The definition of the word nigger
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The word "nigger" is defined across standard dictionaries as an extremely offensive racial slur directed at Black people; major lexicons call it "probably the most offensive word in English" and note its use as an expression of hatred and bigotry [1] [2] [3]. Historical and scholarly sources trace the term from the Latin niger and document its degeneration into an overt slur by the 18th–19th centuries and its persistent role in exclusion, stereotyping, and violence [4] [5].
1. What mainstream dictionaries say: plain, blunt definitions
Leading dictionaries present the same core fact: the word is an extremely offensive term for Black people. Merriam‑Webster describes it as "an insulting and contemptuous term for a Black person" and calls it "almost certainly the most offensive and inflammatory racial slur in English" [1]. Cambridge Dictionary labels it "an extremely offensive word for a Black person" [2]. Dictionary.com likewise states it is "probably the most offensive word in English" and that its offensiveness has increased markedly over time [3].
2. Historical origins and how it became a slur
Scholarly overviews and historical summaries trace the etymology to Latin niger, through Romance languages into English usage; the neutral term "Negro" gave way as the word "nigger" acquired a derogatory, demeaning sense by the mid‑18th to 19th century [4] [5]. Wikipedia summarizes that the word "degenerated into an overt slur" by the middle of the 19th century and links that shift to the word's role in social exclusion [5].
3. Social effects and why it is taboo
The term is tied to symbolic and actual violence. Reporting and historical accounts emphasize that use of the word "wreaked symbolic violence, often accompanied by physical violence," and that it has been used to define and justify discrimination and degrading stereotypes [5] [4]. Because of that history, many institutions and civil‑rights groups explicitly discourage or ban its use; for example, the NAACP has affirmed action to reinforce its ban and educate about the word's offensiveness [6].
4. Context matters, but debate remains
Academic work notes contested views about context. Some scholars argue that the word functions as a slur in nearly any use and should be eradicated; others analyze how meaning shifts with speaker, audience, and intra‑group uses—pointing to instances of reappropriation or differing pragmatic effects depending on context [7]. Wikipedia also documents intra‑group casual or fraternally inflected forms (e.g., "nigga") and notes ongoing controversies when the term appears in literature and film [5].
5. Usage in culture, literature and media raises disputes
The word appears in canonical literature and contemporary media, and its presence frequently sparks debate. Wikipedia highlights controversies around works that include the term—Mark Twain’s Huck Finn and films by Quentin Tarantino are cited as flashpoints—reflecting disagreement about historical fidelity, artistic license, and harm to readers or audiences [5]. The academic article on contextual determinants likewise discusses how representation and authorship (who uses the word) influence public reaction [7].
6. Alternative labels and euphemisms in practice
Because of its offensiveness, speakers and writers commonly substitute euphemisms such as "the N‑word." Cambridge Dictionary records "the N‑word" as a polite way to refer to the term without repeating it [8]. Linguistic analyses classify such substitutions as orthophemism or euphemism used to avoid dysphemistic slurs [7].
7. Fringe and noisy sources show divergent or irresponsible uses
Less authoritative sites and user‑generated platforms sometimes present broader or different senses that depart from mainstream definitions—for example, Urban Dictionary entries offer colloquial, nonstandard, and sometimes racist characterizations that are not authoritative and reflect fringe or offensive usage [9]. Relying on such sources can obscure historical harm documented by mainstream lexicons and scholarship [1] [5] [4].
8. What reporting does not cover / limits of available sources
Available sources do not mention comprehensive legal rules governing the word’s use across jurisdictions or workplace disciplinary standards beyond the NAACP position (not found in current reporting). They also do not provide exhaustive data on contemporary frequency of use in different media platforms; sources here are definitional, historical, and analytical rather than corpus‑linguistic.
Final note: authoritative dictionaries, historical summaries and social‑science analyses presented here converge: the word is not a neutral descriptor but a deeply offensive slur with a documented history of demeaning, exclusionary and often violent uses [1] [2] [5] [4] [3] [7].