Article published In:
Pragmatics: Online-First Articles

Towards a distinction between non-euphemistic and euphemism-based politically correct expressions

A relevance-theoretic perspective

ORCID logo | Nizhny Novgorod State Technical University
This qualitative research is the first attempt to analyse differences in the interpretation of politically correct (PC) expressions by using relevance-theoretic and lexical pragmatics tools. The results suggest that PC language can be non-euphemistic and euphemism-based. Non-euphemistic PC expressions achieve relevance by explicitly communicating their lexically encoded conceptual content. Euphemism-based PC expressions become relevant by communicating some concepts and propositions that are not lexically encoded by them and are inferred logically from the utterance context or/and by accessing encyclopaedic information. These concepts and propositions constitute euphemistic meaning and are recovered at explicit and implicit levels, as well as with varying degrees of strength.
Keywords: PC expressions, euphemisms, relevance, government discourse, speaker’s meaning
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background
  • 3.Data and methodology
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Non-euphemistic PC expressions
    • 4.2Euphemism-based PC expressions
  • 5.Results
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
  • Sources
Published online: 3 September 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.23032.gol
References (49)
References
Allan, Keith, and Kate Burridge. 2006. Forbidden Words. Taboo and the Censoring of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
American Psychological Association. 2022a. “Disability.” [URL] (accessed 29 October 2022).
. 2022b. “Racial and Ethnic Identity.” [URL] (accessed 15 November 2022).
Burridge, Kate. 2012. “Euphemism and Language Change: the Sixth and Seventh Ages.” Lexis. Journal in English Lexicology 71: 65–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caplan, Gerald. 1964. Principles of Preventive Psychiatry. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Cardichon, Jessica, and Linda Darling-Hammond. 2017. Advancing Educational Equity for Underserved Youth. Palo Alto: Learning Policy Institute.Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. “Ad Hoc Concepts, Polysemy and the Lexicon.” In Relevance, Pragmatics and Interpretation, ed. by Kate Scott, Billy Clark, and Robyn Carston, 150–162, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. “The Relevance of Words and the Language/Communication Divide.” Frontiers in Psychology 141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn, and George Powell. 2008. “Relevance Theory – New Directions and Developments.” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language, ed. by Ernie Lepore, and Barry C. Smith, 279–299. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
“Circumlocution.” n.d. In Collins Online Dictionary. [URL] (accessed 14 October 2023).
Department for Education. 2023. “Special Educational Needs and Disability: An Analysis and Summary of Data Sources. June 2023.” [URL] (accessed 14 October 2023).
Dunn, Dana S., and Erin E. Andrews. 2015. “Person-First and Identity-First Language: Developing Psychologists’ Cultural Competence Using Disability Language.” American Psychologist 70 (3): 255–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehly, Stewart. 1986. Crisis Intervention Handbook. Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.Google Scholar
Felt, Christian, and Ellen Riloff. 2020. “Recognising Euphemisms and Dysphemisms Using Sentiment Analysis.” In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Figurative Language Processing, ed. by Beata Beigman Klebanov, Ekaterina Shutova, Patricia Lichtenstein, Smaranda Muresan, Chee Wee, Anna Feldman, and Debanjan Ghosh, 136–145. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gernsbacher, Morton A., Adam R. Raimond, M. Theresa Balinghasay, and Jilana S. Boston. 2016. ““Special Needs” Is an Ineffective Euphemism.” Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 11: 29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halmari, Helena. 2011. “Political Correctness, Euphemism and Language Change. The Case of “People First”.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (3): 828–840. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoff, Lee Ann. 1978. People in Crisis: Understanding and Helping. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Holder, R. W. 2002. How Not to Say What You Mean: A Dictionary of Euphemisms. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hughes, Geoffrey. 2010. Political Correctness: A History of Semantics and Culture. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Luchtenberg, Sigrid. 1985. Euphemismen im Heutigen Deutsch. Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Mackey, Richard. 1968. “Crisis Theory: Its Development and Relevance to Social Casework Practice.” The Family Coordinator 17 (3): 165–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. n.d. “YouthBuild Program.” [URL] (accessed 10 December 2022).
Neurodiversity Hub. n.d. “What Is Neurodiversity?” [URL] (accessed 10 April 2023).
O’Neill, Ben. 2011. “A Critique of Politically-Correct Language.” Independent Review 16 (2): 71–98.Google Scholar
Parker, Emily, and Michael Griffith. 2016. The Importance of At-Risk Funding. Policy Analysis. Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven. 1994. “The Game of the Name.” New York Times, April 5. [URL]
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Roper, Cynthia. 2022. “Political Correctness.” In Encyclopaedia Britannica. [URL] (accessed 15 August 2022).Google Scholar
Rosen, Alan. 1997. “Crisis Management in the Community.” The Medical Journal of Australia 167 (11–12): 633–638. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sexual Assault Kit Initiative. n.d. “Victim or Survivor: Terminology through Investigation to Prosecution.” [URL] (accessed 15 November 2022).
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 2015. “Beyond Speaker’s Meaning.” Croatian Journal of Philosophy 441: 117–149.Google Scholar
. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sytnyk, Andriy. 2014. “Argumentative Euphemisms, Political Correctness and Relevance”. PhD disseration. University of Neuchâtel.
The Fortune Society. n.d. “Words Matter: Using Humanising Language.” [URL] (accessed 15 November 2022).
“Visually Impaired.” n.d. In Collins Online Dictionary. [URL] (accessed 30 October 2022).
Yus, Francisco. 2013. “Analysing Jokes with the Intersecting Circles Model of Humorous Communication.” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 9 (1): 3–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. “Attaching Feelings and Emotions to Propositions: Some Insights on Irony and Internet Communication.” Russian Journal of Linguistics 22 (1): 94–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 2011. “Parallels and Differences in the Treatment of Metaphor in Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics.” Studia Linguistica Universitatis Lagellonicae Cracoviensis 1281: 195–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Relevance Theory.” In The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Yan Huang, 79–100. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber (eds). 2012. Meaning and Relevance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sources
A Proclamation on World Autism Awareness Day, 2023. Published 31 March 2023. [URL] (accessed 1 April 2023).
Emergency Funding to Support Most Vulnerable in Society during Pandemic. Published 2 May 2020. [URL] (accessed 10 November 2022).
Library Services for Blind and Visually Impaired People. Published 16 December 2015. [URL] (accessed 10 November 2022).
President Biden’s Budget Invests in Reducing Gun Crime to Make Our Communities Safer. Published 28 March 2022. [URL] (accessed 20 August 2022).
President Biden’s FY 2023 Budget Advances Equity. Published 30 March 2022. [URL] (accessed 20 August 2022).
Supporting Disabled People through the Coronavirus Outbreak. Published 31 March 2020. [URL] (accessed 10 November 2022).
Technology Unlocks Cities for Visually Impaired. Published 21 May 2015. [URL] (accessed 10 November 2022).
The Biden-⁠Harris Administration Advances Equity and Opportunity for Black Americans and Communities Across the Country. Published 06 November 2022. [URL] (accessed 15 December 2022).