Vestnik On-line
Orenburg State University november 05, 2024   RU/EN
Headings of Vestnik
Pedagogics
Psychology
Other

Search
Vak
Антиплагиат
Orcid
Viniti
ЭБС Лань
Rsl
Лицензия Creative Commons

October 2017, № 11 (211), pages 73–78

doi: 10.25198/1814-6457-211-73

Solodilova I.A., Sokolova T.Yu. EUPHEMISM IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA Problem of identification criteria defining for some language phenomenon is a very often problem in linguistic science. It is also actual for euphemia. That’s why word’s defining as a euphemistic one is not always simple and doubtless. Despite the centuries-long history euphemisms have not clear features. Scientists point out different in volume and content features’ groups for euphemism identification. It is caused by analysis of this phenomenon in different aspects. Differences in analysis approaches are also reasons for uniformity lack in this problem solving. Substitution approach (that conditions the narrow view of euphemia) and broader interpretation of this phenomenon as a product of mediate nomination, change of estimative directivity, linguistic and pragmatic, sociolinguistic and semantic-stylistic phenomenon have together conditioned a wide range of study aspects and, as a consequence, the uniformity lack in identification criteria. Modern researches tend to necessity of the complex approach to this phenomenon study. This approach supposes interrelation of extra— and intralinguistic factors conditioning formation of euphemistic nomination in language. There are firstly social-psychological and denotative-significative factors among them. Social-psychological factors are related to learning style and reality estimation. Denotative-significative factors are connected with formation of objects’ new conceptual features in human mind and with changes in conceptual world view. The detailed analysis allows revealing the next euphemisms’ identification criteria: extralinguistic criteria — negative nature of emotions (caused by nomination object), social and cultural motivation of nominative replacement process, tendency to denotation melioration, and intralinguistic criteria — stigmatic antecedent, positive connotative semantics of euphemism, semantic reduction, and secondary nature of nomination. Key words: euphemism, identification criteria, substitution approach, complex approach, extra— and intralinguistic features.

Download
References:

1. Agamdzhanova, V.I. Conceptual excessiveness of word lexical meaning / V.I. Agamdzhanova. — Riga, 1977. — 123 p.

2. Aymoldina, А.А. About the question of euphemism and its classification studies / А.А. Aymoldina // Innovation technologies in theory and practice of language and literature teaching: problems and solution ways: proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference. — Astana, 2009. — P. 11-15

3. Babina, L.V. Concepts’ secondary representation in language / L.V. Babina. — Tambov, 2003. — 341 p.

4. Benvenist, E. General linguistics / E. Benvenist. — M.: Progress, 1974. — 446 p.

5. Berdova, N.М. Euphemisms in the modern German language / N.М. Berdova. — Kiev, 1981. — 230 p.

6. Katsev, А.М. Euphemisms in the modern English language: experience of sociolinguistic description / А.М. Katsev. — Leningrad, 1977. — 190 p.

7. Katsev, А.М. Euphemisms and synonymy / А.М. Katsev // Scientific paper. — Omsk. State Pedagogical Institute named aft. А.М. Gorkiy, iss. 1, 1976. — p. 166-172.

8. Larin, B.А. About euphemisms // B.А. Larin. — L.: Leningrad State University, 1961. — 124 p.

9. Nikitina, А.М. Euphemisms in teacher’s speech as a harmonization tool for pedagogical discourse / А.М. Nikitina. — Moscow, 2015. — 214 p.

10. Obvintseva, О.V. Euphemism in political communication: as exemplified in English language in comparison with Russian / О.V. Obvintseva. — Yekaterinburg, 2004. — 192 p.

11. Orlova, S.N. Euphemisms’ cognitive and discursive analysis in title complexes of British and Australian national variants of the English language (as exemplified in economical print media) / S.N. Orlova // Abstract of thesis for a Candidate Degree in Philological Sciences. — Moscow, 2012. — 22 p.

12. Risel, E.G., Shendels, E.I. Stylistics of the German language / E.G. Risel, E.I. Shendels // Textbook for institutes and faculties for foreign languages. — Moscow, 1975. — 316 p.

13. Senichkina, E.P. Euphemisms of the Russian language / Е.P. Senichkina. — Moscow, 2006. — 120 p.

14. Teliya, V.N. Secondary nomination and its types / V.N. Teliya. — Moscow, 1997. — 305 p.

15. Sheygal, Е.I. Semiotics of political discourse: Thesis for a Candidate Degree in Philological Sciences / Е.I. Sheygal. — Volgograd, 2000. — 440 p.

16. Yartseva, V.М. Linguistic encyclopedical dictionary / V.М. Yartseva. — Moscow: Soviet encyclopedia, 1990. — 688 p.


About this article

Authors: Solodilova I.A., Sokolova T.Yu.

Year: 2017

doi: 10.25198/1814-6457-211-73

Editor-in-chief
Sergey Aleksandrovich
MIROSHNIKOV

Crossref
Cyberleninka
Doi
Europeanlibrary
Googleacademy
scienceindex
worldcat
© Электронное периодическое издание: ВЕСТНИК ОГУ on-line (VESTNIK OSU on-line), ISSN on-line 1814-6465
Зарегистрировано в Федеральной службе по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций
Свидетельство о регистрации СМИ: Эл № ФС77-37678 от 29 сентября 2009 г.
Учредитель: Оренбургский государственный университет (ОГУ)
Главный редактор: С.А. Мирошников
Адрес редакции: 460018, г. Оренбург, проспект Победы, д. 13, к. 2335
Тел./факс: (3532)37-27-78 E-mail: vestnik@mail.osu.ru
1999–2024 © CIT OSU