The Use of Gendered Language in Interviews of Male and Female Athletes

Julia Offerman, Isabelle Sandback, Samantha Morgan, and Niki Agarwal

Societal viewpoints regarding sports can be partially attributed to gender bias in sports commentating and interviews. This is true even for tennis, which has become very gender-inclusive in terms of media coverage, as well as respect for female athletes. Still, many studies have found biases in language used for male and female tennis players—but have not examined interviews or interview questions. In this study, we analyzed six post-game interviews of mixed doubles tennis players to ascertain if there was a difference in questions directed to female and male tennis players. We observed the proportion of emotional and practical questions directed to each, as well as the proportion of questions regarding the interviewee themself, their partner, or teamwork for each player. We found that the women were asked significantly more emotional questions than their male counterparts, but that both were asked relatively similar percentages of interviewee-partner-teamwork questions. This study has important implications for language, respect, and gender-inclusivity surrounding tennis and women’s sports, as well as interview protocol between men and women interviewees in other fields. These metrics analyzed could be used in these other cases, and ideally, the differences should be mitigated in order to promote equality in interviews.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Background

Although media coverage of tennis has been more gender-inclusive than other sports, biases are still present in the language used by interviewers when interacting with male versus female tennis players. In our study, we analyzed the post-match interviews of mixed-doubles teams, which consisted of one female player and one male player, to see if word choice and question type display any gendered bias. This allowed us to test the hypothesis that gender-based bias found in broadcasting also extends to in-person interviews with the athletes.

Gendered language in tennis has served as the subject of several studies. Though the definition of gender may be fluid depending on context and background, tennis itself has established a gender line between male and female that we used as our baseline. Previous studies, such as Messner and Jensen (1993), have compared the broadcasts of men’s and women’s tennis matches because they are usually held at the same venue and given equal amounts of coverage.

Articles reporting on the 2015 Australian Open were analyzed for “gender-specific descriptors” in a 2016 study conducted by Adrian Yip (2016). It was found that “stereotypical beliefs about females were largely reinforced in mediated gender representations,” and specifically focused on the disproportional discussion of women’s appearance, mental-weakness, and other stereotypical female traits (Yip, 2016). The 2015 Australian Open media coverage was additionally analyzed by the International Review for the Sociology of Sport, and strong gendered differences in how announcers “created spectacle” and described athletes during the live matches were found (Quayle et al., 2019). Commentators were again analyzed during the 2018 US Open and found that they reported emotionality more frequently with female athletes (Gerbasi, 2019).

Despite the focus on bias in sports media coverage, no studies have looked at how gender bias shows up in press conferences and interviews. Interactions with the players deserve their own focus since reporters are not describing the athletes or offering their own commentary, which therefore makes it more difficult to identify examples of stereotypes or biased language.

Overall, we expect that female athletes will be asked more emotional-coded questions and males will be asked more practical-coded questions. In addition, we hypothesize that women will be asked more questions about their partner than men will be asked about their partner, and that women will be asked more questions about teamwork in general. If we see these differences, we can determine that there may be bias in the question choice when directed towards female and male athletes.

Methods

For our study, we looked at post-match interviews from Grand Slam tennis tournaments and decided to focus exclusively on mixed-doubles teams. Since a mixed-doubles pair includes one female and one male athlete who are both being interviewed about the same match, gender is isolated as a difference between the players; therefore, the differences in the questions posed to each athlete could be indicative of gender biases. We chose to analyze 6 formal interviews of players that were successful (had each won major tournaments before both in individual and doubles events) and well-known within the tennis world. The interviews totaled 71 minutes for analysis. Additionally, we chose to disregard the gender of the interviewers because the questions seemed to be highly scripted and therefore not indicative of the interviewers’ personal biases. After an initial scan, we conducted two waves of analysis: one that marked the subject of the question (i.e. emotional versus practical) and one that marked the referent of the question.

For the first part, we defined “emotional questions” as questions that either are meant to elicit an emotional reaction or ask about the player’s feelings. We looked for keywords or question topics that indicate emotions, specifically focusing on—but not limited to—the following list of keywords and concepts: therapy, emotional wellbeing, “feel,” personal life, emotional reaction to the results of the match, “happy” instead of “satisfied,” support. We used this framework in order to tally and average the number of emotional questions directed towards the female and male athletes.

