Avoidance Language Typology: Comparing Policy-Driven and Culture-Driven Professional Communication for ESP Research
Abstract
In professional communication, effectiveness is determined not only by what is said but also by what is consciously avoided. While English for Specific Purposes (ESP) research has traditionally emphasised productive vocabulary, avoidance language remains underexplored. This study addresses this gap by proposing a comparative typology of avoidance language across two professional domains: (1) policy-driven avoidance in English-language social media moderation and (2) culture-driven avoidance in Thai business communication contexts. Adopting a qualitative, dataset-informed design, the study analyses normative institutional artefacts, specifically, publicly available profanity blocklists and business communication substitution manuals, to map the mechanisms of avoidance. Although the datasets are purposively limited by proprietary and cultural constraints, their comparison yields noteworthy theoretical insights into high-context professional ESP communication. The researchers propose the Avoidance Language Typology Model, distinguishing between top-down, rule-based avoidance (omission) and bottom-up, relational avoidance (substitution). The analysis demonstrates that while social media moderation enforces compliance through rigid keyword blacklists, business communication in high-context settings emphasises pragmatic substitutions to maintain harmony. These findings offer direct implications for ESP pedagogy, particularly for learners navigating the intersection of algorithmic constraints and English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) pragmatic norms. Specifically, the distinction between lexical compliance and pragmatic substitution provides a practically applicable pedagogical framework for teaching avoidance as a necessary communicative skill in digital and intercultural workplaces.
Keywords: Avoidance Language Typology; Intercultural Pragmatics; Social Media Content Moderation; Thai Business Communication; English for Specific Purposes Pedagogy
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ahamat, M. I., & Kabilan, M. K. (2022). Material adaptation among rural primary school English language teachers. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature®, 28(1), 90–102. http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2022-2801-07
Ahmad, S., & Krzywdzinski, M. (2022). Moderating in obscurity: How Indian content moderators work in global content-moderation value chains. In M. Graham & F. Ferrari (Eds.), Digital work in the planetary market (pp. 77–95). The MIT Press; International Development Research Centre. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/13835.003.0008
Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (2006). Forbidden words: Taboo and the censoring of language. Cambridge University Press.
Basile, V., Caselli, T., Balahur, A., & Ku, L.-W. (2022). Bias, subjectivity and perspectives in natural language processing. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 5, Article 926435. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.926435
Belcher, D. D. (2009). English for Specific Purposes: Theory and practice. University of Michigan Press.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Cooper, R. M., & Blumenfeld, W. J. (2012). Responses to cyber-bullying: A descriptive analysis of the frequency of and impact on LGBT and allied youth. Journal of LGBT Youth, 9(2), 153–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2011.649616
Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge University Press.
Dadvar, M., de Jong, F. M. G., Ordelman, R., & Trieschnigg, D. (2012). Improved cyber-bullying detection using gender information. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Dutch-Belgian Information Retrieval Workshop (DIR 2012) (pp. 23–25). Universiteit Gent.
Dergacheva, D., & Katzenbach, C. (2023). “We learn through mistakes”: Perspectives of social media creators on copyright moderation in the European Union. Social Media + Society, 10(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231220329
Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press.
Duggan, M. (2017, July 11). Online harassment 2017. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/07/11/online-harassment-2017/
Gorwa, R., Binns, R., & Katzenbach, C. (2020). Algorithmic content moderation: Technical and political challenges in the automation of platform governance. Big Data & Society, 7(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951719897945
Hafner, C. A. (2025). Multimodality and ESP research. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 619–639). Wiley-Blackwell.
Holmes, J. (2000). Politeness, power and provocation: How humour functions in the workplace. Discourse Studies, 2(2), 159–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445600002002002
Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. D. (2014). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet. Routledge.
Jhaver, S., Ghoshal, S., Bruckman, A., & Gilbert, E. E. (2018). Online harassment and content moderation: The case of blocklists. ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction (TOCHI), 25(2), Article 12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3185593
Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR). https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-395173
Milosevic, T. (2016). Social media companies’ cyber-bullying policies. International Journal of Communication, 10, 5164–5185. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/5320
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.
Nickerson, C. (2005). English as a lingua franca in international business contexts. English for Specific Purposes, 24(4), 367–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.001
Nordin, N. R., Hamza, M. H., & Hussin, Z. (2024). Politeness strategies in declining invitations: A cross-cultural analysis between Iraqi Arabs and Kurds. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature®, 30(2), 218–230. http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2024-3002-14
Notar, C. E., Padgett, S., & Roden, J. (2013). Cyber-bullying: A review of the literature. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 1(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2013.010101
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (Eds.). (2013). The handbook of English for specific purposes. Wiley-Blackwell.
Pateda, L., Hula, I. R. N., & Mariana, A. (2025). Algospeak: The evolution of language in the age of social media in Indonesia. ELOQUENCE: Journal of Foreign Language, 4(3), 391–408. https://ejournal.iaingorontalo.ac.id/index.php/ELOQUENCE/article/download/3013/2050
Rajprasit, K., Sirisuksakulchai, J., Srimontra, K., Pitakpornsin, N., Letakulkit, P., Phaiboontham, P., & Dumrongruedee, S. (2022). Using Business English as a Lingua Franca for written and spoken communication: Challenges encountered by Thai human resources professionals in an American multinational company. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature®, 28(4), 13–
http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2022-2804-02
Recuero, R. (2024). The digitalization of discourse: Exploring key discussion points for the study of violence online. Dialogues on Digital Society, 1(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1177/29768640241250267
Reynolds, K., Kontostathis, A., & Edwards, L. (2011). Using machine learning to detect cyber-bullying. In 2011 10th International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications and Workshops (pp. 241–244). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMLA.2011.152
Roberts, S. T. (2019). Behind the screen: Content moderation in the shadows of social media. Yale University Press.
Spencer-Oatey, H., & Kádár, D. Z. (2021). Intercultural politeness: Managing relations across cultures. Cambridge University Press.
Steen, E., Yurechko, K., & Klug, D. (2023). You can (not) say what you want: Using algospeak to contest and evade algorithmic content moderation on TikTok. Social Media + Society, 9(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231194586
Wierzbicka, A. (2003). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Mouton de Gruyter.
Yang, K. (2023). Analysis of pragmatic functions of euphemisms: From the perspective of pragmatic principles. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 23, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.54097/ehss.v23i.12723
Yin, D., Xue, Z., Hong, L., Davison, B. D., Kontostathis, A., & Edwards, L. (2009). Detection of harassment on Web 2.0. In Proceedings of the Content Analysis in the WEB (pp. 1–7). https://www.academia.edu/download/47631616/Yin_etal_CAW2009.pdf
Zhang, Q., & Su, P. (2023). A pragmatic study of euphemisms. Journal of Education and Educational Research, 6(3), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.54097/vr8m5x42
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
eISSN : 2550-2247
ISSN : 0128-5157