#Cancelada: a culture of boycott conveyed by impoliteness estrategies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/1984-8412.2025.e96951Keywords:
Cancellation culture, Linguistic-discursive violence, Impoliteness, Digital social networksAbstract
This research aims to analyze how internet users, in online-mediated interactions on the social network X (formerly Twitter), employed linguistic-discursive resources that would suggest the cancellation of the artist Thaila Ayala, by reducing interlocutive distance and constructing metapragmatics of impoliteness. In the theoretical scope, we assume that cancel culture involves impolite language actions at the micro (impoliteness strategies), macro (establishment of violent metapragmatics), and meso levels (regulation of interlocutive instances for violence), guided by the intersection of Interactional Sociolinguistics and Pragmatics. In the methodological scope, we selected one post from G1 and seven comments related to the cancellation of the artist Thaila Ayala, under the guidance of (N)etnography and Critical Discourse Analysis. In the analytical scope, we observed that irony, derogatory rhetorical questions, pejorative adjectives, distinct insinuations, and various grammatical-textual uses, as violent linguistic-discursive strategies, emerged from a (meta)discursive struggle between the artist (cancelled) and the internet users (cancellers), forming a unit of meaning that framed the cancellation as a kind of pursuit of social justice.
References
ABREU, C. L. Hipervisibilidade e self-disclosure: novas texturas da experiência social nas redes digitais. Visualidades, Goiânia, v. 13, n. 2, p. 194-219, 2015.
ALBUQUERQUE, R.; MUNIZ, A. Proxêmica linguístico-discursiva: um mecanismo de modalização intersubjetiva. Fórum Linguístico, Florianópolis, v. 19, n. 4, p. 8586-8603, 2022.
ALVES, M. A. S.; ANDRADE, O. M. Da “Caixa-Preta” à “Caixa de Vidro”: o Uso da Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) para Reduzir a Opacidade e Enfrentar o Enviesamento em Modelos Algorítmicos. RDP, Brasília, v. 18, n. 100, p. 349-373, 2021.
ARUNDALE, R. B. Face as relational and interactional: A communication framework for research on face, facework and politeness. Journal of Politeness Research, Berlin, v. 2, n. 2, p. 193-216, 2006.
BARGIELA-CHIAPPINI, F. Facing the future: Some reflections. In: BARGIELA-CHIAPPINI, F.; HAUGH, M. (ed.). Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, 2009. p. 306-325.
BAYM, N. K. Tune in, Log on: Soaps, Fandom, and Online Community. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2000.
BLITVICH, P. G-C.; SIFIANOU, M. Im/politeness and discursive pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 145, p. 91-101, 2019.
BOUSFIELD, D. Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2008.
BOUVIER, G. Racist call-outs and cancel culture on Twitter: The limitations of the platform’s ability to define issues of social justice. Discourse, Context & Media, Amsterdam, v. 38, p. 100431-100441, 2020.
BROWN, E. Renewing Cancel Culture for a New Season. Logos-sophia, Pittsburg, v. 16, p. 23-32, 2021.
BROWN, P.; LEVINSON, S. Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
CARREIRA, M. H. Modalisation linguistique en situation d’interlocution: proxémique verbale et modalités en portugais. Louvain-Paris: Peters, 1997.
CASTILHO, A. T. Nova Gramática do Português Brasileiro. São Paulo: Contexto, 2012.
CHIZZOTTI, A. A pesquisa qualitativa em ciências humanas e sociais: evolução e desafios. Revista Portuguesa de Educação, Braga, v. 16, n. 2, p. 221-236, 2003.
CLARK, M. D. DRAG THEM: A brief etymology of so-called “cancel culture”. Communication and the Public, [S.l.], v. 5, n. 3-4, p. 88-92, 2020.
CLARK, M. Black Twitter: building connection through cultural conversation. In: RAMBUKKANA, N. (ed.). Hashtag Publics: the power and politics of discursive networks. Nova York: Peter Lang, 2015. p. 205-217.
