Semantic and structural particularities of "hate speech"

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

SEMANTIC AND STRUCTURAL PARTICULARITIES OF “HATE SPEECH”

Kolesnyk H.O.,

Senior Lecture at the Foreign Languages Department Lviv Polytechnic National University

Summary. The article is devoted to the study of linguistic and extralinguistic factors that influence the functioning of "hate speech" in Ukrainian society. The author investigates the factors that give rise to "hate speech", determines its typology, semantic and structural features. The term "hate speech" is defined as a linguistic means of insulting human dignity on racial, ethnic, language, religious, political, sexual grounds. So, it refers to the image of spiritually related people. Any dissent of the opposite group provokes indignation and encourages complete strangers who share common values and collective memory to defend their dignity and the dignity of their like-minded people. It is proved that social, economic, political destabilization, as well as prejudice in society contributes to the emergence of "hate speech". With the development of the media space, words of hatred, allocated in the global information space, are picked up by the media and go beyond the Internet, inciting mass clashes. It is also established that "hate speech" has not only a verbal manifestation, the factors of aggression and discrimination can be not only words but also gestures, facial expressions, behavior, memes, symbols and so on.

In the framework of this study, a typology of the formation of "hate speech" was proposed, such as: association with historical facts or figures; identification with social groups, ethnic groups or races; using comparative characteristics; dehumanization of the outgroup; unattractive angle; identification with literary characters; formation of words of hatred with the help of contamination. It has been proven that "hate speech" has destructive power, constitutes a danger of violence and leads to the polarization of society. Thus, as a result of the study, the ways to counteract and prevent the influence of "hate speech" on the formation of "common opinion" and provoke aggression were proposed. The international experience of preventing the use of hate speech in journalistic practice and tools for overcoming the problem of its incorrect collection and coverage of information about it are considered. According to the author, an effective method of combating hatred can be humor as a well-known effective weapon against human vices and a manifestation of superiority over offenders.

Key words: hate speech, aggression, discrimination, ingroup, outgroup.

extralinguistic factors hate speech ukrainian society

Formulation of the problem. Throughout the history of humanity, people are constantly in a state of struggle of opinions, which leads to the instigation of conflicts of various scales, from domestic to world wars. The first years of the 21st century were no exception and were marked by inter-national, inter-ethnic and interstate enmity in many countries of the world. Unfortunately, in 2014, the people of Ukraine were subjected to external aggression and were involved in a hybrid war, which requires finding ways to strengthen national security, maintain a national and patriotic mood, and ensure the territorial integrity of the state. As you know, hybrid war combines classical military actions and non-classical ones, such as economic and political factors, as well as propaganda and informational pressure via the media space. The processes that take place in society obviously affect language, which also turns out to be a weapon during the hybrid war. Now the term "hate speech” has become widespread and is used to denote statements that have an extremely negative connotation in relation to representatives of certain social groups based on race, ethnicity, language, religion, sexual affiliation, people with certain physical or mental disabilities, as well as social processes that are not supported by a certain stratum of society. With the development of social networks, "hate speech" has gained a huge scope, instantly reaching a wide audience. Therefore, the study of the phenomenon of "hate speech" is becoming more and more relevant, because in the realities of destabilization of both the domestic and foreign political situation, "hate speech" leads to aggression and escalation of conflicts. Moreover, "hate speech" becomes a manifestation of domestic violence, bullying in children's and adolescent groups, as well as in work relationships, which causes moral oppression, provokes aggression and even causes suicide.

The main purpose. In this paper the author aims to:

- determine the factors that give rise to "hate speech";

- define semantic and structural features of "hate speech";

- define the typology of "hate speech";

- identify countermeasures and prevention of "hate speech" influence on the formation of "common opinion" and provoking aggression.

