Abstract
In this paper, blunt slogans used in China's health campaign against coronavirus are closely examined and the public's conflicting comments on them are analyzed. These slogans, due to their extreme effectiveness in making the public comply with the health preventive measures suggested by the government, are called Yinghe or "hardcore" slogans by the Chinese people. Containing harsh and taboo language, they convey threats of death and disease, insults or negative evaluation, and harsh demands. Despite their impolite nature, "hardcore" slogans have received significantly more positive judgment than negative judgment, especially when they made their debut in rural areas in Henan, an agricultural province in China. Criticism towards these blunt slogans then gradually increased after their initial appearance. Plausible factors contributing to the change of judgment are analyzed. The public's conflicting judgment regarding the impoliteness of the slogans may be related to the public's different positioning across time and space. This study shows that impoliteness is a practice situated not only in discourse, genres, and institutions, but also in social, cultural, and political contexts. More attention should be paid to impoliteness in special social configurations (e.g., rural areas) and social emergencies, which not only contextualize a discourse event but also define it.