Slurs and ideologies stand in mutually supporting relations to each

other
uses of slurs strengthen ideologies, ideologies make uses of
slurs more harmful
possible to slur without the help of conventionalized slurs,
complete account of slurring will consider the relationship
between language and ideology broadly construed
CI: Acceptability implicatures
harm is done generally even if the speaker makes an attempt to
cancel
mentioned in the lecture that it you can never negate a slur in
the sense that the meaning and its negative connotations
are still there
In using a word W, a speaker generally conversationally
implicates that it is acceptable to use itlegally, morally
etc
Acceptability implicature : reflexive and higher order:
content is commentary on how what was said was
said
Convey that it is acceptable to put it that way
Tool 1 and Tool 2 : Boston B and O and S
cancel all the things considered acceptability implicature
in the ways that conversational implicatures are often
canceled
Non-conventionality of these implicatures is crucial to
understanding the connections between language used to
slur and ideologies in full generality
Ideologies
cluster of mutually supporting beliefs, aliens, interests, norms,
practices, values, affective dispositions ;; cluster of
elements that mutually support each other
Cueing Ideologies
Uses of slurs cue ideologies to do certain things

McCready: crux of the argument is that pejoratives/slurs carry their

nominative meaning but carry implicated content as well

***
Questions

Does this mean that slurs are linguistically no different from other
words or phrases that have connotations, like, for example, janitor,
secretary, and stewardess (other than obviously the fact that slurs
being used in a pejorative context)?

Also, in using conventional slurs, the speakers intention to cue a

certain ideology (for the purposes of insulting/harming) can be quite
clear, but can a speaker unintentionally convey a non-cancellable
conventional implicature in using phrases that may be taken to cue
certain ideologies? Does the speakers intention play a role in whether
or not the ideology is cued?

- what makes a slur a slur?

- do slurs strengthen ideologies?
- fine line drawn between free speech and being politically correct
- What happens the slur/what are the consequences of reclamation of
the slur by members of the marginalized group? Its not rational for the
marginalized group to use the slur in a pejorative context, but it is only
alright for that particular group. If that group is not homogenous, then
using the slur becomes less straightforward.
- People use slurs without thinking about the implications, and we
dont fully recognize or are fully aware of the pejorative aspect and
how it forces a lot of xenophobic and overall negative ideologies.
Especially as some slurs are being reclaimed, will it be acceptable to
use that slur (in the future), in other words can a slur lose its
pejorative meaning completely? (i.e. queer/gay)

Swanson: A speaker may not be aware that they are cueing that
ideology
Whether or not an ideology is cued also depends on the social, causal
and historical context
What happens when you direct a slur towards someonebearing in
mind that, in the situation, slurs are often intended as a source of
intimidation/threat, cueing negative ideologyhow does this change?
What happens when you use a slur and are unaware of its ideology?
Does the slur lose its pejorative meaning, or its still reinforced