before_revision: Language Dehumanization and dehumanized perception can occur as a result of the language used to describe groups of people. Words such as migrant, immigrant, and expatriate are assigned to foreigners based on their social status and wealth, rather than ability, achievements, or political alignment. Expatriate is a word to describe the privileged, often light-skinned people newly residing in an area and has connotations that suggest ability, wealth, and trust. Meanwhile, the word immigrant is used to describe people coming to a new location to reside and infers a much less-desirable meaning. Further, "immigrant" is a word that can be paired with "illegal", which harbors a profoundly negative connotationto those projecting social cognition towards the other. The perpetual misuse of these words used to describe the other in the English language can alter the perception of a group in a derogatory way. "Most of the time when we hear illegal immigrant%DIFDELCMD < ] %%% used, most of the time, the shorter version 'illegals' is being used as a noun, which implies that a human being is perpetually illegal. There is no other classification that I'm aware of where the individual is being rendered as unlawful as opposed to those individuals' actions." A series of language examinations found a direct relation between homophobic epithets and social cognitive distancing towards a group of homosexuals, a form of dehumanization. These epithets (e.g., faggot) were thought to function as dehumanizing labels because they tended to act as markers of deviance. One pair of studies found that subjects were more likely to associate malignant language with homosexuals, and that such language associations increased the physical distancing between the subject and the homosexual. This indicated that the malignant language could encourage dehumanization, cognitive and physical distancing in ways that other forms of malignant language do not.
after_revision: Language Dehumanization and dehumanized perception can occur as a result of the language used to describe groups of people. Words such as migrant, immigrant, and expatriate are assigned to foreigners based on their social status and wealth, rather than ability, achievements, or political alignment. Expatriate is a word to describe the privileged, often light-skinned people newly residing in an area and has connotations that suggest ability, wealth, and trust. Meanwhile, the word immigrant is used to describe people coming to a new location to reside and infers a much less-desirable meaning. The word "immigrant" is sometimes paired with "illegal", which harbors a profoundly derogatory connotation. Misuse of these terms - they are often used inaccurately - to describe the other , can alter the perception of a group %DIFDELCMD < ] %%% as a whole in a negative way. Ryan Eller, the executive director of the immigrant advocacy group, Define American, expressed the problem this way: A series of language examinations found a direct relation between homophobic epithets and social cognitive distancing towards a group of homosexuals, a form of dehumanization. These epithets (e.g., faggot) were thought to function as dehumanizing labels because they tended to act as markers of deviance. One pair of studies found that subjects were more likely to associate malignant language with homosexuals, and that such language associations increased the physical distancing between the subject and the homosexual. This indicated that the malignant language could encourage dehumanization, cognitive and physical distancing in ways that other forms of malignant language do not.
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: Further,
edit_actions: The word
edit_actions: coherence
edit_actions: coherence coherence style
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: a word that can be
edit_actions: sometimes
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity clarity meaning-changed
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: negative connotationto those projecting social cognition towards the other. The perpetual misuse of these words used
edit_actions: derogatory connotation. Misuse of these terms - they are often used inaccurately -
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity clarity style
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: in the English language
edit_actions: ,
edit_actions: coherence
edit_actions: coherence clarity coherence
edit_actions: D
edit_actions: in a derogatory way. "Most of the time when we hear
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity clarity coherence
edit_actions: D
edit_actions: illegal immigrant
edit_actions: style
edit_actions: coherence style style
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: used, most of the time, the shorter version 'illegals' is being used as a noun, which implies that a human being is perpetually illegal. There is no other classification that I'm aware of where the individual is being rendered as unlawful as opposed to those individuals' actions."
edit_actions: as a whole in a negative way. Ryan Eller, the executive director of the immigrant advocacy group, Define American, expressed the problem this way:
edit_actions: meaning-changed
edit_actions: meaning-changed meaning-changed meaning-changed