Function of Euphemism

Function of Euphemism

Introduction

In social interactions and politics, one must convey messages through language by carefully selecting the right words for each social and political setting. There is a multitude of factors one must consider to ensure that the receiver interprets the message correctly; one of them is regarding the connotative meaning of what one is saying. Most words and phrases carry a positive or negative association with them, and choosing the correct synonym is crucial.

This text will discuss how euphemism is employed in everyday life and US politics. It will review the general function of euphemism but primarily look at its usage in US politics, mainly how it is used in election debates by presidential candidates to sway the public.

Function of Euphemism

Euphemism is used prevalently in our society and applies to countless situational contexts and semantic fields. The word itself is derived from a Greek term which roughly translates to “to speak favourably” (Pan, 2013, p. 1).

The term Euphemism carries two different definitions. According to (Leech, 1990:45) “The technique consists of replacing a word which has offensive connotations with another expression, which makes no overt reference to the unpleasant side of the subject”. On the other hand, Allan (2001: 148) defines it similarly, but also states that “It avoids possible loss of face: either Speaker’s own positive face or, through giving offence, the negative face of Hearer or some third party”. The difference lies in the way the euphemism’s function is portrayed; Leech describes it as a technique used to avoid mentioning the offensive side of a subject, whereas Allan adds a second definition by stating that it is also used to elevate or preserve one’s reputation. Some examples of where euphemism is commonly applied are; In the domain of politics and political correctness, to facilitate social interaction, to be humorous, to convince others and in official statements (Pan, 2013, p. 2).

Euphemism Used in US Politics

The primary function of euphemism in politics is to avoid embarrassment, deceive or to wrap up controversial and unfavourable information in a pleasant and innocuous blanket. In the USA for instance, the government often put out official statements concerning various topics such as military actions and campaigns. The way they formulate the statement will play a significant role in how the public will interpret it and will influence people’s opinion. When for example talking about the war in Iraq, George W. Bush (Reich, P., & Kudrnáčová, P. D. N, 2013, p. 185) discussed how they would disarm Iraq which paints quite a different picture in one’s head than if he had presented how they would invade Iraq. The expression to disarm Iraq suggests that Iraq is a dangerous enemy and that the US needs to take care of it. It focuses on the result, disregarding any military action necessary to do so. Invading Iraq seems considerably more aggressive and may make the public oppose it even though the statements discuss the same thing. Same goes for the euphemistic term financial difficulty as opposed to the dysphemism

Today, the division concerning all military branches is named The Department of Defense. The name itself is a euphemism and was known as The Department of War until 1949 when it became politically incorrect to reference anything related to war. (Lutz, 1990, p. 10).

In 1984, the US State Department decided that it would in its annual reports, regarding the status of human rights in countries around the world would swap out the word killing. The replacement became unlawful or arbitrary deprivation of life (Lutz, 1990, p. 27).

Such ways of improperly using euphemism are defined as doublespeak[1]: when the euphemism is used to deceive it becomes doublespeak. The term itself is an amalgam of two words from the book Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, doublethink[2] and newspeak[3].

The usage of euphemism is a powerful tool when in the right hands and is something all political parties use to their advantage. This can be observed by analysing their speech. When for example discussing abortion, the Democratic party uses euphemisms based on choice or choosing, whereas the Republicans tend to base their euphemisms on life. Both exploit the listener’s sympathy and tries to make the opposing side look bad. This is demonstrated examining presidential candidates in election debates from 2000, 2004 and 2008.

In the election debates from 2000, George W. Bush used the terms to be pro-life and to support culture of life when discussing abortion. Al Gore on the other hand, used the terms woman’s right to choose and anti-choice group. (Reich, P., & Kudrnáčová, P. D. N, 2013, p. 171-172).

In the election debates from 2004, these terms took a step further. George W. Bush used the terms; destruction of life, promote life and destroy life in addition to the previously mentioned from 2000. This time the Democratic candidate John Kerry used the terms women’s rights to choose and family planning concerning women’s freedom of choice and their right to have control over their own body and decide upon their own future. The Republicans responded with terms which seemed to indicate that the opposing party was evil, such as the destruction of life, implying that the Democrats were killing infants, and women’s rights to choose. This suggested that the Republicans were against the freedom of women. In these circumstances, one would call these statements for dysphemisms[4]. As defined by the scholars (Allan and Burridge, 2006), “dysphemism is a word or phrase with connotations that are offensive either about the denotatum or to people addressed or overhearing the utterance”.

How statements such as those mentioned above affect our opinion is difficult to measure, but it certainly changes our behaviour and thoughts to some degree. The use of euphemism often goes under the radar and stealthily persuades the listener by painting a biased picture in their head without them picking up on it (Crespo-Fernández, Eliecer, 2018, p. 30/ 2014, p. 22-23). In most cases, it is difficult to notice the use of euphemism and doublespeak if the listener is not aware of it, or if the speaker or is not outright lying.

Concluding remarks

What emerges from this analysis is that euphemism is a mild or indirect word used for softening statements and downplay the meaning of what one is saying. Euphemism is a natural part of English and most other languages. They are especially common among politicians, who use them to downplay their weak sides and hide the true meaning of their statements as exemplified earlier in the text. Moreover, official statements often utilise euphemisms to seem nonpartisan and detached from their message.

A consequence of this is that it can occasionally deceive the public due to the statement’s convoluted language. Furthermore, the use of euphemism can significantly alter the public’s interpretation. It can stealthily sway someone’s opinion by switching out words with negative connotations with an ameliorative term, a strategy often used by politicians and governments. The final purpose of euphemism is to mask profanity and taboo topics such as execution, abort and sex in regular social interactions. Thus, one could sum up that a euphemism is used to seem more polite, avoid unpleasant topics, facilitate social interactions, self-promotion and alter others perception of reality.

[1] In the thesis by Crespo-Fernández, Eliecer (2014) it is defined that doublespeak is a “language which avoids or shifts responsibility, language which is at variance with its real or its purported meanings. It is language which conceals or prevents thought”.

[2] Doublethink is as quoted by George Orwell “power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” (1989: 223)

[3] Newspeak is defined in Nineteen Eighty Four as a restricted language with limited grammar to limit freedom of thought.

[4] Dysphemism is the opposite of a euphemism and is defined as the use of an offensive or derogatory expression rather than a harmless and positive one.