An example of an emotional question is the following, posed to Serena Williams at the 2019 Wimbledon Tournament:

(1) “You said you had gone to see a therapist after the-dealing with the uh US Open incident, can you just talk about that process-what it did for you and how maybe it has affected you going forward?” – Question to Serena Williams in the Second Round Mixed Doubles Press Conference Wimbledon 2019 (0:16)

This targets both personal life and therapy, making the question emotional. Other times, the lexical choices indicated gender biases—competition related for the male player and emotional/psychological interaction for the female—such as in the following questions:

(2) “Were you surprised at how well you came together, you really seemed to have excellent chemistry this week?” – Question to Martina Hingis in the Mixed Doubles Finals Press Conference Australian Open 2015 (5:55)

(3) “How is the mixed doubles helping mentally and physically your, you know, your ambition to get back to singles?” – Question to Andy Murray in the Mixed Doubles Second Round Press Conference Wimbledon 2019 (6:38)

(4) “How did it feel to hit so many return winners against Martin?” – Question to Serena in the Second Round Mixed Doubles Press Conference Wimbledon 2019 (9:17)

In the second round of analysis, we tracked each question’s referent by sorting them into three possible categories: questions referring to the interviewee, questions referring to the interviewee’s partner, and questions referring to teamwork. We marked questions as referring to the interviewee when they asked about the player’s personal life, mental health, individual match play, opinions on larger news stories, etc., such as in the following question:

(5) “Andy, on TV you said that uh once Wimbledon finishes, hopefully on Sunday, you’re gonna practice a bit more singles? Does that mean you’ve made your decision about if you’ll go to the US Open or you will try the US swing as a singles player?” – Question to Andy Murray in the Second Round Mixed Doubles Press Conference Wimbledon 2019 (0:48)

Questions were marked as referring to the interviewee’s partner when players were asked about the other’s personality, habits, or style of play, such as in this example:

(6) “What is it about playing with Jamie that is so good for you?” – Question to Bethany Mattek-Sands in the Mixed Doubles Final Post-Match Interview US Open 2019 (2:29)

Finally, questions were marked as referring to teamwork when players were specifically asked about their partnership or future plans to play together. For instance:

(7) “You said on court that you only sort of teamed up again in the last couple weeks, was there ever a chance that you weren’t going to play together?” – Question to Neal Skupski in the Mixed Doubles Final Press Conference Wimbledon 2022 (11:42)

We conducted a paired t-test for each set of averages in order to determine the statistical significance of our results.

Results

On average, male tennis players were asked 58.33% of questions and females 41.67%, which was not significantly different (p-value=0.16).

Of the questions asked to the male partner, 35.83% were emotional-based and 64.33% to the female partner. This gives a two-tailed p-value of 0.006, which is very significant. Out of the total emotional questions, the female partner was asked 64.5% of the questions on average, with a p-value of 0.04, also significant.

Figure 1: The average percentage of questions that are emotional-based asked to the male and female tennis players; the percentage is the number of emotional questions divided by total questions asked to each partner.

Of the questions asked to the male, 51.4% referred to themselves, 17.7% referred to their partner, and 30.9% referred to teamwork. Of the questions asked to the female, 54.6% referred to themselves, 14.8% referred to their partner, and 30.6% referred to teamwork. The p-value between these two groups is over 0.9, indicating that there is no significant difference between the questions for male and female tennis players regarding if the question is about themselves, their partner, or teamwork.

Figure 2: The average percentage of questions asked about the interviewee, partner, and teamwork to each gender. The averages are comparable for each group; the percentages are taken out of total questions asked.

Discussion

Overall, the study indicated that there were some significant differences in the questions directed at male and female tennis players, but certain aspects were more likely to be gender specific than others. Based on the data, we can accept our hypothesis that female tennis players tend to be asked more emotion-based questions than male tennis players on average. We cannot, however, accept our hypothesis that female tennis players are asked more questions about their partner than male tennis players are, as the proportions are similar. This could indicate that emotional versus practical questions could be a metric for examining gender bias in sports interviews, but interviewee-centered versus partner-centered versus teamwork-centered may not be—at least, for mixed doubles tennis.

