Functional features of euphemisms in English-language political discourse

Pavlova Tatyana Alexandrovna ORCID: 0000-0002-8033-3272 Senior Lecturer, Department of Foreign Languages, Sevastopol State University 299053, Sevastopol, Universitetskaya str., 33, Russia, Sevastopol, Crimea, Rudneva str., 26/5 tatyana_bokhan@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Potovskaya Kseniya Sergeevna Senior Lecturer, Department of Foreign Languages, Sevastopol State University 299053, Sevastopol, Universitetskaya str., 33, Russia, Sevastopol, Crimea region, Sevastopol, Crimea, Rudneva str., 26/5 xevia25@mail.ru Other publications by this author

1. Introduction [Introduction]The phenomenon of euphemization is not a new phenomenon in linguistics.

In all languages, there have always been topics that, for certain reasons, were considered taboo, forbidden, sacred, so when referring to them, allegories, veiled forms and softening formulations, that is, euphemisms, were used.

By euphemization we mean the process of replacing an illegal, rude word or expression with a neutral language form that does not carry negative connotations. Such a process of etiquette and ethical mitigation is conditioned by the need to avoid awkward moments, conflicts in the process of communication and achieve the fulfillment of communicative tasks. However, this is not the only function of euphemisms, their pragmatic purpose is much broader – to embellish or distort information about the real state of affairs, to expose something or someone in a positive or negative light, to encourage any actions or inaction. In this context, euphemisms are used to manipulate mass consciousness.

The study of the phenomenon of euphemization is especially relevant in connection with the steady interest of society in the tactics of social management, techniques of influencing the audience and mechanisms of forming public opinion.

In political discourse, euphemisms are actively used as a tool of manipulation and propaganda of certain ideas, having an emotional impact on society, encouraging people to make certain political decisions. It is well known that politicians, government institutions and the media resort to discrediting tactics, substitution of concepts, concealment of unpleasant facts for the purpose of forming a certain ideological picture of the world in society. Given the above, it is quite natural that the language of politics is saturated with euphemistic expressions.

Thus, euphemisms are, on the one hand, a means of achieving conflict-free communication and a tool of speech etiquette, and on the other hand, an instrument of influence in the hands of politicians, diplomats, and government institutions.

The hypothesis of our research is that the dominant function of euphemisms in the political discourse of the English media is the manipulation of public opinion and the masking of information. We believe that the communicative function of conflict mitigation and neutralization, which was originally the main communicative task of euphemization, has receded into the background. Moreover, avoiding direct and crude nominations in a political context often also has a manipulative effect.

In this paper, we will consider cases of using euphemisms in English political discourse in order to study ways of implementing manipulation tactics and conflict-free communication.

The material for the study was news articles on political topics from modern English-language mass media.

2. Methods [Methods]In the course of this study, we used the following methods: the method of continuous sampling when studying material from electronic news sources, the method of quantitative analysis of the presented euphemisms in terms of their functions and ways of use, as well as the method of contextual analysis of the meanings of the euphemisms in question.

3. Literary Review [Literature Review]Many researchers note that euphemization is widely represented in modern speech and is very effectively used in the everyday language life of society, given its tendency to neutralize the conflict of communication.

Despite the obvious meaning of the term "euphemism", researchers consider it from different points of view. Some emphasize the connection of euphemisms with taboos and their dependence on a certain speech situation. Thus, V. P. Moskvin characterizes euphemisms as "emotionally neutral words and expressions used to replace such a direct name, the use of which seems inappropriate (i.e. taboo) to the speaker in this particular situation" [Moskvin, 1999, p. 262].

Within the stylistic approach, euphemisms are considered as means of artistic expression that perform an aesthetic function. In the Dictionary of Linguistic Terms O. S. Akhmanova's euphemism is interpreted as "a trope consisting in an indirect, veiled, polite, softening designation of an object or phenomenon" [Akhmanova, 1969, p. 521]. A similar definition is given by V. I. Zabotkina: "these are tropes based on an indirect, polite, softening word or phrase used for pragmatic purposes (politeness, delicacy, decency)." [Zabotkina, 1989, p. 44].

