Recent research has shown that the same dilemma may elicit different moral judgements depending on the language in which it has been presented. The explanation usually invoked is the different purported emotionality of content presented in one’s first vs second languages.

Using a covert 2×2×2 experiment where 61 L₁ Polish–L₂ English bilinguals were asked to translate (L₁↔L₂) a passage peppered with swearwords, we show that the picture is much more complex. While the results ostensibly corroborate the so-called ‘foreign language effect’, with a significant interaction between the source and target words and the direction of translation, it was only observed in the case of ethnophaulisms, that is expletives directed at social (out)groups (significant interaction between the source and target words, direction of translation, and type of word, F(1,59)= 59, p<.01; η_p²=.16), but not generic swearwords. This indicates that the key factor modulating response strength is not so much the different emotional power associated with the respective languages, but social and cultural norms.

In a follow-up study, we extend the investigation of the effect of language choice on acceptability judgments of social norm violations by looking at whether a difference will be observed in ratings given in multilingual speakers’ L₃ vs L₂. Expectedly, the acceptance rates of scenarios presented in the two languages did not differ much. However, regression analyses indicated different predictors of evaluations: in the L₂, the age factor was significant, with older participants more severe in their judgments; the severity of judgments passed in the L₃ in turn depended on the respondent’s gender, with male participants evaluating the scenarios as less severe.

It transpires that switching to a foreign language during decision-making may not only reduce emotionally-driven responses and political correctness biases, but also promote candid deliberative processes, with other factors moderating the process.