Homophobic grammar

The role of transitivity and phoricity in homophobic formation

Bibliographic Data

ID2137349
AuthorsDavid Peterson (0000-0002-9247-4451), David J Peterson (University of Nebraska at Omaha, corresponding author)
Year2016
Volume5
Issue1
Pages61-93
Publication date2016-03-11
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Language and Sexuality (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2211-3770 • E-ISSN: 2211-3789
PublisherJohn Benjamins Publishing Company (PUBLISHER • NL)
DOI10.1075/jls.5.1.03pet
OpenAlexW2330360262
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited41

This study analyzes a historical example of how participants in military policy formation within the US Senate harnessed lexicogrammatical resources to legitimate queer exclusion from military service. Intended as a conceptual rather than definitive study, I analyze text taken from a US Senate hearing related to the implementation of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' (repealed in 2011). The investigation focuses on how transitivity and phoricity are drawn on to produce homophobic formations. My findings indicate that the text exhibits a process of lexicogrammatical selection that enables homophobic formation to unfold at the discourse-semantic level. I then explore how lexicogrammatical and discourse-semantic choice-making flows from the social practice of which the text is part, which in turn reflects the ideological structures that configure the practice. I conclude the paper with a brief discussion of my preliminary findings' implications in terms of analyzing homophobic formation

Grammar · Ideology · Linguistics · Political science · Politics · Queer · Selection (genetic algorithm · Sociology · Systemic functional grammar · Transitive relation · Computer Science · Gender Studies · Gender Studies in Language · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Translation Studies and Practices · Artificial Intelligence