Euphemism
Created | Updated May 21, 2002
In theory, the point of euphemism is to communicate clearly without taking the chance of offending anyone. Thus a large proportion of euphemisms have to do with supposedly offensive or insensitive subjects, mainly involving bodily functions, like sex and death.
Excretion is a favourite for euphemism. "S**t", which goes back at least to the seventeenth century in English, and is cognate with the socially acceptable word "schism", is avoided in polite conversation, though its Latinate counterpart "defecate" is acceptable. Why the Romans are allowed to have words for such things and the English aren't is unclear; possibly it's because if someone is using Latinate words it is assumed he or she is well-educated, and therefore could not be saying anything offensive.
Euphemising for death is a curious practise. If a loved one is dead, the fact that someone is skirting around the fact instead of just saying it and getting it over with, seems unlikely to lighten the blow. For example, if the euphemism prompts "Gone? Where's he gone?" or "Passed on what?" then it is just dragging the painful moment out.
Speaking about sex is made more difficult as every time a verb appears in the language which describes sex, it automatically falls into the "offensive slang" category. Any word you can think of and use as a euphemism for f***ing will instantly become suspect. "Boffing", "bonking", "benching", all would cause offense to the grammatically sensitive; even Latinate verbs ("copulate", "fornicate") are risque in this area. Hence increasingly obscure euphemisms appear to distance the words as far as possible from the act itself: "Making love" is an odd phrase but is widely understood, though where love is uninvolved it seems unsuitable; "sleeping with" can be ambiguous, since it is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for having sex; "going to bed with" is a bizarre double euphemism, implying "sleeping with" thence to imply having sex.
A stranger and more insidious practice that has emerged in the last few years is to euphemise for completely innocent concepts. Nowadays, instead of asking what sex someone is, a form or questionaire usually asks "Gender?". Can the writers really believe that someone filling in a form will reach the word "Sex" and be overcome with disgust for the base term? Gender doesn't mean sex, not even nearly. Being a variation of the words "genus" and "genre", it is cognate with English "kin" and "kind", so asking someone their gender is roughly equivalent to saying "What kind of person are you? A male kind of person or a female kind of person?"
Excretion is a favourite for euphemism. "S**t", which goes back at least to the seventeenth century in English, and is cognate with the socially acceptable word "schism", is avoided in polite conversation, though its Latinate counterpart "defecate" is acceptable. Why the Romans are allowed to have words for such things and the English aren't is unclear; possibly it's because if someone is using Latinate words it is assumed he or she is well-educated, and therefore could not be saying anything offensive.
Euphemising for death is a curious practise. If a loved one is dead, the fact that someone is skirting around the fact instead of just saying it and getting it over with, seems unlikely to lighten the blow. For example, if the euphemism prompts "Gone? Where's he gone?" or "Passed on what?" then it is just dragging the painful moment out.
Speaking about sex is made more difficult as every time a verb appears in the language which describes sex, it automatically falls into the "offensive slang" category. Any word you can think of and use as a euphemism for f***ing will instantly become suspect. "Boffing", "bonking", "benching", all would cause offense to the grammatically sensitive; even Latinate verbs ("copulate", "fornicate") are risque in this area. Hence increasingly obscure euphemisms appear to distance the words as far as possible from the act itself: "Making love" is an odd phrase but is widely understood, though where love is uninvolved it seems unsuitable; "sleeping with" can be ambiguous, since it is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for having sex; "going to bed with" is a bizarre double euphemism, implying "sleeping with" thence to imply having sex.
A stranger and more insidious practice that has emerged in the last few years is to euphemise for completely innocent concepts. Nowadays, instead of asking what sex someone is, a form or questionaire usually asks "Gender?". Can the writers really believe that someone filling in a form will reach the word "Sex" and be overcome with disgust for the base term? Gender doesn't mean sex, not even nearly. Being a variation of the words "genus" and "genre", it is cognate with English "kin" and "kind", so asking someone their gender is roughly equivalent to saying "What kind of person are you? A male kind of person or a female kind of person?"
