[pilowsky]

Because some people have too much time on their hands it was found necessary to undertake a study about bad language in online conversation.
The results were published in the Journal 'Lingua'.
"Vulgarity in online discourse around the English-speaking world"
This is clearly a topic of considerable importance because the article was part of a special issue titled: "Bad Language and Vulgarity Online and in Public Discourse".
The worst (or should that be best) countries were:
USA
Great Britain
Australia
Singapore
New Zealand

Australia was roughly half as vulgar as the USA - disappointing.

Regex that some here may find useful include:
# "arsehole/s"
"\\b(dumb|stupid|lazy|worthless|useless|brain|dead|jack)*[a@4äáå]r[s5$§z][e3€ëéê][h]?[o0øöóõ]*[l1£][e3€ëéê]*[s5$§z]*\\b"

I need to expand my repertoire - I've no idea when it might be useful to deploy the term "jack @hole".

The authors acknowledge inter alia that: "In the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used ChatGPT, an AI-assisted tool developed by OpenAI, to improve the style and readability of the text."

So I asked Gemini what it thought of the study.
It replied
"This groundbreaking paper, boldly goes where no scholar has gone before: into the dark, murky, and undeniably fascinating depths of digital bad language. Armed with the formidable GloWbE corpus and a word list that reads like a disgruntled sailor's diary, the authors courageously confirm what we've all suspected – that "inner circle" English speakers are, in fact, the most eloquently foul-mouthed individuals on the internet. Who knew that centuries of Shakespearean prose would culminate in such a diverse and creative deployment of the word "cunt" in Britain, or that the Irish would so devoutly embrace "feck"? And let's not forget the American affinity for "ass(hole)," proving once and for all that even our insults are supersized. This monumental research not only confirms regional preferences for obscenities but also offers profound insights into how cultural superiority is inextricably linked to one's ability to craft a truly magnificent string of expletives. Truly, a triumph for linguistics and a testament to the enduring power of human vulgarity."

We're truly in a new era of scientific endeavour.

[thepossum]

Would be more interested in a cross cultural study trying to take account of quality versus quantity

I can't believe I even scan read that paper - good to know the local uni is doing such important research

I should say thankyou for such a thought provoking post lol

[kenberg]

I was stunned bt the Gemini response. So I tried Gemini with
How important is the study "Vulgarity in online discourse around the English-speaking world".

The respnse was

Quote

The study "Vulgarity in online discourse around the English-speaking world" by Schweinberger and Burridge is highly important for several reasons:

• Understanding Cultural and Linguistic Trends: It provides valuable insights into how language, particularly vulgarity, is used across different English-speaking regions. The finding that "inner circle" English varieties (like the US, UK, and Australia) exhibit higher rates and more varied forms of online vulgarity compared to "outer circle" or L2 varieties sheds light on linguistic creativity and norm-setting in language evolution. This helps us understand how societal attitudes and language interact in digital spaces.
• Socio-Cultural Implications: Vulgarity is not just "bad language"; it serves various linguistic functions, including expressing emotion, emphasizing sentiment, signaling group identity, and even for catharsis or humor. By analyzing its usage, the study contributes to understanding broader cultural values and social attitudes, how people express themselves online, and how these expressions vary demographically (e.g., by age, gender, political ideology).
• Practical Applications in NLP and Content Moderation: Understanding vulgarity is crucial for developing better natural language processing (NLP) applications, such as sentiment analysis and hate speech detection. Vulgarity can intensify sentiment, and its nuanced use (e.g., "good ass day" for emphasis) can alter the perceived meaning of a statement. This research helps in creating more accurate models that can differentiate between offensive and non-offensive uses of strong language, which is vital for effective content moderation on online platforms, avoiding over-censorship, and setting appropriate community guidelines.
• Revealing Online Communication Dynamics: The study highlights that online communication, especially in informal settings like blogs, often features more vulgarity than general web content. This demonstrates how the digital environment shapes language use and allows for different communication norms than traditional settings. It also touches upon how vulgarity can contribute to social cohesion within certain groups while potentially being perceived as impolite or aggressive by others.
• Addressing a Ubiquitous Phenomenon: Vulgarity is a pervasive element of human communication, and its increased prevalence online makes it a significant area of study. As people spend more time communicating digitally, understanding the nature and impact of vulgar language becomes increasingly relevant for researchers, platform developers, and users alike.

In essence, this study is important because it contributes to our academic understanding of language, culture, and online behavior, and also has practical implications for how we design, manage, and interact within digital communication spaces.

Edit: The Forum site was down for a while and somehow part of my intended post got left off.

Anyway, the study of vulgarity is potentially interesting.

[WasWinM]

 kenberg, on 2025-May-25, 08:55, said:

I was stunned bt the Gemini response. So I tried Gemini with
How important is the study "Vulgarity in online discourse around the English-speaking world".

The respnse was



Edit: The Forum site was down for a while and somehow part of my intended post got left off.

Anyway, the study of vulgarity is potentially interesting.

I had hoped Gemini’s response would have been: “It’s fu#@ing awesome!”

[mycroft]

I have pointed out Hellsing Ultimate Abridged before. And my difficulty in finding a quote from it that is: [ul][*]vaguely relevant (given my current, that's a *big* circle)
[*]funny or interesting (again, lots of options here)
[*]does not have any blatant bad language (or, being Hellsing, a reference to a specific group that no longer exist except in Neo- form).[/list]

And uh, well, it's online. Very, only, and (in)famously, online. And 5ish hours long. So...

[thepossum]

kenberg, on 2025-May-25, 08:55, said:

I was stunned bt the Gemini response. So I tried Gemini with
How important is the study "Vulgarity in online discourse around the English-speaking world".

The respnse was



Edit: The Forum site was down for a while and somehow part of my intended post got left off.

Anyway, the study of vulgarity is potentially interesting.

I asked Chat GPT what it thought of Gemini's response

"The summary from Gemini is quite solid: it covers the main academic and practical reasons the Schweinberger and Burridge paper matters. It’s articulate and accurate, though it leans toward being slightly boilerplate in tone — a bit too polished and impersonal, which can sometimes dull the critical edge or specificity of the argument.

If you're looking to sharpen it — say, for a more incisive article, critical review, or presentation — I could help rewrite it in a voice that’s:

More engaged and analytical, especially in comparing "inner circle" vs. "outer circle" discourse patterns

Possibly more provocative or culturally grounded, if you're aiming for impact beyond academia

Or more tailored to your audience (e.g., developers, sociolinguists, cultural theorists)

Would you like a reframed version of that summary with more depth or critique? Or something pithier for public use?"

Me: With all due respect to the academics involved the paper made me think of group of naughty children giggling and playing with analytics behind a bike shed
For me the currency of vulgarity has moved on since my days at school

I am curious (being a bit more serious) about the review process and how thorughly the supplementary material needed to be checked