This has several implications not only for current perceptions of men’s and women’s sports, but for future actions that should be taken in order to mitigate gender bias in sports interviews. Based on the current understanding, interviewers direct more emotional questions towards female tennis players, which can undermine their competitive and athletic ability. If equal respect is going to be given to male and female athletes, the proportion of emotional and practical questions should be comparable for both genders—and this must be done deliberately. Though emotional aspects can be relevant in an interview or discussion with athletes, the priority should likely be the competitive aspects to establish any athlete’s prowess as paramount. “Gender Inequality in Sports: Women Face a Double Bind” from the publication The Hilltop Monitor, talks about a running hashtag back in 2015 called “#CoverTheAthlete.” This hashtag was created in order for people to highlight how male and female athletes were interviewed online and in the news, or, more importantly, how females were asked questions not related to their skill or game, but ones about personal life, looks, emotions, and how they felt about the male-side of sports. The author’s hypothesis was to see if there was a link between these interview differences and female athletes’ pay. Women are paid incredibly lower versions of their male-counterparts’ salaries. “The Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA) had a 2018 salary cap of $110,000 while the National Basketball Association (NBA) minimum salary was $582,186” (Porth 2019). The blog argues that gendered language and lower pay go hand in hand; if female athletes are going to be interviewed like their games do not matter, then their games will matter less to people, resulting in less revenue. Does the request “can you give us a twirl” sound like what an interviewer would ask to a serious, skilled player? It might be why women’s sports are seen as less serious than men’s.

Furthermore, tennis is a sport in which female athletes are seen as relatively equivalent to their male counterparts when compared to athletes in other sports. This suggests that the disparity could be even greater in other sports, underscoring a need for studies such as these to explore the way gender bias presents itself. The emotional and practical question metric could be applicable in these cases as well, and the necessity for similarity in questions directed to athletes of different genders in order to promote equal respect is key. Further differences in interview questions between men and women may be present in other industries and fields, which is another area for future development.

In order to truly determine if gender biases were present in these interviews, we specifically needed to limit the scope of this study to focus on quantifiable and qualifiable differences in the questions asked to male and female athletes. However, each athlete has multiple other aspects of their identities that could affect how they are perceived, such as race and age. There are intersections between said identities that may play an additional role in the choice of questions directed to them. Broadening the extent of this study could help account for some of these intersections. In addition, a longer study with more interviews would be ideal in order to further solidify the relationships noted.

There are efforts that can be made to help reduce the biases held regarding women’s sports in general, which can be considered a possible cause of the difference in questions posed in interviews. The International Women’s Day campaign offers a few ways that individuals can combat biases in women’s sports. Encouraging young women and girls and supporting them in sports can help instill equitable perceptions at a young age. Additionally, closing the gender gap in sports salaries will improve the legitimacy of women in the field. One of the easiest ways anybody can make a difference is simply supporting professional sports in any way, from attending a game to buying merchandise (“Support female athletes”). Supporting women and being aware of the stereotypes reflected in their sports interviews will contribute to the effort in improving gender inequities. This study, among many others, has revealed evidence of gender biases and awareness of this prejudice can allow for progress towards eliminating it.

References

AK. (2016, June 4). Martina Hingis and Leander Paes seal career grand slams at French Open. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8Fh-fF8Zek

Australian Open TV. (2015, February 1). Martina Hingis and Leander Paes press conference—Australian Open 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAPoYiZHzeU

Cooky, & Messner, M. A. (2018). No slam dunk: gender, sport and the unevenness of social change / Cheryl Cooky and Michael A. Messner. Rutgers University Press. https://muse.jhu.edu/chapter/2124054

Gerbasi, A. (2019). Game, Set, and Match: A Content Analysis on the Commentating of Tennis Broadcasters for the 2018 US Open Championship Weekend. [Master’s thesis, East Tennessee State University]. ProQuest, https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3575

Messner, Duncan, M. C., & Jensen, K. (1993). Separating the Men from the Girls: The Gendered Language of Televised Sports. Gender & Society, 7(1), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124393007001007

Porth, M. C. (2019). Gender Inequality in Sports: Women face a double bind – The Hilltop Monitor. Retrieved December 8, 2022, from https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/gender-inequality-in-sports-the-double-bind-women-face/

