Skip to main content

In other words: ‘The language of attraction’ used by pick-up artists

  • Daria Dayter and Sofia Rüdiger

The idea that speaking in a certain way can make people do things – persuasion on steroids, so to say – is understandably fascinating. This holy grail of communication studies is sought after by ‘professional persuaders’, politicians and copywriters, but also in non-professional situations. One example of wishful thinking of what is possible when it comes to the power of language is the Pick-up Artist (PUA) paradigm. PUAs are a community of self-designated or aspiring seduction experts; and it should come as no surprise that most members are men. While it is possible for PUAs to meet face-to-face, for example, at workshops organized by the so-called gurus (at no little cost to the students of pick-up), much of the interaction between the members takes place in PUA Internet forums and similar online venues.

Hide All
Anthony, L. 2014. ‘AntConc (Version 3.4.3).’ Online at <> (Accessed September 14, 2017).
BBC News. 2014. ‘Julien Blanc: UK denies visa to “pick-up artist”.’ BBC News, November 19. Online at <> (Accessed March 30, 2016).
Cheng, T. O. 1994. ‘Acronymophilia.’ BMJ, 309, 683.
Denes, A. 2011. ‘Biology as consent: Problematizing the scientific approach to seducing women's bodies.’ Women's Studies International Forum, 34, 411–19.
Dayter, D. & Rüdiger, S. 2014. ‘Speak your mind, but watch your mouth: Objectification strategies in negative references on CouchSurfing.’ In: Bedijs, K., Held, G. & Maaß, C. (eds.), Face Work and Social Media. Zürich; Berlin: LIT, pp. 193212.
Dayter, D. & Rüdiger, S. 2016. ‘Reporting from the field: The narrative reconstruction of experience in pick-up artist online communities.’ Open Linguistics, 2(1), 337–51.
Drew, P. 1998. ‘Complaints about transgressions and misconduct.’ Research on Language & Social Interaction, 31(3–4), 295325.
Glick, P. & Fiske, S. 1996. ‘The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism.’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491512.
Gotti, M. 2011. Investigating Specialized Discourse. 3rd edn. Bern: Peter Lang.
Gumperz, J. 1977. ‘The sociolinguistic significance of conversational code-switching.’ RELC Journal, 8(2), 134.
Isaacs, D. & Fitzgerald, D. 2000. ‘Acronymophilia: An update.’ Archives of Disease in Childhood, 83(6), 517–18.
Kuypers, J. 2009. ‘Framing analysis.’ In Kuypers, J. (ed.), Rhetorical Criticism: Perspectives in Action. Plymouth: Lexington Press, pp. 181204.
PUA Acronyms List. n.d. Online at <> (Accessed February 28, 2018).
Rüdiger, S. & Dayter, D. 2017. ‘The ethics of researching unlikeable subjects.’ Applied Linguistics Review, 8(2–3), 251–69.
Swales, J. M. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. 1998. Other Floors, Other Voices: A Textography of a Small University Building. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Vrij, A. & Lochun, S. 1997. ‘Neuro-linguistic programming and the police: Worthwhile or not?Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 12(1), 2531.
Wilson, N. 2002. ‘Commercializing mental health issues: Entertainment, advertising, and psychological advice.’ In Lilienfeld, S., Lynn, S. J. & Lohr, J. (eds.), Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology. New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 425–59.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

English Today
  • ISSN: 0266-0784
  • EISSN: 1474-0567
  • URL: /core/journals/english-today
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed