Page 392 - Handbooks of Applied Linguistics Communication Competence Language and Communication Problems Practical Solutions

370 Martin Reisigl

systematically. Actions or processes of accentuating differences, of devaluating
and of (stereo)typing are realized by the explicit or implicit assignment of traits.
In this respect, assigning traits – which I call “predication” in section 5.2. – is a
more basic operation than accentuating differences, devaluating and stereotyp-
ing. On the other hand, assigning traits presupposes the discursive construction
of social actors who can be endowed with attributes. This construction – which I
discuss in my own approach in section 5.1. under “nomination” – may, among
others, be realized by typing. Separating and distancing – two operations which
I subsume under “perspectivation” in section 5.4. – also presuppose that there
are social actors, i.e. someone who can be separated from someone else.
In the given context I deliberately refrain from trying to offer a unifying pro-
posal that aims to put an end to the terminological muddle across and within the
different disciplines, since such a suggestion can only, if it can at all, be success-
ful if it is elaborated in a differentiated interdisciplinary discussion. Given that
the terminological difficulties related to the concept of “discrimination” have
not yet been appreciated in most of the disciplines concerned with the problem,
the explication of terminological differences gets more space in the present
chapter than most readers of a handbook of applied linguistics and intercultural
communication would probably expect. Both the previous section and the fol-
lowing section are designated to increase the awareness of conceptual distinc-
tions, dissimilarities and similarities.

3. Types of social discrimination

Among the – mostly binary – differentiations of “discrimination” are “intended”
versus “non-intended discrimination”, “direct” versus “indirect discrimination”,
“explicit” versus “implicit discrimination”, “active” versus “passive discrimi-
nation”, and “individual” versus “structural” or “institutional discrimination”.
Some of these categories cross-cut, overlap and are thus not neatly separable
from each other.
The theoretical distinction between “intentional” and “unintentional dis-
crimination” – which is especially relevant in legal discussions – as well as be-
tween “active” and “passive discrimination” seem to be rather palpable differ-
entiations that need no long explications, although it is often difficult to prove
concretely that someone discriminates against somebody else purposely. The
other three binary distinctions, however, are characterized more inconsistently
and disputed more controversially in the relevant literature.
As for the distinction between “direct” and “indirect” as well as “explicit”
versus “implicit discrimination”, conflicting suggestions are to be found in dif-
ferent disciplines. The psychologists Graumann and Wintermantel propose to
speak of “direct discrimination” in the realm of verbal discrimination if the dis-