EUPHEMIZATION AS A STRATEGY OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS IN MODERN FRENCH
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/folium/2026.9.25Keywords:
euphemisms, inclusive language, linguistic worldview, semantics, vocabulary, sociolinguisticsAbstract
The article presents a comprehensive study of euphemization as a linguocultural strategy for shaping politically correct discourse in modern French. The relevance of the research is determined by the rapid renewal of socially sensitive vocabulary, growing attention to non-discriminatory naming practices, and tensions between inclusive usage, codified norms, and the pragmatics of public communication. The purpose of the article is to identify the semantic, pragmatic, structural, and word-formational patterns of euphemization and to clarify its role in constructing politically correct nominations. The material comprises French lexemes, phrases, and periphrastic constructions attested in public, media, administrative, and inclusive discourses. The methodology combines descriptive, semantic, componential, contextual, and word-formation analysis with elements of discourse analysis. The theoretical framework draws on the works of M. Bréal, S. Ullmann, F. de Saussure, Ch. Bally, S. Semchynskyi, and contemporary studies of taboo and political correctness. The findings systematize the principal mechanisms of euphemization: semantic generalization, metonymic transfer, lexical substitution, borrowing, terminologization, abbreviation, and descriptive constructions. The most productive thematic domains are identified as disability and health, ethnic and migration background, gender, age, appearance, socio-economic status, and professional activity. The study describes the preventive, solidaritybuilding, masking, and performative functions of euphemisms and demonstrates that they can both mitigate potentially offensive expression and obscure socially significant facts. Particular attention is paid to the “euphemism treadmill”, a cyclical process in which a formerly neutral designation gradually acquires negative connotations and is replaced by a new form. The analysis also considers the interaction of euphemization with taboo, reclamation, inclusive writing, and the institutional codification of linguistic norms. The scholarly contribution of the article lies in combining semasiological, word-formational, and sociolinguistic perspectives in the analysis of French politically correct vocabulary. It is concluded that euphemization is a dynamic mechanism through which language adapts to social and ethical change; its effectiveness depends on context, institutional support, and the readiness of the speech community to accept a new norm.
References
Алексієвець, О. М. (2013). Точка зору в сучасних наукових інтерпретаціях. Мови професійної комунікації: лінгвістичний, соціокультурний та дидактичний аспекти. 283–287
Богович, В., & Бігун, О. (2026). Інклюзивні стратегії французького копірайтингу. Сучасні дослідження з іноземної філології, 1(29), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.32782/2617-3921.2026.29.62-69
Кочерган, М. П. (2006). Загальне мовознавство. Академія.
Семчинський, С. В. (1988). Загальне мовознавство: підручник для вузів. Вища школа.
Смущинська, І. В. (2016). Суб’єктивна модальність у французькій мові. Видавничий центр КНЛУ.
Тараненко, О. О. (2013). Евфемізми. Українська мова: Енциклопедія (4-те вид.) / Ред. кол.: В. М. Русанівський, О. О. Тараненко, М. П. Зяблюк та ін. Видавництво «Українська енциклопедія» ім. М. П. Бажана.
Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (2006). Forbidden words: Taboo and the censoring of language. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511617881
Bally, C. (1909). Traité de stylistique française (Vol. 1). C. Winter.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Harvard University Press.
Bréal, M. (1897). Essai de sémantique (science des significations). Hachette.
Breton, P. (2020). La parole manipulée. La Découverte. https://doi.org/10.3917/dec.breto.2020.01
Guillaume, M. (2020). Norme et créativité dans la langue française contemporaine. Presses Universitaires de France.
Pêcheux, M. (1990). L’inquiétude du discours: Textes de Michel Pêcheux (D. Maldidier, Ed.). Éditions des Cendres.
Pinker, S. (1994, April 5). The game of the name. The New York Times, p. 21.
Safrati, G.-É. (2011). Analyse du discours et sens commun: institutions de sens, communautés de sens, doxa, idéologie. In J. Guilhaumou & Ph. Schepens (Eds.), Matériaux philosophiques pour l’analyse du discours (pp. 139–173). Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté.
Saussure, F. de. (1959). Course in general linguistics. Philosophical Library.
Ullmann, S. (1959). Précis de sémantique française (2nd ed.). A. Francke.