Literature review. The study of such a phenomenon as " hate speech " is quite relevant and has attracted the attention of researchers since the middle of the 20th century. For the first time, the term Antilocution, similar to the modern term "hate speech", was introduced by the American psychologist H. Allport in 1954, who proposed a scale of prejudice in society. Antilocution refers to jokes aimed at representatives of minorities on any basis. According to this scale, antilocution is the first step on the way to physical violence and even the complete destruction of a person or group [1]. The Dutch linguist Teun Adrianus Van Dijk focuses on the fact that language in modern conditions is a means of influencing human consciousness, an impetus for ideological changes, and the generation of attitudes of fear, anxiety, and skepticism in society [2]. Some Ukrainian researchers consider "hate speech" in the context of mass media discourse [3, 4]. Of particular interest to Ukrainian scientists is the verbalization of enmity against certain ethnic minorities [5]. Also, "hate speech" is studied in detail within the framework of the Campaign of the Council of Europe "Movement against hate speech". However, today there is no comprehensive analysis of "hate speech" taking into account the linguistic (semantic, structural) and extralinguistic aspects of the study of this phenomenon. Therefore, the relevance of the study is due to the insufficient disclosure of the issue of linguistic and extralinguistic factors of the functioning of "hate speech".

Presentation of the main material. "Hate speech" is a complex phenomenon that requires a detailed investigation in linguistic, sociological, psychological, political and legal discourse. In particular, in the Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe No. 97(20), "hate speech" is considered as all types of expressions that spread, incite, support or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-semitism and other forms of hatred caused by intolerance, including intolerance manifested in the form of aggressive nationalism and ethnocentrism, discrimination against minorities and hostile attitudes towards them, as well as immigrants and persons of immigrant origin [6]. At the same time, "hate speech" should be distinguished from profanity, abusive language, insults. It is relevant to talk about "hate speech" only in the case when aggressive language towards a person refers to his belonging to a certain social group on any grounds: political, religious, ethnic, sexual, etc. "Hate speech" does not include content that has an extremely negative assessment of the addressee's actions and even threats, if they refer to a specific person and do not identify him with a specific social group. Aggressive language directed at an individual or a group can cause moral pain, humiliate dignity, cause indignation, but it does not cause mass indignation and protest. While "hate speech", according to the "General Policy Recommendation of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance No. 15: Countering Hate Speech", is used with the intention of inciting or can reasonably be expected to lead to the incitement of others to commit acts of violence, intimidation, hostility or discrimination against those targeted by "hate speech" and that this is a particularly severe form of such speech [7]. The OSCE defines "hate speech" as "various types of expressions based on hostility, which demonstrate or incite hostility towards a group of persons (or an individual because of his membership in the group) [8]. In Ukraine, the Criminal Code of Ukraine provides for criminal liability for the use and dissemination of "hate speech" [9]. According to Art. 161 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine "intentional actions aimed at inciting national, racial or religious enmity and hatred, humiliating national honor and dignity, or insulting the feelings of citizens in connection with their religious beliefs, as well as direct or indirect restriction of rights or establishment of direct or indirect privileges of citizens based on race, skin color, political, religious and other beliefs, gender, ethnic and social origin, property status, place of residence, language or other characteristics" shall be punished by a fine of two hundred to five hundred tax- free minimum incomes of citizens or by restriction of freedom for a term of up to five years, with or without deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years. Also, in Ukraine, there is an opportunity to oppose "hate speech" in civil proceedings. Judicial practice shows that it is possible to execute this within the framework of a claim for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation and refutation of inaccurate information. But mostly it is about public statements; first of all it concerns mass media and public people, mostly politicians. It is officials of state authorities, deputies, politicians of various levels of government who cause particular concern, using the "language of enmity", because they divide society into "friend or foe". Usually, public figures use these means to raise their own rating, not realizing the power of the word, which pushes society to aggression. The most famous examples are the speeches of Hitler, Mussolini, as well as modern powerful people like Russian authorities, whose statements influenced the development of history. In 2019, during the presidential election campaign, voters of the candidate for the presidency of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, called his opponents morons, and the candidate himself with the personal pronoun "It", which is a classic example of dehumanizing a representative of an outgroup. In recent times, the platform for spreading information has expanded significantly thanks to numerous talk shows and social networks that are able to reach the maximum number of people. According to the Internet security system Websense, there are more than 15,000 sites which content contains elements of hatred and malice, and their number is constantly growing. In 2019, Mark Zuckerberg recognized the importance of social networks during a speech to students at Georgetown University: "People who have the power of large-scale self-expression represent a new kind of power in the world - the 'fifth estate' along with other power structures in society." Words of hatred, thrown into the global information space, cause a resonance among network users, are picked up by the mass media and go beyond the Internet, inciting mass clashes. Social manipulators who generate the "language of enmity" create an ingroup (friends) and an outgroup (foes), completely excluding the possibility of identity: maidaun, maidanuti, Ukry, ukropy, couch troops, vatniki, colorady, svidomi, pravoseki, etc. Also, speakers of "hate speech" present the outgroup as a threat to the ingroup, endowing it with features that are not typical of the generally accepted stereotypes of society. For example, at the beginning of the war in Donbas, gossip was spread in the temporarily occupied territories that the "Banderivtsi" were eating the babies of Russian-speaking Ukrainians. At the same time, all actions of the ingroup are a priori recognized as benevolent.