Quayle, M., Wurm, A., Barnes, H., Barr, T., Beal, E., Fallon, M., Flynn, R., McGrath, D., McKenna, R., Mernagh, D., Pilch, M., Ryan, E., Wall, P., Walsh, S., & Wei, R. (2019). Stereotyping by omission and commission: Creating distinctive gendered spectacles in the televised coverage of the 2015 Australian Open men’s and women’s tennis singles semi-finals and finals. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 54(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690217701889

Support female athletes worldwide and help #breakthebias in women’s Sport. International Women’s Day. Retrieved December 7, 2022, from https://www.internationalwomensday.com/Missions/17255/Support-female-athletes-worldwide-and-help-BreakTheBias-in-women-s-sport

US Open Tennis Championships. (2019, September 7). Mixed Doubles Final—Ceremony and Post Game Interview | US Open 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMDNRmO1cyY

Wimbledon. (2019a, July 9). Andy Murray & Serena Williams Second Round Mixed Doubles Press Conference Wimbledon 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqckd0HxyWY

Wimbledon. (2019b, July 10). Andy Murray & Serena Williams Third Round Press Conference Wimbledon 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AD9GhiFNA

Wimbledon. (2022, July 8). Neal Skupski and Desirae Krawczyk Final Press Conference | Wimbledon 2022. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DamI3-8RWjU

Yip, A. (2018). Deuce or advantage? Examining gender bias in online coverage of professional tennis. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 53(5), 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690216671020

[/expander_maker]

Are some NBA slang terms too vague? Absolutely!

Isaac Verdugo, Riley Kwinn, Brendan Xiong, and Gustavo Gutierrez

NBA (National Basketball Association) slang is widely used by basketball fans all over the world. NBA slang is formed and developed with NBA history. It has unique features and functions that give NBA fans the opportunity to express their opinions about the game of basketball in creative ways. NBA slang reflects NBA culture. A sociolinguistic study of NBA slang helps people know more about NBA culture and fans of different teams. The following study discusses semantic change in NBA slang terminology within Los Angeles Lakers and Los Angeles Clippers communities of practice through discourse analysis. First, we selected four common NBA slang terms that are used in this sports league and provide their generic definitions. We then analyzed online basketball discourses to look for ways in which fans from both teams use the NBA slang terms that we are examining. Third, we used a corpus analysis toolkit, AntConc, which helped us find patterns of concordance within our data. We concluded by making generalizations about the use of our selected terms by Lakers and Clippers fans and determined trends through analysis.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

In this study we sought to understand why NBA slang is used in online communities of practice. This helps identify connections within communities of practice because basketball fans are tight-knit, have frequent interaction, develop shared goals and knowledge about basketball, and create new NBA slang. Because many basketball fans use NBA slang to refer to a particular team and/or player, the meaning will vary depending on who you ask; some use older meanings from previous eras of the NBA, whereas others use newer meanings that fit today’s NBA style of play. By analyzing the use of four NBA slang terms (foul, skill, superteam, flagrant foul), it will help us understand how they have changed in meaning over time. Next, we will compare and contrast the usage between Lakers-Clippers fans. We chose these two teams specifically because they are from the city of Los Angeles and have drastically different histories; the Lakers are the most famous NBA franchise of all-time with 17 championships, whereas the Clippers have none (Los Angeles Clippers vs. Los Angeles Lakers, n.d.).

That being said, we attempted to answer the following question:

(1) What sorts of semantic change has NBA slang experienced within Lakers and Clippers communities of practice?

Background

Previous research in semantic change shows that words or real world entities change over time. More specifically, words change semantically and this change is reflected in the way words are being used (Wijaya & Yeniterzi, 2011, “Introduction” section). This linguistic aspect of semantic change also applies to NBA slang. For example, in the 20th century of the NBA, the NBA slang term Greatest of All Time or GOAT, was used to describe how successful a player and/or team was based on the number of championships they won. However, NBA fans have added new layers onto its meaning over time, such that basketball IQ, skillset, defensive rating, and other basketball qualities are relevant in the discussion of “Who’s the GOAT?” While the NBA uses generic definitions for NBA slang terms, it does not necessarily mean that fans will use that particular definition in every basketball context. Because of this, NBA slang terms are extremely nuanced, which is why the word GOAT highlights one of our goals to lay out differing traits of the four terms we will examine.

