STUDIA UBB. PHILOLOGIA, LV, 4, 2010
SOME TYPOLOGICAL REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH AND
ROMANIAN OFFENSIVE AND DEROGATORY TERMS
VS. THE EUPHEMISTIC VOCABULARY
CONSTANTIN MANEA1
ABSTRACT. The author has culled the most illustrative examples from some
common monolingual dictionaries in order to substantiate the claim that English is
very rich in terms relevant of demotion and promotion. A case in point is the so-called
PC vocabulary, which is increasingly more similar in today’s Romanian journalese. In
the context, the author has tried to demonstrate that the relationship evident in the
choice of the PC Anglicisms coming into contemporary Romanian can be exploited for
the promotion of sociolinguistic studies.
Keywords: derogatory and offensive terms, English and Romanian euphemisms,
politeness, PC words
1. In a number of previous papers we have devoted special attention to
illustrating (while considering it with approval and – more often than not – with pleased
surprise) the really disconcerting multiplicity of the aspects connected with slang words
(no less than the slangy and highly colloquial terms), in their natural opposition to
the class of the euphemisms and similar down-toners. Our bird’s-eye-view analysis
mainly consisted in grouping and (sketchily) examining those words and phrases from
the standpoint of their domain belonging, the main mechanisms of word-formation
underlying them, the sheer plethoric synonymic abundance and polysemous richness
of their lexical and semantic paradigms, as well as their etymological hints and suggested
guidelines, the main style and register issues associated, the form exoticness and
imaginative, even fanciful sonority some of them displayed. It would be simply redundant
to mention that, as a rule, in both English and Romanian, what is usually called (highly)
colloquial / slang(y) terms (some of which may be further characterized as euphemistic,
offensive, or even vulgar and taboo) boast, as their arguably principal quality, a broad
range of metaphoric images (some rather transparent, others harder to expose), among
which a number of “international metaphors / images”. In some cases, the surprises
originating in revealing the etymological path of the terms replete with cultural,
historical, literary, etc. allusions were really rewarding.
2. In the present paper, we propose to outline, through a few examplebased remarks extracted from the study of that often despised treasury which is the
common dictionary, the rich typology of the Anglo-American corpus of euphemisms;
comparative hints will be provided as to the class of offensive terms in the English
1
University of Piteşti, Faculty of Letters, e-mail: [email protected]
BDD-A15600 © 2010 Editura Presa Universitară Clujeană
Provided by Diacronia.ro for IP 88.99.165.207 (2017-06-17 19:44:59 UTC)
CONSTANTIN MANEA
language. As a matter of fact, this paper’s aim is to continue some of our older
preoccupations concerning euphemization conceived as indirectness – a pragmatic
and discourse feature that is generally seen as implying politeness. Since it has often
been noted that some cultures are more polite, we can reasonably add that the AngloAmerican one is heir to an ideological complex of a predominantly democratic type,
which could often be perceived as rather hypocritical but has the forte of being consistent
(cf. that indisputable constant of British history: the idea of compromise / settlement).
On the other hand, as Romanians we could derive profit, be it indirectly, from those
remarks, inasmuch as borrowing languages use calque / loan translation, and also to
the extent to which a massive influence on the contemporary Romanian lexicon can be
noted as coming from English – but we will concentrate on that specific aspect in a
future contribution.
3. From the angle provided by the main aspects encompassed by the
disparaging attitude, it is quite apparent that the topmost position is held by ethnic
and racial taunting: – illustrated by either (a) the nicknames attributed to certain ethnic or
local groups, populations or nations (starting from their origin or traditional (self-)
designation, their speech, their – more or less subjectively perceived – aspect, their
favourite food, etc.), or (b) by the various racist attitudes concerning them, e.g. (a)
abo “[Austral. Slang] an Aborigine”; boong “(Austral) a Black person”; Darky
“(Austral) an offensive word for an Aborigine”; Eyetie “(Brit. slang, offensive)
Italian”; fuzzy-wuzzy “(Offensive slang) a Black fuzzy-haired native of any of
various countries”; joual “a name for any variety of dialectal Canadian French: orig.