What is the phenomenon of "hate speech"? Why does aggressive language not cause such indignation and resonance as "hate speech"? As it was already mentioned above, "hate speech" is a linguistic means of insulting human dignity based on racial, ethnic, linguistic, religious, political, sexual characteristics, as well as health status. So, it is about the image of spiritually related people. Gustave Lebon, studying the mechanism of collective formation, introduces the concept of "collective soul" - a social organism that is subject to the law of spiritual unity of the group [10]. At the same time, there is a leveling of the individual in favor of a common opinion, belief, goal, and common protest. There is a transition of the individual to the general social identity, spiritual unity, which is why words of hatred directed at an individual are perceived as an insult to the spiritual community. The collective identity, which is determined by the division of "friend and foe", is extremely sensitive to external aggression. Any dissent from the opposing group provokes indignation and prompts complete strangers who are united by common values and collective memory to defend their dignity and the dignity of their like-minded people.

There are reasons to claim that the "active substance" of "hate speech" is the stereotypes created by society. Why do some words that have neutral semantics get a negative connotation when used by outgroup members? "Hate speech" includes vocabulary that evokes negative associations in a certain context and social environment. For example, the word "vatnik" is associated with rural residents of Russia, lumberjacks or prisoners. By analogy, people who support pro-Russian agitation are called "vatniki". The vocabulary of "hate speech" is often supported by the events that gave rise to it, and over time lose relevance, having an occasional character. Thus, the word "fritz", relevant during the Second World War and the post-war period, meant not only soldiers of the German army, but was also identified with the inhabitants of Germany. But today this word is practically not used. Such is the fate of words that appear in periods of economic, political or social turbulence and become understandable only in a certain context: porohoboty and ZElenophily, "vesna bez porohu", "time to plant "petrushku", ZEdebily, kovidiot, kovidnik, colorada, ukrop, Len- inopad, the crucified boy, the junta, etc. Other words are passed down through the generations, become familiar, replace similar but less aggressive concepts and replenish the arsenal of verbal weapons: moskal, katsap, barbarian, khokhol, churk, yuda, holop, farisi, vysiganit, natsmeni, kurkul. Language is constantly changing and developing, so words that were once normative (Jew, Negro, Pharisee) eventually become offensive.

"Hate speech" has not only a verbal manifestation, factors of aggression and discrimination can be not only words, but also gestures, facial expressions, behavior, memes, symbols, pictures, etc. Everyone knows the fact of the manifestation of "football racism" in Russia during matches with the participation of black legionnaires, when the song "Killed a Negro" popular in 2004 sounded from the stands, and black players were met by fans with shouts that imitated the sounds of monkeys, and threw bananas and oranges. You can often see how people cross the street when they see Roma or representatives of the youth subculture.

Contextual indicators of "hate speech" can even be prepositions, punctuation or other aids. For example, some Russian figures, in order to emphasize their contemptuous attitude towards Ukraine, use the preposition "on" instead of "in" - on Ukraine, thereby denying its statehood. It is known that the preposition "on" is used when talking about regions that are not independent. Similarly, in English texts you can sometimes see the derogatory "the Ukraine", where the definite article also indicates the country's non-independence.

