SPREAD OF TOXIC SPEECH THROUGH PEJORATIVE WORDS ON TWITTER DURING CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK

Authors

  • Choirun Nisa Universitas Negeri Surabaya
  • Adam Damanhuri Universitas Negeri Surabaya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26740/elitejournal.v2n3.p137-147

Keywords:

toxic speech, pejorative words, Twitter, cyberculture, coronavirus

Abstract

This research aims to convince the existence of toxic speech on social media, especially on Twitter, and its effect on the internet citizen mindset that can construct new culture on how people use language on Twitter during the coronavirus outbreak. The research problems of this study are the kind of toxic speech frequently used on Twitter, how toxic speech containing pejorative words spreads, and how it shapes Twitter cyberculture. This study utilized Tirrell and Ralston’s toxic-speech theory to define and classify the tweet. This study used qualitative research with non-participant observation and documentation as the data collection technique. The data obtained were a tweet about coronavirus from influential people containing the pejorative word. Then, the data were classified based on the toxicity level of the tweet that meets the toxic speech classification criteria combined with speech act theory and the LIWC program. The first analysis revealed the existence of toxic speech on Twitter and the type of toxic speech frequently found on Twitter. After classifying, ICM transmitted the whole tweet’s meaning by recognizing the pejorative words. This study found that toxic speech spreads on Twitter with the ratio of 2:1 for discursive morbidity is frequently found on Twitter. It also can shape the new culture on Twitter seen from the netizen response.

References

Bradac, J. J. (1986). Threats to generalization in the use of elicited, purloined, and contrived messages in human communication research. Communication Quarterly, 34(1), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463378609369620

Bradac, J. J. (1999). Language 1. . . n and social interaction 1. . . n : Nature abhors uniformity. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 32(1–2), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.1999.9683603

Chales J. Filmore. (2006). Frame Semantics.

Chung, C. K., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2013). Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC). Applied Natural Language Processing, (April), 206–229. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-741-8.ch012

Finkbeiner, R., Meibauer, J., & Wiese, H. (2016). What is pejoration, and how can it be expressed in language? Linguistics Today 228, 228(Jurafsky 1996), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.228.01fin

Keifer, G., & Effenberger, F. (2014). Twitter and society. In Angewandte Chemie International Edition (Vol. 6).

Kumar, S., Morstatter, F., & Liu, H. (2013). Twitter data analytics. Springer, 89.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. London: The university of Chicago press. Prieiga per internetą: http://shu. bg/tadmin/upload/storage/161. pdf [žiūrėta 2012 09 24].

Langacker, R. W., & Lakoff, G. (1988). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. In Language (Vol. 64). https://doi.org/10.2307/415440

Litosseliti, L. (2010). Research Methods in Linguistics.

Mark Johnson. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 8, 356–360.

Pennebaker, J. W., Booth, R. J., & Francis, M. E. (2007). Operator’s manual: Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count - LIWC2007. Depts.Ttu.Edu, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-741-8.ch012

Ralston, S. J. (2018). Metaphor abuse in the time of coronavirus : A reply to Lynne Tirrell. Forthcoming in Southwest Philosophy Review.

Riemer, N. (2010). Introducing semantics. Introducing Semantics, (2005), 1–460. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808883

Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(1), 24–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676

Tirrell, L. (2017). Toxic speech: Toward an epidemiology of discursive harm (pp. 139–161). pp. 139–161. Storrs, United Nation: Philosophical Topics.

Downloads

Published

2022-07-29

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 3 (2022): ELite Journal (Volume 2 Number 3, July 2022)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Choirun Nisa

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

License and Copyright Agreement

In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal. Please also carrefully read ELite Journal's Posting Your Article Policy at editorial policy
  • That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
  • That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
  • They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  • They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.

Copyright

Authors who publish with ELite Journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

Licensing for Data Publication

ELite Journal use a variety of waivers and licenses, that are specifically designed for and appropriate for the treatment of data:

Other data publishing licenses may be allowed as exceptions (subject to approval by the editor on a case-by-case basis) and should be justified with a written statement from the author, which will be published with the article.

Open Data and Software Publishing and Sharing

The journal strives to maximize the replicability of the research published in it. Authors are thus required to share all data, code or protocols underlying the research reported in their articles. Exceptions are permitted, but have to be justified in a written public statement accompanying the article.

Datasets and software should be deposited and permanently archived in appropriate, trusted, general, or domain-specific repositories (please consult http://service.re3data.org and/or software repositories such as GitHub, GitLab, Bioinformatics.org, or equivalent). The associated persistent identifiers (e.g. DOI, or others) of the dataset(s) must be included in the data or software resources section of the article. Reference(s) to datasets and software should also be included in the reference list of the article with DOIs (where available). Where no domain-specific data repository exists, authors should deposit their datasets in a general repository such as ZENODO,Dryad, Dataverse, or others.

Small data may also be published as data files or packages supplementary to a research article, however, the authors should prefer in all cases a deposition in data repositories.

Abstract views: 169 , PDF Downloads: 167