← Back to catalogue
Research draft

profanity

vr.tr.profanity · ACT.ACT

Let an agent explain profanity descriptively, relay linguistic, psychological, legal and cultural research from linguistics and media regulation sources with attribution, describe the named topics without reproducing offensive words unnecessarily, and distinguish profanity from hate speech, blasphemy as a legal offence, minced oaths and harassment.

Thing Registry Activities and processes

Research draft, second pass

A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.

written by Claude from model knowledge without web access - no source was read, every claim is a lead to verify

Researched by: Claude

Purpose and description

Let an agent explain profanity descriptively, relay linguistic, psychological, legal and cultural research from linguistics and media regulation sources with attribution, describe the named topics without reproducing offensive words unnecessarily, and distinguish profanity from hate speech, blasphemy as a legal offence, minced oaths and harassment.

Language regarded as offensive, vulgar or taboo in a given culture, including swear words, obscenities, blasphemy and slurs, used for emphasis, emotion, humour, insult or group bonding, varying across languages and communities, as studied in topics such as Latin profanity, Meitei profanity, Esperanto profanity, slang terms for body parts and invented profanity in science fiction such as minced substitute oaths; this model discusses profanity descriptively without reproducing offensive terms, and slurs targeting protected groups are treated as hate speech issues.

What it is for: Not applicable; a category of language.

It can be explain the concept descriptively; relay research with attribution; describe named topics without offensive terms; distinguish related categories.

Distinguishing features

Culturally relative

Emotional function

Taboo domains

Regulated in broadcasting

What it looks like

Not a visible object; words and phrases.

Physical character

FCC v. Pacifica Foundation: 1978 year - US broadcast indecency case

swearing and pain tolerance study: 2009 year - Stephens and colleagues, as reported

registry parents: meaning, word or phrase, name calling note

How it is recognised

Offensive or taboo language

Vulgar language, Latin profanity, Meitei profanity, Esperanto profanity, genital slang, profanity in science fiction

Hate speech targets groups; blasphemy laws concern religion; minced oaths are softened substitutes; harassment is conduct

Related models

is a kind of - in registry terms

word or phrase

is contrasted with -

hate speech

includes -

minced oath

is regulated by - in some countries

broadcast indecency rules

In practice

Families and kinds

obscenities

blasphemous oaths

slurs

minced oaths and euphemisms

invented fictional profanity

profanity in specific languages

Standards and regulation

Broadcast codes such as Ofcom and FCC rules

Workplace and school conduct policies

Hate speech laws for slurs

Failure modes and hazards

Gratuitously reproducing offensive terms

Treating slurs as mere profanity

Moralising about ordinary swearing

Also called

vulgarLatin profanityMeitei profanityEsperanto profanitydick slangProfanity in science fictionKazakh profanityRussian profanityEnglish profanityQuebec French profanityItalian profanityPolish vulgarisms and cursesFinnish profanityPortuguese profanityProfanity in American Sign LanguageCantonese profanityJapanese profanity

Where this came from

wikidata · CC0 1.0

Also registered as vr.tr.profanity

Drafted structure

Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 4 bundles · 8 layers · 8 findings · 16 questions.

Understand What profanity is.

Attribution.

Definition

Definition.

Definition

Definition.

  1. What is profanity, and how does it differ from hate speech, blasphemy, minced oaths and harassment? definition
  2. Is the question academic, about moderation or about being harassed, which may need reporting or support? boundary

Topics

Named topics.

Topics

Topics.

  1. What are studies of Latin, Meitei and Esperanto profanity, body-part slang and science fiction profanity, described without reproducing terms? definition
  2. Which entry fits the specific topic? action
Linguistics Linguistics and psychology.

Attribution.

Function

Functions.

Function

Function.

  1. Why do people swear, as linguists and psychologists describe? provenance
  2. Which references are standard? provenance

Cultures

Across cultures.

Cultures

Cultures.

  1. How do taboo domains differ across languages? provenance
  2. Which sources are cited? provenance
Rules Regulation.

Regulation.

Broadcast

Broadcast rules.

Broadcast

Broadcast.

  1. How do broadcasters regulate profanity, such as the watershed? provenance
  2. Which entry fits watershed (broadcasting)? action

Moderation

Content moderation.

Moderation

Moderation.

  1. How do platforms filter profanity, and what are the pitfalls such as the Scunthorpe problem? provenance
  2. Which entry fits Scunthorpe problem? action
Context Culture.

Context.

Fiction

Invented profanity.

Fiction

Fiction.

  1. Why do science fiction works invent substitute swear words? provenance
  2. Which entry fits minced oath? action

History

History.

History

History.

  1. How have attitudes to swearing changed historically? provenance
  2. Which entry fits taboo? action

What the second pass must settle

  • Should language-specific profanity topics be separate entries?
  • How should linguistics research be linked?
  • How should slurs be handled separately from general profanity?