"Hate speech" is formed in different ways:

- Association with historical facts or figures (Judas; fascist; junta; fifth column);

- Identification with social groups, ethnic groups or races (katsap; village; khokhol; black);

- With the help of comparative characteristics (cunning like a Jew; dirty like a gypsy; dumb like a Chukchi; work like a negro on a plantation);

- Dehumanization of the outgroup (dill; colorados; churks; beasts; veal language; it);

- Unattractive perspective (rotting capitalism; Russian peace);

- Identification with literary characters (Shwonder; Sharikov; Blue Stocking; Casanova; Uncle Tom, Orcs, Mordor);

The formation of words of enmity with the help of contamination (lugandonia, maydaun, rashist, tarifocide, porohoboty). Negative- emotional contaminants have an offensive, disparaging character, and have a strong psychological impact on the recipient. When familiar words do not lead to the expected resonance, more expressive expressions are artificially formed, capable of impressing with the novelty of form and semantics [11].

A separate group can include memes - any ideas, symbols, gestures, songs, colloquialisms, pictures, etc. During the full-scale war of the Russian Federation against the people of Ukraine, many memes aimed at ridiculing the "Rashists" are spreading. On the one hand, they can also be classified as "hate speech", taking into account the reaction of the enemy. On the other hand, memes act as a shield that helps protect people from stress and disruption that protects the psyche and allows them to survive amid the horrors of war and information pressure. So, the words of the Ukrainian border guard from Zmiiny Island in response to the Russian aggressor's demand to surrender became a well-known meme. Later, Ukrposhta issued a stamp in honor of the sending of a Russian ship to a known address by the defenders of Zmiiny Island.

Conclusions. Therefore, the world of "hate speech" is vast and diverse, and people compete in creativity, inventing new ways of insulting. The destructive power and danger of "hate speech" is beyond doubt, as it leads to the key problem of today - the polarization of society. Language changes along with people, instantly reacting to any events in society, but on the other hand, language can influence the structure of society and change the development of history. Statements, which at first seem witty and funny, in a short period of time change the lives of entire social groups. "Hate speech" is the first step to violence. That is why the issue of combating "hate speech" at various levels is acute.

In Ukraine, the fight against "hate speech" is carried out at the legislative level. Art. 161 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which provides for criminal liability for inciting hatred or enmity; Art. 295 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine - calls to commit actions that threaten public order; Art. 300 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine - distribution of works promoting the cult of violence and cruelty, racial, national or religious intolerance and discrimination; Art. 436 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine - propaganda of war. However, the current law does not protect all vulnerable categories of the population without exception; moreover, the culprit can be brought to justice only if a lawsuit is filed. The Law of Ukraine "On Television and Radio Broadcasting" also acts against the spread of "hate speech", which provides for the prevention of intensifying attention on war, violence and cruelty, inciting racial, national and religious enmity or their positive presentation (interpretation) [12]. Unfortunately, "hate speech" media is not limited to state- controlled sources. Written antilocutions can be seen on building facades, fences, school desks, etc. And with the development of social networks, the exchange of information has acquired new dimensions and has no obstacles. Of course, the state must regulate the content available to the public, but this is already a struggle with the consequences of the problem. Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of the Facebook network, sees ways to solve the problem in uniting different camps through common interests, conducting educational campaigns on tolerance, starting from kindergartens, to eradicate stereotypes, prejudices, intolerance and discrimination among people.

Anothersolution tothe problemofxenophobia anddiscrimination can be the use of humor as a known effective weapon against human vices and showing superiority over offenders. Thus, in the realm of humor, the UKROP Territorial Defense Battalion appeared, and presidential candidate V Zelenskyi disarmed opponents who called him a clown by wearing a false clown nose while addressing the voters. Thus, humor can be an important strategy in the fight against "hate speech", the study of which is beyond the scope of this study and is promising.

References:

1. Allport G.W. The Nature of Prejudice. Massachusetts, 1966.

2. Teun A. Van Dijk. The Mass Media Today: Discourses of Domination or Diversity? Journal of the European Institute for Communication and Cultural. 1995. Vol. 2. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.1995.1 1008592 (дата звернення: 13.02.2023).