Another frequently used NBA slang term is skill. Skill in the NBA during the 1960s meant being able to run down the court efficiently, shoot the ball from close range, and defend. However, in the 1970s, skill was about playmaking abilities, too. One paper addressing a similar topic discussed the importance of player impact, “Berri tried to determine if Karl Malone or Michael Jordan was more valuable, and he found that Dennis Rodman was most valuable because of his rebounding ability” (Whitmoyer, 2019, p. 4). The significance of this quote shows that many teams prefer having a player who impacts the game of basketball in more than one aspect. Many believe that Michael Jordan is the best basketball player of all time, but Whitmoyer argues that Dennis Rodman is. This shows that there are different views about a player’s importance, which is part of what we will explore in our project.

Methodology

We analyzed the NBA slang terms on online basketball discourses such as Twitter, Reddit, and Instagram, where we collected 100 Lakers-Clippers samples relating to these terms for a total of 400 samples. Then, we used AntConc, a corpus analysis software that made it much easier to compare the surrounding environments of all the data samples for each term. Lastly, we made generalizations about the use of the NBA slang terms and determined trends in our data through analysis. This method allowed us to gather more samples and data from online discourses than we would have surveying/interviewing basketball fans with the amount of time we had for the project, and helped us address the question in our introduction by allowing us to identify common trends in a data set that would be far too large to analyze without the assistance of corpus linguistics software.

Results: Data Analysis

In Figure 1, we see a list of words that AntConc found that foul was commonly used within the same sentence, as flop appeared the most with a total of 73 samples.

Figure 1. Total frequency of words that AntConc found for the NBA slang term foul.

With this software, we were able to discover that foul has a new meaning added to it that can be used in more contexts than before with the use of flop. This concept is known as widening, which is a type of semantic change. Throughout the history of the NBA, the generic definition of foul has remained the same, referring to “illegal personal contact with an opponent and/or unsportsmanlike behavior” (How Fouling Works in Basketball: 6 Common Fouls Explained, 2020, para. 2), which can be seen in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Tim Duncan (#21) fouls Monta Ellis (#11) after bumping him in mid-air when scoring a lay-up.

However, the word foul has become too vague in today’s NBA that Lakers and Clippers fans have used a more specific word to describe the actions that opponents do to get the foul call in their favor — flop. A “flop” is an attempt to fool referees into calling undeserved fouls by exaggerating the effect of contact with an opposing player (Explanation of Anti-Flopping Rule, 2012, para. 2), which can be seen in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Mario Chalmers (#15) flops and sells the contact after Danny Green (#4) swipes through to create space.

The use of flop for a non-foul changes the meaning of foul because opponents fall to the ground when contact is drawn, whether minimal or not. The act of flopping is changing the way the game of basketball is played since referees must distinguish between what is and isn’t a foul, which they tend to struggle with.

Both Lakers and Clippers fans use flop as a way to express their anger when they believe there wasn’t any illegal contact by the opponent, but referees think otherwise. This finding shows how the meaning of foul has been expanded by these fans because flopping is more common today than it was before in the NBA. Instead of fans saying “That was not a foul,” fans can now say “That was a flop,” when there was little or no physical contact by the opponent. This semantic change of the word foul allowed these fans to be more specific and provide a reasonable judgment about a certain basketball play, instead of giving a biased opinion with no context. Because there was a high frequency of data where the slang term foul was used with flop in the same sentence than without it, it suggests that they both go hand-in-hand when fans debate a foul call.

The second word we examined was skill. Skill is “the ability to do something well; expertise” (Oxford University Press (OUP), n.d.). In the 20th century of the NBA, skill was synonymous with players who could run down the court efficiently and score more than 15+ points on a regular basis. However, in today’s game skill is used in many other ways such as passing, as observed in Figure 4.

Figure 4. LeBron James (#23) makes an incredible no-look pass to teammate Ante Zizic (#41) who dunks the ball.

