Dirty talk : a critical discourse analysis of offensive language crimes

Methven, Elyse Patricia

Dirty talk : a critical discourse analysis of offensive language crimes

Methven, Elyse Patricia

Permalink

Publication Type:: Thesis
Issue Date:: 2017

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download contents and abstractAdobe PDF (199.41 kB)

Adobe PDF

Download thesisAdobe PDF (8.02 MB)

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Methven, Elyse Patricia
dc.date.accessioned	2017-04-06T04:48:55Z
dc.date.available	2017-04-06T04:48:55Z
dc.date.issued	2017
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/90323
dc.description	University of Technology Sydney. Faculty of Law.	en_AU
dc.description.abstract	This thesis analyses criminal justice discourse as it relates to offensive language crimes in Australia. Across Australia, and elsewhere, it is a crime to use offensive, indecent or obscene language in or near a public place. These crimes are governed by broadly drafted provisions that allow police and judicial officers significant discretion in determining offensiveness. Although offensive language crimes can theoretically target a multitude of words and phrases, in practice, the laws are used to police and punish a small selection of swear words. Provisions that circumscribe offensive speech have a linguistic dimension. This dimension has been under-theorised in previous scholarship on the topic. Accordingly, my thesis places language at the centre of offensive language crimes, by interrogating how such crimes are represented and legitimised as a particular discursive formation within the criminal justice system. My thesis asks two questions: Firstly, how is offensive language represented in criminal justice discourse? Secondly, how are offensive language crimes legitimised in criminal justice discourse? I employ a distinct approach to these questions by employing critical discourse analysis (‘CDA’) as my primary methodological tool. CDA is not strictly a ‘method’, but rather, a loosely grouped body of work that views language as both shaping and shaped by society. Analysts works from the premise that we cannot neutrally represent reality. Instead, we construct (and reconstruct) reality, including social identities, subject positions, social relationships and systems of knowledge and belief, through language. I use the phrase ‘criminal justice discourse’ to describe socially constructed ways of signifying reality, through language, in the criminal justice system. My thesis situates its linguistic analysis of offensive language crimes in broader social, political and historical contexts. I draw into the frame linguistic research on swearing, and literature relating to metaphors, purity and disgust. The thesis structure is based on the following themes: language interpretation in the courts; swearing, danger and disgust; context; objective standards; and power, order and authority. These themes are derived from my doctrinal analysis of offensive language crimes and ideas that inform and legitimise the criminal punishment of swearing. My thesis reconceptualises how offensive language is interpreted in the criminal law. I extend existing scholarship by highlighting how criminal justice discourse creates and entrenches power inequalities, augments judicial discretion, ignores difference and promotes unfairness. I demonstrate how discourse shapes perceptions about things, people, ideas and words that are deemed ‘out of place’ and worthy of criminal sanction.	en_AU
dc.format	Thesis (PhD)
dc.language.iso	en_AU	en_AU
dc.relation	https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/90323/2/02Whole.pdf
dc.rights	au.edu.uts.lib/ppc
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights	The author owns the copyright in this thesis including all reproduction and reuse rights for the work. The work may not be altered without the permission of the copyright owner. Attribution is essential when quoting or paraphrasing from this thesis.
dc.subject	Criminal justice system.	en
dc.subject	Offensive language crimes in Australia.	en
dc.subject	Use of offensive or obscene language in public places.	en
dc.subject	Critical discourse analysis (‘CDA’)	en
dc.subject	Language interpretation in the courts.	en
dc.subject	Swearing.	en
dc.subject	Danger and disgust.	en
dc.subject	Context.	en
dc.subject	Objective standards.	en
dc.subject	Power, order and authority.	en
dc.title	Dirty talk : a critical discourse analysis of offensive language crimes	en_AU
dc.type	Thesis	en_AU
utslib.copyright.status	open_access

Abstract:

This thesis analyses criminal justice discourse as it relates to offensive language crimes in Australia. Across Australia, and elsewhere, it is a crime to use offensive, indecent or obscene language in or near a public place. These crimes are governed by broadly drafted provisions that allow police and judicial officers significant discretion in determining offensiveness. Although offensive language crimes can theoretically target a multitude of words and phrases, in practice, the laws are used to police and punish a small selection of swear words. Provisions that circumscribe offensive speech have a linguistic dimension. This dimension has been under-theorised in previous scholarship on the topic. Accordingly, my thesis places language at the centre of offensive language crimes, by interrogating how such crimes are represented and legitimised as a particular discursive formation within the criminal justice system. My thesis asks two questions: Firstly, how is offensive language represented in criminal justice discourse? Secondly, how are offensive language crimes legitimised in criminal justice discourse? I employ a distinct approach to these questions by employing critical discourse analysis (‘CDA’) as my primary methodological tool. CDA is not strictly a ‘method’, but rather, a loosely grouped body of work that views language as both shaping and shaped by society. Analysts works from the premise that we cannot neutrally represent reality. Instead, we construct (and reconstruct) reality, including social identities, subject positions, social relationships and systems of knowledge and belief, through language. I use the phrase ‘criminal justice discourse’ to describe socially constructed ways of signifying reality, through language, in the criminal justice system. My thesis situates its linguistic analysis of offensive language crimes in broader social, political and historical contexts. I draw into the frame linguistic research on swearing, and literature relating to metaphors, purity and disgust. The thesis structure is based on the following themes: language interpretation in the courts; swearing, danger and disgust; context; objective standards; and power, order and authority. These themes are derived from my doctrinal analysis of offensive language crimes and ideas that inform and legitimise the criminal punishment of swearing. My thesis reconceptualises how offensive language is interpreted in the criminal law. I extend existing scholarship by highlighting how criminal justice discourse creates and entrenches power inequalities, augments judicial discretion, ignores difference and promotes unfairness. I demonstrate how discourse shapes perceptions about things, people, ideas and words that are deemed ‘out of place’ and worthy of criminal sanction.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/90323