So, to briefly recap: we’ve established that there’s a thing called construction grammar, which can be used to describe the ways people speak and understand language (see Part 1). We also established that there’s a particular type of construction grammar called Embodied Construction Grammar, which bases its idea of “meaning” on schemas about embodied experiences in the world.
Where does profanity come in?
This post was originally intended to describe some issues involved in building a grammar that allows for the usage and understanding of profanity. Instead, I ended up giving a brief introduction to construction grammar, as well as a particular version of construction called Embodied Construction Grammar. If you’re familiar with these things already, feel free to skip to pt. 2, which will have the more fun bits about profanity. (Or don’t, and tell me what I got wrong.)