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.

Minutes 23/10/2013

In today's meeting, we:

• Discussed the measures to be taken in order to observe the etiquette when designing and distributing the questionnaire.
• Set a target to have our questionnaires produced by Week 6, in order to collect data during reading week when the group won't be organising a meeting.
• Decided that the group will meet on three occasions during Week 5, in order to compensate for no meetings during Week 6.
• Discussed the possibility and practicality of a Skype group call during reading week.

Our next meeting will take place tomorrow at 15:00.  

Minutes 21/10/2013

Following Alison's feedback, we met today to discuss improvements that could be made to our original proposal.  We agreed that our topic was far too broad and looked at refining it, instead focussing on how celebrity culture influences taboo language.  For this, we suggested looking at three areas: Politics, Football and Music, for each of these we will research cases, which will then be compared and contrasted with one another.

Our next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, in which we will refine our revised proposal further.

Minutes 17/10/13

In today's meeting we:

• Completed the 500-word proposal for our research project and posted it on the blog. 
• Exported the blog and backed it up to a number of different devices. 
• Exchanged mobile phone numbers to improve communication and increase opportunities to be flexible with future meetings.
• Discussed dates to be arranged for meetings next week.

Our next meeting will be at 12:00 on Monday 21st October.  We will think about our research methods in more detail before starting to design our questionnaire, or begin researching for our literature review.  We'll keep an eye out for any feedback from Alison on our proposal!

Proposal

We (Ellie, Hope, Jake, Jaya, and Natalie) have decided to focus our investigation on the social and cultural influences on taboo language around the world. These will include issues of sexism, racism, defecation, sex, family, and how these differ in significance in English and other languages. Our investigation will aim to answer the following questions: ‘What makes lexis taboo?’, ‘Which words or phrases are considered most offensive and why?’, ‘How much does the taboo language of English differ to that of other languages, and why?’, ‘Is there sufficient evidence to suggest that it does differ?’, ‘How has taboo language in English changed over time and why?’

               The methods we will use to investigate this topic will be: a questionnaire about which taboo terms are most offensive to which ethnic groups and why people believe this is so; a number of interviews with people whose first language is not English about their impressions of taboo words from their native tongue and English; a corpus analysis into which words are commonly used; and a variety of literature to help support our findings and investigate further into the topic. Whilst the questionnaire will allow us to see if our predictions about people’s opinions about words are correct, the corpus study will tell us more about the frequency of words, the genre in which they are used, the gender of the person who is using them, and the time period in which they are used. The interviews will help to highlight which issues have the highest influence on taboo lexis in which languages. Some of the literature that we think will be relevant to our study includes: An Encyclopaedia of Swearing: the social history of oaths, profanity, foul language, and ethnic slurs in the English-speaking world by G. Hughes, 2006; Cursing in America: A psycholinguistic study of dirty language in the courts, in the movies, in the schoolyard, and on the streets by T. Jay, 1992; Taboo expressions in American Sign Language by Mirus et al., 2012; Fk yea I swear: cursing and gender in MySpace by M. Corpora, 2008.

               One of the potential problems that has arisen when discussing this topic is the fact that investigating taboo language involves using potentially offensive lexis when conducting the questionnaires and interviews, and even when presenting our findings to our peers. We aim to address this issue by including a consent form at the start of the questionnaire, which offers the participant the opportunity to withdraw themselves at any time and warns them of the personal nature of the questions and use of potentially offensive lexis. We will include a similar disclaimer at the beginning of each interview. As well as this, we will offer an ‘I’d prefer not to say’ option for each of the questions of the questionnaire so that participants do not need to discuss anything which makes them feel uncomfortable. We will present our findings to our peers at the exhibition at the end of term, making use of visual representations of our data through pie charts, bar charts, other graphs, and tables.