Minutes for 20/11/13 and Agenda for 27/11/13

Minutes:
- We went over our questionnaire again, discussing the points Alison had brought up for us to change
- We made the necessary changes, tidied up our questionnaire and decided to ask another person on our course, but not in our research group, to give general feedback on the questionnaire (if they thought it was too long or not and if they felt the questions were too offensive)
- We received positive feedback, so made no changes, but were still unsure on whether some questions were accurate and acceptable to have on our final draft, therefore we decided to email Alison our draft and ask for more feedback
- We also decided to book in a meeting to see Alison about our final queries

Agenda:
- To try to finalise our questionnaire and make it worthy enough to give out to our participants
- Meet with Alison and check if there are any other changes to make
- Make those changes, if discussed in the meeting, and hopefully publish the final draft of the questionnaire later on in the week

Agenda 20/11/13

After receiving some feedback from Alison regarding the first draft of our questionnaire, we have decided to meet up as soon as possible in order to make the necessary amendments.  Hope, who visited Alison for some face-to-face feedback, has informed us of the changes that need to be made.  Therefore, we have arranged to meet on Wednesday from 11-2 (or later, if necessary).  Hopefully, we will have a complete questionnaire by the end of the session that we can then begin to distribute over the next couple of days, once we have received approval.  The final version of the questionnaire will be posted in the 'Questionnaire' tab on the blog.

What we've done so far and what we need to do

What we've done so far and what we need to do:

Our project had a rather slow start.  Originally, our research topic was focussed on regional accents and dialects, but we quickly changed to 'taboo' language.  The original focus wasn't precise enough; we intended on looking at the history of 'taboo' lexis and its presence/use in other countries as well as people's different opinions on what is 'taboo'.  Alison quickly notified us that this topic would be too broad under the time constraints and suggested we delve deeper into the metalinguistics of 'taboo' language.  As a result, the group worked carefully to fine-tune three specific research questions that we wanted to answer.  Thereafter we quickly decided on four case studies from which to base our questionnaire around.  These include the controversial 'Plebgate Affair,' involving a prominent UK politician Andrew Mitchell, as well as the allegations of the use of racial and/or offensive language by footballer John Terry towards England colleague Anton Ferdinand.  The other two cases are both controversial songs: 'Niggaz in Paris' by Jay-Z & Kanye West and '212' by Azealia Banks.  One of the reasons why we chose these case studies in particular was because of the interesting metalinguistic language found either from blogs, press reports, Twitter or legal findings. From this stage, we have produced a questionnaire (which will be uploaded soon).  

Throughout our project, we have discussed the severity and sensitivity involving the ethics of our study.  These issues have been at the forefront of our mind, as by no means do we want to cause people any distress by participating in our project.

What we need to do:

Once our questionnaire has been uploaded, we will await feedback from Alison as, due to the ethical nature of our project, we feel Alison's input is crucial at this stage.  We will then distribute our questionnaire, aiming to collect a sample size of approximately 50.  We hope this will give us widespread, varied viewpoints and thus a great deal to analyse on 'taboo' lexis.  From here, we will use readings alongside our analysis.  After this we will start to put together our presentation and plan the recording for the blog.  We still have lots to do before the project is completed but now the questionnaire is together, we are hoping our progress will increase dramatically. 

Agenda 13/11/13

- We have arranged to meet on Wednesday 13th from 6pm, in order to compile all of our questions, our consent form and our brief introductions to the case studies to create a final version of the questionnaire.
- So that we can all access the questionnaire once it has been made, we will create a page on the blog with an attachment for the questionnaire. This will give the whole group easy access to the questionnaire, so that each group member can individually print and distribute them.
- Once the questionnaire is complete, we will discuss our distribution methods and decide on a mutually convenient time in which we can collect our data and discuss the analysis of it.

Agenda 12/11/13

- Over reading week, our individual tasks were to think of some questions for the case study we had been designated. Therefore, we plan to discuss the ideas and questions that we have thought about. We will then compare each other's questions, to ensure that they are consistent.
- Once we are happy with our questions, we will arrange to meet up as soon as possible to create the actual questionnaire in order for it to be ready for distribution over the next week.

Minutes: Week 5

During week 5, the group went back to the drawing board in terms of finding a more particular focus for our research project.  First and foremost, upon receiving Alison's feedback, the group had the task of drastically narrowing down our originally vague 'focus' for the project.

What questions will your research answer?

• To what extent does the social status of the speaker and/or receiver affect the way in which “taboo” language is perceived?
• What role does gender have in the way in which taboo language is perceived?
• To what extent do the opinions of people on what is considered to be “taboo” language differ and why?

In order to achieve this, we have decided to base most of our analysis on both the social status and gender of the speaker and/or receiver, within context.  The 'context' being 4 separate 'case studies', all of which have been well-documented in the media recently:

1)  The court case involving alleged offensive and/or racist language used by Chelsea FC captain John Terry towards QPR defender and fellow England colleague Anton Ferdinand.

2 & 3)  The song '212' by Azealia Banks and, in particular, it's lyrical content and the way in which the song was received by the general public.  This song will then be compared and contrasted with 'Niggaz In Paris' by Jay-Z and Kanye West which peaked at #10 in the UK Singles Chart.

4)  Andrew Mitchell's alleged use of the term "plebs" and/or other offensive language towards police officers in an incident outside the Houses Of Parliament.

The group made a considered effort to find the most appropriate, engaging case studies from which to collect data for our research project.  By confining the case studies to the topics of sport, music and politics respectively, we as a group are confident that we have taken the right steps to provide a solid, interesting basis on which to design our questionnaire.

Another interesting factor that will be integrated into our analysis is the use of metalinguistic language when discussing the case studies, i.e. how each individual case is perceived and how they are written/spoken about in the media, newspapers, etc.  

During week 5, each member of their own group had their own delegated responsibilities in terms of research for separate case studies.  There has been a unanimous agreement in terms of the effectiveness of sharing the workload in this manner and it is something we are keen to continue with.

The blog will be updated further during the week.