Despite increasing acceptance of interracial couples in the U.S., biases persist, and some evidence suggests that interracial couples may elicit a disgust response among people in the U.S. In a series of preregistered studies (Ntot = 3,367), we examine one possible explanation for this disgust response—sexual stereotyping of Black-White interracial couples. In Studies 1 and 2, participants explicitly identified interracial couples as being attributed deviant sexual stereotypes, and Study 3 completed the experimental causal chain by demonstrating that couples who are described with these deviant sexual stereotypes elicit disgust. Study 4 provided evidence that perceiving interracial relationships to be based on sexual fetishes statistically mediates the relation between interracial couples and disgust. Taken together, these findings indicate that interracial couples are stereotyped as sexually deviant, and that thinking of couples in terms of such deviant sexual stereotypes can produce a disgust response.
Abstract. Discourse markers are only a small group of words in English, but the study of discourse markers has become an interdisciplinary and interdisciplinary research. This paper holds that discourse markers play a procedural role in the discourse, reveal the meta-pragmatic awareness of language users, and exert a series of meta-pragmatic functions. This paper extends a discussion and makes some conclusions to those meta-pragmatic functions. The Composition, the Names and the Definitions of Discourse MarkersAlthough discourse markers are a small group of words, they are prevalent in various languages. Researchers from different races and different countries have discussed them in diverse perspectives. Many scholars have extended wide research on them in the aspects of psychology, philosophy and linguistics, and the research angles have been shifted from the syntactic-pragmatic ones or the semantic-pragmatic ones to the pragmatic-cognitive ones.Discourse markers are few in English, mainly composed of interjections (well, oh, uh), adverbs (actually, incidentally, frankly), conjunctions ((and, therefore, however, but), phrases (As a consequence, in particular, you know, I mean, therefore), and clauses (according to, I think, I guess). However, since different researchers unfold their research from different angles, this small group of words has different names, such as logic connectors, particles, gambits, discourse operators, discourse markers, discourse signaling devices, pragmatic particles, pragmatic formatives, pragmatic function words, semantic conjuncts, disjunct markers, clue words, extra sentential links, hyperpropositional expressions, conversational routines, prefaces, phatic connectives, etc.. The difference of those terminologies reflects that different researchers undertake their research on this group of words from different angles in different ways, and that discourse markers have various discourse functions. At present, there is no consensus on which terminology can be used to generalize such group. In this paper, the terminology discourse markers is used to summarize them, because "This term appears to be the one with the greatest universality and the least applicability, and it allows us to include a large variety of words under a semantic concept".Additionally, different scholars give distinct definitions to discourse markers. Among them, Schiffrin, a well-known scholar who studies English discourse markers in depth, argues that discourse markers are "a set of functional, verbal (or non-verbal) tools that provide contextual assistance to ongoing discourses". And Levinson thinks that discourse markers are "undoubtedly the words or phrases that can indicate the relation of a discourse to the preceding discourse in English. Usually they show how the words reflect or continue to discuss certain parts of the former words in very complex ways. Redeker defines discourse markers as "a group of discourse operators that are universally used as coherent language markers in discourse". On the basis of Re...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.