Slurs, neutral counterparts, and what you could have said

Recent pragmatic accounts of slurs argue that the offensiveness is generated by a speaker's free choice to use slur opposed more appropriate and semantically equivalent neutral counterpart. I theoretical role counterparts on such views overstated. consider two recent analyses, Bolinger (Noûs, 51, 2017, 439) Nunberg (New work speech acts, Oxford University Press, 2018), which rely heavily upon optionality slurs, namely, speaker exercises deliberate lexical when they could have easily used counterpart instead. Against views, across range different offensive uses plays little no in accounting for why generates offence. Such cases cast serious doubt explanatory depth these raise general concerns draw relationship between its The main upshot this: theorists should exercise caution assuming play any fundamental or systemic explaining are offensive.