The opinions of philologists also differ with regard to the linguistic expression of euphemisms. In this paper we will give a classification of Beatrice Warren, who divides all euphemisms into two groups according to the method of formation, depending on the form of the word (formal innovation) and its meaning (semantic innovation). Warren identifies four main ways of forming euphemisms:

1. Various word-formation techniques (word-formation devices), for example, the acronym NYR, which stands for no t yet returned – not yet returned instead of dead – dead;

2. Foreign borrowings (loanwords), for example, lingerie (fr.) – women's underwear;

3. Phonetic changes of the word (phonemic modification), for example, Jeez instead of Jesus – Jesus;

4. Giving new meaning to words and expressions already existing in the language (semantic innovation), for example, the great divide – the great division in the meaning of divorce – divorce [Warren, 1997, p. 132].  

Euphemisms are used in many spheres of society. L. P. Krysin notes that the process of softened renaming is carried out in two main areas – in everyday life and in socio-political. Interpersonal relationships manifest, first of all, "the desire to avoid communicative conflicts and failures, not to create a sense of communicative discomfort in the interlocutor." Euphemisms in a socio-political context are a means of veiling and masking reality, which is caused by "the general falsity of the system and the ideological apparatus serving it, the fear of publicity of unseemly or inhumane activities" [Krysin, 2004, p. 262].

4. Results and discussion  [ResultsandDiscussions]As mentioned above, the main focus of our work is on the study of the functioning of euphemisms in a political context.

Using a continuous sampling method, we selected and analyzed euphemisms in the political discourse of the English-language media in order to assess the functional potential of euphemisms.

The question of the functions of euphemisms is one of the most relevant, since the function is connected with the speaker's intention, with his communicative intention, and therefore is very important for understanding the essence of euphemism. There are different views of linguists on the functions, goals and communicative tasks of euphemisms, and, accordingly, there are various classifications of functions in the literature. We are interested in L. P. 's point of view . A rat that identifies three functions or purposes of euphemization.

The main purpose of using euphemisms is the desire to avoid communicative discomfort. From the position of the linguopragmatic approach, euphemisms perform a communicative function, being a form of speech interaction convenient for both sides of communication. The euphemisms used for this purpose are determined by the following pragmatic intentions:

• the desire to increase the social significance of some non–prestigious professions, for example, garbage collector – garbage collector became known as sanitation engineer - sanitation specialist;
• mitigation of situations related to negative aspects of life, such as illness or death. For example, the euphemism moon-child – a person born under the constellation Cancer is used instead of the word C ancer – Cancer, which causes associations with the disease;
• the desire to relieve tension in interethnic relations. For example, to mitigate racial discrimination, instead of the word black, colored or non-white are used – the colored population;
• the desire to hide physical and mental disabilities. For example, people suffering from speech disorders are called speech-impaired – with speech disorders. Instead of insane asylum – madhouse , the euphemism mental hospital is used – a psychiatric hospital;
• the desire to avoid age discrimination. So, in order not to offend the elderly, the word middlescence has appeared in the English language of recent decades – people of venerable age (by analogy with adolescence – adolescence);
• the desire to avoid discrimination based on appearance, for example, a vertically challenged person – a person with non-standard proportions;
• the desire to avoid property discrimination. For example, the word disadvantaged appeared to designate the poor – socially unprotected;
• the desire to avoid the manifestation of sexism in language. For example, to designate a housewife, the euphemism domestic engineer is used – literally, the engineer of the hearth.

Politeness is one of the postulates of linguopragmatics, and it is politeness, tact, and the desire to observe the ethical norms of civilized communication that become the pragmatic goals of using euphemisms. Resorting to euphemisms, the speaker sends optimal speech signals that correspond to the pragmatic expectations of the addressee of speech. Thus, within the framework of linguistic pragmatics, successful speech interaction is ensured for both communicants. At the same time, we note that the sender of a speech message, activating the speech mechanism of euphemization, can change the mental state of the recipient, that is, in fact, directly affect his consciousness.

