This week I presented the reading by Wierzbicka explored the
extensive range of Australian cultural meanings associated with the word
“bloody”. The word bloody is a useful tool in expressing the way one is feeling
in Australian culture. Its repeated use conveys different and specific meanings
and can thus provide important insight into the culture specific attitudes and
values amongst Australian communities.
Research by Hong in 2008 builds upon Wierzbicka’s work of
the word “bloody” and how it is characteristic to Australian culture. His
research found that from an intercultural perspective the use of “bloody hell”
amongst other non-Australian cultures, tended to be received as impolite and
rude. However he recognises that “bloody” has been integral to Australian
discourse for many years and should thus be appreciated as an everyday casual
Australian expression used to portray friendliness and casualness. Hong however
does not delve into the negative aspects associated with the word as Wierzbicka
did.
In relation to this week’s lecture and Wierzbicka’s work on
the word “bloody”, Hong’s paper supports the idea that the importance of the
word extends beyond its literal definition, as its meaning is inherited from
the speakers intonations, articulations and the context in which it is used. Hong’s
study found that most Australian’s tended to appreciate “bloody hell” as an
acceptable everyday terminology used in Australian culture; however British
English speakers found the word to be course and reflect impoliteness. Therefore
I agree with Hong that the meaning of “bloody hell” is strongly associated with
the Australian culture, and thus it may easily be misinterpreted and taken with
offence when used external to the Australian context.
References:
Hong, M 2008, "Where the bloody hell are you?": Bloody
hell and (im)politeness in Australian English. Griffith Working Papers in
Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication, vol.1, no.1, pp33-39.
No comments:
Post a Comment