On Caste Slurs as Neutral Correlates

• In Event: Culture, Affect, and Political Representation

Abstract

Slurs are speech acts that are, undoubtedly, objectionable and hence, reinforce forms of communication tied to systems of oppression. Caste slurs are some examples of types of “deeply derogatory terms”. Caste slurs, we argue, is an undertheorized aspect of deeply derogatory terms and could potentially provide useful insights into the nature of slurs more generally and their how their offensiveness is understood. Caste slurs, slurs that derogate members of certain caste groups, share some similarities with racial and gendered slurs but differs from them in a crucial aspect, namely, the same linguistic term performs the dual function of being a slur and its neutral correlate. Neutral Correlate is, simply understood, a term that is an opposite of slur and is relatively non-derogatory and co-referential. Can caste slurs be explained through existing accounts of slurs that involves a relation to their neutral counterparts that are either co-extensive or relatively less derogatory in nature? What implications do the category of caste slurs have for how neutral correlates are understood? Does this pose any significant challenge to the theories that explain a slur’s offensiveness? In what follows, we argue that caste slurs cannot be accommodated within the present definitions of slurs. They don’t have either a co-extensive neutral co-referent like racial slurs or comparatively less derogatory terms as neutral counterparts like the gendered slurs. They have neutral counterparts which are lexically same terms but vary in their semantic content. We argue that this account compels us to revise our definition of neutral counterparts.

Authors

• Faizan Rashid, University of Massachussets, Amherst

• Kanika Chawla, Binghamton University