There are different connotations as to what skill implicates. According to the data via AntConc in Figure 5 and 6, skill was used the most within members of the Lakers community when discussing Kobe Bryant, an all-time great with elite footwork, shooting, post-moves, and defense that contributes to what skill means. Clippers fans most used skill in reference to flopping, identifying it as a ‘skill’, or point guard ‘skills’ which implies a specific attribute derived by a select group of positioned players. In the online discourse data, Kobe [Bryant] was mentioned most to embody skill because of his scoring ability, footwork, shooting, defense, basketball IQ, work ethic, and athleticism. Other players like Kawhi Leonard, Patrick Beverly, and Ivica Zubac were mentioned a combined 7 times in the data set, a stark contrast to Kobe Bryant’s 22.

Figure 5. Total frequency of words that AntConc found for the NBA slang term skill.

 

Figure 6. Total frequency for Kawhi Leonard, Ivica Zubac, and Patrick Beverly via AntConc.

The data suggests that semantically, skill has changed from what it was once meant over the last few decades among these communities of practice. Skill in basketball does in fact include scoring ability, but it also incorporates many other factors that make up a player’s complete value on the court (Locklin, 2021, para. 3). Skill no longer identifies a player who can run down the court efficiently and score 15+ a game but instead, is the marker for players who embody proficient attributes in all areas of the game.

The third word we examined was superteam. This term can be defined as “already established All-Star players coming together to a team to form a super team (Urban Dictionary: Superteam (NBA), 2018). Many of the fans’ conversations from the data involved debates about the exact definition of the term. It was more commonly used as one word, rather than as two separate words, though there was no significant difference in its intended meaning; fans often responded to one variation with the other. Superteam seems less rooted in one literal definition, and more tied to the emotional idea of a “team that is unfairly good,” as the meaning seems to change depending on the context it’s used in. The people using superteam seemed more intent on winning debates than using the word “correctly.” The term has therefore seemed to experience a significant semantic widening such that its meaning changes depending on a) the people using it, and b) the greater context of which teams are performing well in the NBA.

Most of the data samples were gathered from Lakers fans since there has never been a Clippers team that was considered so good that it was unfair. The only instance superteam was used to describe the Clippers was when a fan claimed Kawhi Leonard, a current player on the Clippers, had “tried to make a superteam,” with the implication being that he had failed. The primary topics discussed in the data we gathered for this term were: 1) whether or not LeBron [James] had actually deserved the championship titles he had won after forming multiple ”superteams,” and 2) whether or not this year’s Lakers roster had in fact been a “superteam” despite not winning a championship nor making the playoffs in 2022, as can be seen in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Lakers 2021-22 roster with 3 All-Stars: Anthony Davis (#3), LeBron James (#6), & Russell Westbrook (#0)

 

Figure 8. A tweet about LeBron’s critics who are downplaying his past successes for forming ‘superteams.’

 

Figure 9. Another tweet where a fan chastised the 2021-22 Lakers for not making the playoffs, despite qualifying as a ‘superteam.’

Unsurprisingly, the teams most commonly associated with superteam were either current or retired All-Star players from teams such as the Cavaliers, Warriors, Heat, Nets, and Lakers, as observed in Figure 10. The high frequency of Lakers relative to the other teams is due to the fact that most of these data are from Lakers’ fans’ discourse.

Figure 10. Total frequency of words that AntConc found for the NBA slang term superteam (focus on the column second from the left and the corresponding term on the far right)

According to the official NBA website, a flagrant foul is excessive contact beyond a regular foul. There are two types, a Flagrant 1 is unnecessary contact against a player committed by an opponent, whereas a Flagrant 2 is unnecessary and excessive contact against a player (Flagrant Fouls, n.d.).

The main semantic change we found from Lakers and Clippers fans regarding this word is elevation, where one uplifts an utterance, and degeneration, where negative light is shone on a statement. Tweets by Lakers fans are uplifting, with one of them proclaiming that the Lakers are equals to every other team. The tweet from the Clippers fan is degenerated through its angry intonation. The Lakers tweet also has more likes, and popularity equates to less negativity as “fearful and negative tweets [have]…low virality” (Cheung‐Blunden et al., 2021, p. 19). The less popular Clippers fan tweet uses strong word choice through swearing.

The primary cause for this difference is team status. The Lakers fan sounded less angry because of the history of his team, as he is comfortable with the prestige and numerous championship titles of the Lakers. The Clippers are not as well-known as the Lakers. Less prestigious teams have fewer fans because their teams are not as competitive as others. Therefore, the fans of such teams are very committed and passionate to be able to stick through team struggles. Furthermore, “high levels of identification with a sports team are positively related to fan display and verbal response” ​​(Rocca & Vogl-Bauer, 1999, p. 244). The intense feeling for one’s team drives Clippers fans to use strong language.

