag adoption? In: 21ST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WORLD WIDE WEB. Proceedings [...]. London, 2012. p. 261-270.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
By submitting any manuscript (articles, reviews, or interviews) authors automatically assign full copyrights to PUC Minas. Authors are requested to ensure:
• The absence of conflicts of interest (relations between authors, companies/ institutions or individuals with an interest in the topic covered by the article), as well as funding agencies or sponsoring institutions of the research that culminated in the article.
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution - Share Alike 4.0 International.