3. Ісакова Т.О. Мова ворожнечі як проблема українського інформаційного простору. Стратегічні пріоритети. Серія: Політика, 2016. № 4. С. 90-97.

4. Кузнецова Т.В. «Мова ворожнечі» в друкованих ЗМІ (на матеріалі преси Сумщини). Вісник Луганського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка. 2008. № 3(142). С. 79-85.

5. Кислова Ольга, Кузіна Ірина, Дирда Ірина. Дослідження онлайнової мови ворожнечі щодо ромської меншини в українському інтернет-просторі. URL: https://doi.org/10.36169/2227-6068.2020.01.000 21 (дата звернення: 11.02.2023).

6. Рекомендація № (97)20 Комітету міністрів Ради Європи державам-учасницям з питань "розпалювання ненависті". URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/994_093 (дата звернення: 11.02.2023).

7. Загальнополітична рекомендація Європейської комісії проти расизму та нетерпимості (ЄКРН) № 15: протидія мові ворожнечі URL: https://rm.coe.int/ecri-general-policy-recommendation-no-15-on- hate-speech-ukrainian-tran/1680a11674 (дата звернення: 11.02.2023).

8. Злочини на ґрунті ненависті: попередження та реагування. Інформаційно-довідковий посібник для громадських організацій у регіоні ОБСЄ. URL: https://www.osce.org/uk/node/180336 (дата звернення: 11.02.2023).

9. Кримінальний Кодекс України (Відомості Верховної Ради України (ВВР), 2001, № 25-26, ст. 131) / Верховна Рада України. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2341-14 (дата звернення: 11.02.2023).

10. Гюстав Лебон. Психология народов и масс. Киев: Издательство Андронум, 2020. 210 с.

11. Колесник ГО. "Мова ворожнечі" як соціальний та лінгвістичний феномен. Вчені записки Таврійського національного університету імені В. І. Вернадського. Серія: Філологія. Журналістика. 2021. Т. 32 (71), № 4, ч. 3. С. 278-283.

12. Про телебачення і радіомовлення: Закон України (Відомості Верховної Ради України (ВВР), 1994, № 10, ст. 43). Верховна Рада України. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3759-12 (дата звернення: 11.02.2023).

Колесник Г.О.

Семантичні і структурні особливості «мови ворожнечі»

Анотація. Стаття присвячена дослідженню лінгвістичних та екстралінгвістичних факторів, які впливають на функціювання «мови ворожнечі» в українському суспільстві. Автор вивчає чинники, які породжують «мову ворожнечі», визначає її типологію, семантичні та структурні особливості. Доведено, що соціальна, економічна, політична дестабілізація, а також упередженість у суспільстві сприяють виникненню «мови ворожнечі». З розвитком медіапростору слова ненависті, закинуті у глобальний інформаційний простір, викликають резонанс у користувачів мережі, підхоплюються ЗМІ та виходять за межі інтернету, підбурюючи до масових сутичок. Також встановлено, що «мова ворожнечі» має не тільки вербальний прояв, факторами агресії та дискримінації можуть бути не лише слова, але й жести, міміка, поведінка, меми, символи тощо.

В ході вивчення даної теми була запропонована наступна типологія утворення "мови ворожнечі": ототожнення з історичними фактами та особистостями; дискримінація за соціальною, етнічною або расовою приналежністю; використання порівняльних характеристик; дегуманізація представників аутгрупи; ототожнення з літературними героями; утворення образливих ідентифікаторів шляхом контамінації.

Було доведено, що «мова ворожнечі» має руйнівну силу, становить небезпеку насильства і призводить до поляризації суспільства. Отже, в результаті дослідження були запропоновані шляхи протидії та запобігання впливу «мови ворожнечі» на формування «спільної думки» та провокування агресії. Також автор вважає, що ефективною зброєю проти виникнення і розповсюдження "мови ворожнечі" може бути гумор. Саме ця ідея має знайти розвиток в наступних дослідженнях автора.

Ключові слова: мова ворожнечі, агресія, дискримінація, інгрупа, аутгрупа.

Размещено на Allbest.ru