CULPEPER, J. Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 25, n. 3, p. 349-367, 1996.
CULPEPER, J. Politeness and impoliteness. In: AJIMER, K.; ANDERSEN, G. (ed.). Pragmatics of Society. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2011. p. 393-438.
EELEN, G. A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome, 2001.
FAIRCLOUGH, N. Discurso e mudança social. Tradução de Izabel Magalhães. Brasília: Editora Universidade de Brasília, 2001.
FARACO, C. A. Considerações sobre a sentença imperativa no português do Brasil. D.E.L.T.A., São Paulo, v. 2, n. 1, p. 1-15, 1986.
FLICK, U. Desenho da pesquisa qualitativa. Tradução de Roberto Cataldo Costa. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2009.
GOFFMAN, E. Interaction ritual: essays on face-to-face behavior. UK: Penguin University Books, 1967.
G1. Thaila Ayala é criticada após lançamento de marca de roupas e altera nome: Vir.Us para Amar.Ca. 8 jun. 2020. Disponível em: https://glo.bo/2MCmaai. Acesso em: 2 mar. 2021.
GRAINGER, K. ‘First order’ and ‘second order’ politeness: Institutional and intercultural contexts. In: LINGUISTIC POLITENESS RESEARCH GROUP (org.). Discursive approaches to politeness. Walter de Gruyter: Berlin/Boston, 2011. p. 167-188.
GREEN, J.; BLOOME, D. Ethnography and ethnographers of and in education: a situated perspective. In: FLOOD, J.; HEATH, S. B.; LAPP, D. (org.). Handbook for literacy educators: research in the community and visual arts. Nova York: Macmillan, 1997. p. 181-202.
HALL, E. T. et al. Proxemics [and Comments and Replies]. Chicago Journals, Chicago, v. 9, n. 2-3, p. 83-108, 1968.
HAN, B-C. La Sociedad de la Transparencia. Tradução de Raúl Gabás. Barcelona: Herder, 2013.
HAUGH, M. The co-constitution of politeness implicature in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 39, n. 1, p. 84-110, 2007a.
HAUGH, M. The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research, Berlin, v. 3, n. 2, p. 295-317, 2007b.
HAUGH, M.; CULPEPER, J. Integrative pragmatics and (im)politeness theory. In: ILIE, C.; NORRICK, N. R. (ed.). Pragmatics and its Interfaces. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2018. p. 213-239.
KÁDÁR, D. Z.; HAUGH, M. Understanding Politeness. UK: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
KARSAKLIAN, E. Comportamento do consumidor. 2. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2004.
KEEN, A. Vertigem digital: por que as redes sociais estão nos dividindo, diminuindo e desorientando? Tradução de Alexandre Martins. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 2012.
KEMP, S. Digital 2021: Brazil. DataReportal: Global Digital Insights, s.l., 11 fev. 2021. Disponível em: https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2020-brazil. Acesso em: 20 maio 2021.
KOZINETS, R. V. Netnography 2.0. In: BELK, R. (Ed.). Handbook of qualitative research methods in marketing. Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2006. p. 129-142.
KOZINETS, R. V. Netnografia: realizando pesquisa etnográfica online. Tradução de Daniel Bueno. Porto Alegre: Penso, 2014.
KRAMSCH, C. J. Language and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
LAIDLAW, E. B. Online shaming and the right to privacy. Laws, Basel, v. 6, n. 3, p. 1-26, 2017.
LAKOFF, R. T. The logic of politeness; or, minding your p’s and q’s. In: CORUM, C. et al. (ed.). Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, p. 292-305, 1973.
LEECH, G. N. The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
LEECH, G. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman, 1983.
MASON, J. Qualitative Researching. 2. ed. London, Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: SAGE, 2002.
MILLS, S. Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
MORSE, J. M. The Significance of Saturation. Qual. Health Res., Thousand Oaks, v. 5, n. 2, p. 147-149, 1995.
NG, E. No Grand Pronouncements Here...: Reflections on Cancel Culture and Digital Media Participation. Television & New Media, Thousand Oaks, v. 21, n. 6, p. 621-627, 2020.