Discussion

According to new research about American slang, there are unique features that influence it based on its originality (Zhou & Fan, 2013). Similarly, we learned that NBA slang is used because of its originality. NBA fans were creative with how they turned generic definitions of the NBA slang terms to more catchy and specific meanings. In addition, these new words and meanings are commonly used by NBA fans for the pleasure of being in fashion and appear to have a deep understanding about the game of basketball. When these fans use NBA slang terminology, it tends to validate their opinion about basketball because it is solely used by basketball fans.

One social factor that influences the use of NBA slang terms is social media. Social media has allowed NBA fans to discuss and share their opinions about basketball that reach millions of people, as can be seen in some figures above. A second social factor is basketball commentators because they enjoy commenting on live-basketball games using descriptive language, and find that NBA slang is more direct and simpler to use than the generic definitions.

An individual factor that influences NBA slang are peoples’ knowledge and skills about the game of basketball. Their knowledge and skills about the game of basketball lets them feel entitled to have a valid opinion about a particular team and/or player.

These findings support our thesis statement that both Lakers and Clippers fans would experience semantic change to NBA slang because of how much the NBA has evolved. More specifically, many NBA slang terms have been outdated, and it was expected that these fans would use different meanings to these slang terms to fit today’s NBA style of play.

Conclusion

Linguists can benefit from our research because they are interested in real world phenomena. As such, they are descriptive and study how people actually talk, where some use NBA slang as part of their everyday speech, and not prescriptive regarding how people “should” talk. Because linguists study semantics, our research allows for linguists to study more in-depth the role that NBA slang has for basketball fans to know what certain words mean, what makes them have more than one meaning, why those meanings exist, and others.

A possible future direction of our research would be for researchers to replicate this study on a much larger scale through ethnographic research to ensure that there is enough data gathered from both groups. Ethnographic research can improve this study because it involves observing a particular group and site over a long period of time, which could gather a large amount of data about the use of NBA slang at basketball games.

 

References

Cheung‐Blunden, V., Sonar, K. U., Zhou, E. A., & Tan, C. (2021). Foreign disinformation operation’s affective engagement: Valence versus discrete emotions as drivers of tweet popularity. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 21(1), 980–997. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12262

Explanation of Anti-Flopping Rule. (2012, October 5). NBA Official. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from https://official.nba.com/explanation-of-anti-flopping-rule/

Flagrant Fouls. (n.d.). NBA Official. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from https://official.nba.com/trigger/review-of-called-foul/

How Fouling Works in Basketball: 6 Common Fouls Explained. (2020, November 8). MasterClass. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from https://www.masterclass.com/articles/how-fouling-works-in-basketball#quiz-0

Locklin, W. (2021, July 15). What is “Skill” in NBA Basketball. The Wright Way Network. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from https://twsn.net/2021/07/what-is-skill-in-nba-basketball

Los Angeles Clippers vs. Los Angeles Lakers. (n.d.). Diffen. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from https://www.diffen.com/difference/Los_Angeles_Clippers_vs_Los_Angeles_Lakers

Oxford University Press (OUP). (n.d.). Skill. Lexico.Com. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/skill

Rocca, K. A., & Vogl‐Bauer, S. (1999). Trait verbal aggression, sports fan identification, and perceptions of appropriate sports fan communication. Communication Research Reports, 16(3), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824099909388723

Urban Dictionary: Superteam (NBA). (2018, May 28). Urban Dictionary. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Superteam%20%28NBA%29

Whitmoyer, E. (2019). Measuring Greatness in the NBA. Scholars Crossing. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/honors/845/

Wijaya, D. T., & Yeniterzi, R. (2011). Understanding semantic change of words over centuries. Proceedings of the 2011 International Workshop on DETecting and Exploiting Cultural diversiTy on the Social Web – DETECT ’11. https://doi.org/10.1145/2064448.2064475

Zhou, Y., & Fan, Y. (2013). A Sociolinguistic Study of American Slang. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(12). https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.3.12.2209-2213

[/expander_maker]