Whose “k-word” is it anyway! : Understanding the discourses used to justify and/or repudiate the use of the word “kaffir” in social media interactions

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorMbowa, Sonia
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-22T08:59:55Z
dc.date.available2019-11-22T08:59:55Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.descriptionA research report submitted to the Faculty of Humanities, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts in Social& Psychological Research, 2019en_ZA
dc.description.abstractThe word “kaffir” has particular histories and meanings in South Africa and has previously led to civil proceedings. In the current study I sought to understand the discourses and discursive strategies used by social media interlocutors to justify and/or repudiate the use of the word and to situate it as (un)acceptable. The study was interested in illuminating the unmediated manner in which social media interactions occur rather than the explanations that people give for the use of the word after it has been used. Twitter and public Facebook pages and groups were searched for posts that comprised the word “kaffir” in its variant spellings, including the euphemized “k-word”. The data was analyzed using discourse analysis. The findings from the study indicate that the discussions around the use of the word “kaffir” generally suggest that it is problematized depending on certain contextual factors like the racial category and age of the persons using the word. The discussions that follow after the initial post about the word “kaffir” highlight South Africa’s continuous struggle with race and accusations of racism and “reverse racism”; disagreements over the nature of racism were recurrent in the exchanges. Interlocutors relied on two competing discourses – the Contextualist discourse and the Universalist discourse to justify and/or challenge the (un)acceptability of using the word and to justify and/or challenge attempts to re-appropriate it as a positive self-identifier. The Contextualist discourse was used to argue that factors like age, race and context determine the (un)acceptability of the word. The Universalist discourse was used to justify the use of the word as acceptable and also to challenge it as unacceptable. Proponents of the Universalist discourse argued for the word “kaffir” to be made available to all people, irrespective of their race on the basis that the word was never racist at its inception. On the contrary, opponents argued that the word was racist at inception and therefore any continued used perpetuates racial stereotypes.en_ZA
dc.description.librarianXL2019en_ZA
dc.format.extentOnline resource (56 pages)
dc.identifier.citationBonwa, Sonia (2019) Whose 'K-Word' is it anyway:understanding the discourses used to justify and/ or repudiate the use of the word 'kaffir' in social media interactions, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, <http://hdl.handle.net/10539/28539>
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10539/28539
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.subject.lcshXhosa language--Grammar
dc.titleWhose “k-word” is it anyway! : Understanding the discourses used to justify and/or repudiate the use of the word “kaffir” in social media interactionsen_ZA
dc.typeThesisen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
Abstract_Sonia Mbowa.pdf
Size:
633.83 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
Sonia Mbowa-MA Research Report (Final).pdf
Size:
2.08 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
ETD Collection