In political discourse, the principle of politeness is reflected in the form of politically correct vocabulary. The diplomatic environment obliges politicians to use euphemisms to observe diplomatic etiquette. At the same time, euphemisms do not reflect the real state of affairs. For example, the euphemism congenial tone – friendly atmosphere is quite often used to describe negotiations, meetings at the level of diplomats, but does not mean that negotiations are really held in a friendly tone.

A civilized society is a politically correct society in which uncomfortable words and straightforward expressions are replaced by softer and neutral ones. It is not possible to fulfill the communicative tasks that the political authorities face if they resort exclusively to direct nominations and do not try to neutralize negative meanings in speech.

Political correctness requires replacing all those linguistic units that offend the feelings and dignity of the individual with appropriate neutral or positive euphemisms. According to S. G. Ter-Minasova, "the political correctness of language is expressed in the desire to find new ways of linguistic expression instead of those that hurt the feelings and dignity of an individual, infringe on his human rights by habitual linguistic tactlessness and/or straightforwardness in relation to race and gender, age, health status, social status, appearance, etc." [Ter-Minasova, 2000, p. 216].

Using the example of the political euphemisms we have selected, we will consider their use in a speech situation when it is necessary to avoid communicative discomfort:

The original: The European Union has used the Canary Islands boat people tragedy to create a new border patrol (news.sky.com, 2020). Translation: The European Union took advantage of the tragedy with the boat of illegal migrants near the Canary Islands to organize a new border post (here and further our translation. – K. S.).

The euphemism boat people was formed for refugees who tried to get to Europe from the Middle East by sea.

The use of euphemization in this case makes it possible to soften the painful topic of illegal migration and to speak politically correctly about a certain social group of people.

Another example of the euphemization of illegal migration:

The original: The Trump administration could be open to providing legal status to undocumented people who have not committed serious crimes (nbcnews.com, 2017).

Translation: The Trump administration may decide to grant legal status to illegal immigrants who have not committed serious crimes.  The euphemism undocumented people avoids the direct naming of illegal immigrants, indicating only the absence of documents for the right of residence in the country.

Thus, we see that the communicative function of euphemisms is realized by renaming what sounds too straightforward, which means rude, harsh and offensive. Euphemisms soften the utterance and help neutralize communication failures.

The second purpose of euphemization is the need to classify their activities from outsiders, to encrypt the message so that the true meaning is clear only to the target audience. An example is euphemisms in the military sphere, for example, cockroach - the F-117 bomber, or euphemisms for naming drug addicts and drugs, for example, sunshine pill - a pill of the hallucinogen lsd (yellow or orange).

The most interesting in the context of this study is the third goal of euphemization according to L. P. Krysin is the desire to disguise the true essence of facts and events that can cause an undesirable public response, a negative reaction from society. This goal is especially often realized in a political context, and reflects the manipulative function of euphemization.

In some cases, the motive for using euphemisms may be the fear of publicity of unseemly or inhumane activities. All lexical units that can cause a negative assessment or offend the feelings of the addressee of political communication are euphemized here. Let 's give an example:

Original: Former US President George W Bush said the CIA had saved lives by using enhanced interrogation techniques to acquire information from suspects (bbc.co.uk , 2014).Translation: Former US President George W. Bush said that the CIA saved people's lives by using advanced interrogation techniques to get information from suspects.

The euphemism enhanced interrogative techniques – the technique of extended interrogation is used instead of the direct term torture - torture. Torture is prohibited by law, but if we call torture an extended interrogation technique, then there will be no associations with aggressive forms of interrogation in the consciousness of society. The manipulative effect is precisely to prevent mass outrage and negative public response.

The manipulative function of euphemisms is actively used by the mass media, which are the catalyst for the main events taking place in the world. The authors of socio-political articles resort to ambiguity, distortion, camouflage of information in order to manipulate public consciousness. To this end, they turn to linguistic means of masking reality, that is, they use euphemisms.