NORRIS, P. Cancel Culture: Myth or Reality? Political Studies, London, v. 21, n. 6, p. 1-30, 2021.
PAULA, N. M.; PEREIRA, W.; GIORDANI, R. C. F. A COVID-19 em meio a uma “tempestade perfeita” no capitalismo neoliberal: reflexões críticas sobre seus impactos no Brasil. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, Rio de Janeiro, v. 28, n. 3, p. 761-770, 2023.
PINTO, J. P. É só mimimi ? Disputas metapragmáticas em espaços públicos online. Interdisciplinar, São Cristóvão, v. 31, p. 221-236, 2019.
PROGRAMA RECLAME. 15 jan. 2021. Instagram: @progrmareclame. Disponível em: https://www.instagram.com/tv/CKEpTtoDQN2/?igshid=83a9zzsh0wl1. Acesso em: 2 mar. 2021.
ROMANO, A. Why we can’t stop fighting about cancel culture. Vox, Nova York, 25 ago. 2020. Disponível em: https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/30/20879720/what-is-cancel-culture-explained-history-debate?__c=1. Acesso em: 26 maio 2021.
SAINT-LOUIS, H. Understanding cancel culture: Normative and unequal sanctioning. First Monday, [S.l.], v. 26, n. 7, 2021.
SANTAELLA, L. Gêneros discursivos híbridos na era da hipermídia. Bakhtiniana, [S.l.], v. 9, n. 2, p. 206-216, 2014.
SANTAELLA, L.; LEMOS, R. Redes sociais digitais: a cognição conectiva do Twitter. São Paulo: Paulus, 2010.
SCHERRE, M. M. P. Aspectos sincrônicos e diacrônicos do imperativo gramatical no português brasileiro. Alfa: Revista de Linguística, São Paulo, v. 51, n. 1, p. 189-222, 2007.
SIGNORINI, I. Metapragmáticas da língua em uso: unidades e níveis de análise. In: SIGNORINI, I. (org.). Situar a lingua[gem]. São Paulo: Parábola, 2008. p. 117-148.
SILVERMAN, D. Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk. London: SAGE Publications, 2001.
SILVERSTEIN, M. Language Structure and Linguistic Ideology. In: CLYNE, P. R.; HANKS, W. F.; HOFBAUER, C. L. (org.). The Elements: a parasession on linguistic units and levels. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 1979. p. 193-247.
SOUZA, G. Qual a rede social mais usada em 2023? A resposta vai te surpreender. Tech Tudo, 21 jul. 2023. Listas. Disponível em: http://www.techtudo.com.br/listas/2023/07/qual-a-rede-social-mais-usada-em-2023-a-resposta-vai-te-surpreender-edapps.ghtml. Acesso em: 20 dez. 2023.
SPRADLEY, J. P. Participant Observation. USA: Thomson Learning, 1980.
TERKOURAFI, M. Beyond the micro-level in politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research, Berlin, v. 1, n. 2, p. 237-262, 2005.
THOMPSON, J. B. A interação mediada na era digital. MATRIZes, [S.l.], v .12, n. 3, p. 17-44, 2018.
TUCKER, B. That’s problematic: Tracing the birth of call-out culture. Critical Reflections, Leeds, 2018. Disponível em: http://ojs.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/index.php/SOC/article/view/4545. Acesso em: 13 out. 2021.
TWITTER. G1. Brasil, 8 de junho de 2020. Disponível em: https://twitter.com/g1. Acesso em: 21 maio 2021.
WATTS, R. J. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
YULE, G. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
ZAPPAVIGNA, M. Searchable talk: the linguistic functions of hashtags. Social Semiotics, [S.l.], v. 25, n. 3, p. 274-291, 2015.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Rights including those in copyright in the content of the published works are owned by Revista Forum Linguistico. Complete or parcial reprint should be authorized by the Editorial Board of the Journal. In case of authorization, the source of the original publication must be stated.
