Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

A Simple Theory of Overt and Covert Dogwhistles

Abstract

Politicians select their words meticulously, never losing sight of their ultimate communicative goal. Sometimes, their objective may be that of not being fully understood by a large portion of the audience. They can achieve this by means of dogwhistles; linguistic expressions that, in addition to their literal meaning, convey a concealed message to a specific sub-group of the audience. This paper focuses on the distinction between overt and covert dogwhistles introduced by J. Saul (2018SAUL, J. "Dogwhistles, political manipulation, and philosophy of language". In New Work on Speech Acts, D. Fogal, D. W. Harris, and M. Moss (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 360-383, 2018.). I argue that, even if the distinction successfully captures a genuine divide within the category of dogwhistles, the account proposed by Saul to explain the distinction is unsatisfactory. In response to this state of affairs, I illustrate how the distinction between overt and covert dogwhistle can be refined and illuminated by incorporating it into the 'Simple Theory' of dogwhistles advanced by J. Khoo (2017)KHOO, J. "Code Words in Political Discourse". Philosophical Topics, 45(2). pp. 33-64, 2017..

Keywords:
Dogwhistles; Political communication; Hate Speech; Khoo

UNICAMP - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência Rua Sérgio Buarque de Holanda, 251, 13083-859 Campinas-SP, Tel: (55 19) 3521 6523, Fax: (55 19) 3289 3269 - Campinas - SP - Brazil
E-mail: publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br