ETHNOPRAGMATIC PERSPECTIVES ON ONLINE POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN GHANA: INVECTIVE AND INSULTS ON GHANAWEB

Abstract

The study explores the practice, meaning and significance of invective and insults in political discourse among Ghanaians. It examines the use of such language forms against people of higher social status in online discourse in Ghana, a country where it is traditionally unacceptable to openly criticize the elderly and authority figures, let alone insult them. Data was sourced from GhanaWeb [www.ghanaweb.com], the most patronized online news website in Ghana that ensures anonymous citizen participation in issues of national interest. The data involved invective and insult-filled online reader comments on news reports about the presidential candidates and the electoral commissioner involved in the 2016 general election in Ghana. Metapragmatic comments (reader reactions) which portray Ghanaian sociocultural perspectives on the use of abusive language against these individuals were also gathered. These two sets of comments were used to build the Corpus of GhanaWeb Comments on Ghana’s 2016 Election (CGCGE16). In addition to CGCGE16, the data for the study included comments from social media platforms, native speakers’ intuitions and the views of Ghanaian anthropological linguists and cultural specialists obtained from interviews, and evidence from scholarly works. The qualitative meaning analysis method is used along with the quantitative discourse analysis method. The study adopts an ethnopragmatic approach, combining corpus-based searches with semantic explications and cultural scripts, following the principles of the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) approach (Wierzbicka, 1992, 1996; Goddard & Wierzbicka, 2014). The findings indicate that most of the comments in CGCGE16 are personal attacks that violate the Ghanaian communicative norms towards the elderly and people in authority and, furthermore, do not conform to the expected displays of verbal respect. Instead of expressing their views on on-going socio-political issues, the commenters often draw on past socio-political occurrences, their public and sociocultural knowledge to engage in negative emotional characterizations and evaluations of the presidential candidates and the electoral commissioner, thereby, showing disapproval of them. By means of name-calling expressions, derogatory adjectives, and derogatory interjections, these commenters attack the intellectual abilities, moral behaviour, social competence, and physical characteristics of their targets. This negative communicative behaviour is attributed to the fact that on GhanaWeb, like on many online communities, interactants are not obliged to uphold communicative norms. The anonymity of GhanaWeb shields commenters from the repercussions such speech behaviours would otherwise necessitate. It is also attributed to the right to freedom of speech, the repeal of the criminal libel law, and the fact that traditionally, there are some specific settings that allow the use of insults against authority. The study demonstrates that although the practice of using insults against political leaders in online commentary appears to be “normal” in the online context, it is a transgression when one considers the Ghanaian sociocultural norms of communication. Consistent with this, although the interaction on GhanaWeb is asynchronous, some commenters play the role of regulatory figures and traditional gatekeepers of appropriate communicative behaviour by posting disapproving metapragmatic comments. The study identifies many ways in which interactions on GhanaWeb are culturally shaped. These include first, commenters do not only rely on English slang terms and swearwords, they also employ some local language insulting expressions (e.g. kwasea ‘fool’, yaka gbɔmɔ ‘worthless person’) due to the ‘weight’ such expressions carry for Ghanaians. Secondly, the metapragmatic comments do not employ certain key terms such as “offensiveness” that can be found in the literature on online studies related to the speakers of Inner Circle Englishes. Instead, they highlight the clear position of the Ghanaian culture on respect for elders and people in authority. These metapragmatic comments also stress the fact that the exchange of invective and insults in politics can result in violence which may have adverse effects on the development of the nation. Overall, the study is inclined towards the view that instead of generalizing the results of studies on abusive language use in online interactions, there is a need to draw out what distinguishes Ghanaian online interactants from, let’s say, Western countries, Asian countries, African countries, or from interactants elsewhere. The key claim is that understanding the sociocultural backdrop for the speech practices of online interactants is crucial to understanding their language use, as interactants draw on existing communicative repertoires which influence their language choices. Also, the study draws attention to news websites in Ghana as a platform where the use of unmitigated invective and insults against people of higher social status is increasingly becoming the norm, despite the fact it violates Ghanaian communicative values. Thus, this study serves as a springboard for future research into abusive language use in online interactions among Ghanaians.