Manipulation occurs due to linguistic influence, which is used to introduce and impose on a person intentions and goals that do not coincide with his own. Language manipulation is realized through the conscious use of any lexical units that cause certain associations, connotations, shades of perception. Consider the following example:

The original: The arrest of Nigerian separatist leader Nnamdi Kanu has dealt a serious blow to his group, and could even spell the end of his movement (bbc.co.uk, 2021).

Translation: The arrest of Nigerian separatist leader Nnamdi Kanu dealt a serious blow to his group and may have marked the end of his movement.The euphemism separatist – separatist replaces the word terrorist - terrorist.

In this case, there is a substitution of concepts, since due to the positive connotation, the target audience creates a favorable opinion about a person leading a fair fight, whereas in fact, terror is usually behind the actions of the separatists.

It should be noted that even in cases where the euphemism is used with the communicative task of neutralizing something awkward or uncultured, a manipulative effect can manifest itself due to the emotional impact on the mass consciousness. Consider an example:

Original: Senior Tory figures are being economic with the truth by denying they offered election candidates jobs in exchange for not standing, a Brexit Party MEP has told Sky News (news.sky.com , 2019). Translation: Senior Tories are skimping on the truth, denying that they offered candidates positions in exchange for refusing to participate in the elections, one of the MEPs from the Brexit Party told Sky News channel.  

 The euphemism to be economic with the truth – to save on the truth is used to denote the denotation of lying.

The expression has a delicate character, helps to avoid discrediting and direct accusations of lying, but here we see an attempt to neutralize the reader's just indignation about the lies of politicians.

From the examples considered, it can be seen that euphemisms in political discourse are used mainly to nominate negative phenomena of modern society. It must be admitted that they successfully neutralize the negative attitude of the audience to such phenomena. This is explained by the fact that the recipient, meeting euphemism in a political context, is not able to immediately understand what is hidden behind the euphemistic substitution. A person either does not have certain knowledge in order to identify the replacement mechanism, or does not focus his attention on the euphemism that is hidden in the general flow of information. Thus, the impact on the recipient in the political discourse is implicit.

5. Conclusion [Conclusion]In this paper, the theoretical foundations of euphemization as a linguistic phenomenon are considered, and the peculiarities of the functioning of euphemisms in political discourse are studied.

Summing up, we can note on the one hand the positive side of euphemization, when information is served filtered, without negative connotations, and on the other hand, we cannot ignore the manipulative orientation of euphemisms, when veiling and distortion of information occurs in order to achieve certain goals hidden for most people.

In a modern society saturated with the ideas of democracy, tolerance and political correctness, euphemization plays a significant role, as it helps to avoid conflicts and excessive aggression. Thanks to euphemisms, ethical, cultural, and social norms of society are not violated. Euphemization contributes to the implementation of communicative tasks, ensuring the success of communication, including intercultural.

At the same time, euphemisms in political discourse often act as an instrument of influence on the mass consciousness, masking acute problems in the world and thereby changing the attitude of the public towards them. The use of euphemisms in political communication can have an emotional impact on people and incline them to certain political decisions or to develop a certain opinion.

In the course of the study, we found that the communicative function of euphemisms, aimed at mitigating and neutralizing communicative failures, plays a secondary role. The vast majority of the considered euphemisms in the political context perform a manipulative function, which manifests itself in masking information and influencing public opinion. And even in cases where a politically correct expression is used directly to replace a rude nomination, we can also observe a manipulative effect.

The present study is of theoretical and practical significance due to the certain contribution it makes to the study of the theory of manipulation of public consciousness by the political authorities. The analysis of the ways of implementing the tactics of emotional influence through euphemisms in political discourse allows us to develop a certain immunity to attempts of manipulation. Undoubtedly, further research in this area will contribute to a deeper understanding of the pragmalinguistic potential of euphemisms in political discourse.