(early 1960’s), and still sometimes, a derogatory term”; Kanaka “a Hawaiian; a native
of the South Sea Islands. This is a neutral term in Hawaiian, but derogatory as used in
English”; Kike “(U.S. and Canadian slang) an offensive word for Jew”; nappy2 “said
esp. of the hair of blacks and used derogatorily or contemptuously”; piccaninny /
U.S. pickaninny “(Offensive) a small Black or Aboriginal child”; Pommy / Pommie
“[Austral. & N.Z. Slang] [also p-] a British person. Sometimes a derogatory usage”; red
man “a North American Indian: sometimes an offensive term”; Red Indian “another
name, now considered offensive, for American Indian [cf. redskin]”; sambo1 “(Slang)
an offensive word for Negro”; spag2 “Austral. slang offensive. an Italian [from
SPAGHETTI]”; spic “[Slang] an offensive term of contempt and derision for a person
from a Spanish-speaking country of Latin America or from a Spanish-speaking
community in the U.S.”; tyke / tike / Yorkshire tyke “(Brit. slang, often offensive) a
person from Yorkshire”; wop “[Slang] an Italian or a person of Italian descent”; yid
“Jew”; (b) to mongrelize “to intermix in racial or ethnic character: a derogatory term
used by racists”; mongrelization; Indian giver “(U.S. and Canadian offensive) a person
who asks for the return of a present he has given”; Irish “(Informal, offensive)
ludicrous or illogical”; Jewish “(Offensive) miserly”. Close behind the ethnic and
racial aspects stand social attitudes and elements, e.g.: greaser “[Slang] a poor or
working-class youth, esp. in the 1950's, often characterized as being rough in manner,
wearing a leather jacket, having oily hair, riding a motorcycle, etc.”; Okie “(U.S. slang,
sometimes considered offensive) an inhabitant of Oklahoma; an impoverished migrant
264
BDD-A15600 © 2010 Editura Presa Universitară Clujeană
Provided by Diacronia.ro for IP 88.99.165.207 (2017-06-17 19:44:59 UTC)
SOME TYPOLOGICAL REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH AND ROMANIAN OFFENSIVE AND …
farm worker, esp. one who left Oklahoma during the Depression of the 1930s to work
elsewhere in the U.S.”; pie-eater “(Austral) informal, offensive. a person of little
account or importance”; prole “[Colloq., Chiefly Brit.] short for PROLETARIAN: often a
derogatory term”; poor white / White “a white person, esp. one born or living in the
southern U.S. or South Africa, who lives in great poverty and ignorance: often an
offensive term”; reffo “(Austral. Slang) an offensive name for a European refugee
after World War II”. At times, racial and social elements intermix in achieving the
derogatory or offensive labels / derisory names: Tom “to behave like an Uncle Tom: an
offensive term of contempt”. Professional elements are also frequent within the overall
picture of linguistic discrimination, e.g. cookie pusher “[Slang] a person in the
diplomatic service”; pig “a police officer”. Similar sociolinguistic parameters are
provided by religious data, e.g. Uniate “a member of any Eastern Christian Church in
union with the Roman Catholic Church but with its own rite, custom”, or by political and
ideological elements, e.g. Black Muslim “a member of a predominantly black Islamic
movement in the U.S.: the name is considered derogatory by members of the group, who
call themselves simply Muslims”; libber “[Colloq.] a person who advocates the securing of
equal social and economic rights for some group, specif. for women: often a derogatory
term”. Then there are notable reflexes of discrimination on the basis of sex, i.e. genderoffensive, or sexist and homophobic terms, e.g. wench “a girl or young woman”; broad n.
“[Slang] a woman”; poof2 “[Brit., etc. Slang] n. a male homosexual”. Similarly, there are
offensive terms having to do with physical and mental conditions perceived as inferior, e.g.
retard “[Slang] a retarded person”; bughouse “a mental hospital or asylum; adj. insane;
crazy”; geriatric “(of people or machines) old, obsolescent, worn out, or useless”.
4. Contrarily, euphemisms attenuate terms considered offensive, too direct
or hurtful (especially words concerning religion, sex and pudenda, excreta, various
taboos, or death), by substituting them for less expressive or direct terms that are
socially / ideologically “safer”, i.e. considered less distasteful and offensive, e.g. departed
instead of dead; remains instead of corpse, etc. For the sake of comparison between
English and Romanian, let us try to analyze the series slut / beteag – infirm – handicapat
– cu nevoi speciale / cu dizabilităţi / dizabilitat and, respectively cripple – disabled,
incapacitated, handicapped, infirm, invalid. See also: death and demise, departure, parting
and passing (cf. the rather formal term decease, the rare terms expiration and release, and
the indirect terms bereavement, cessation, quietus). Not only did native speakers of
English endeavour to dilute the indelicateness of such terms (be it in point of religious,
anatomical, sexual, social and professional implications, e.g. bejabbers, jeez, goodness,
blaze, blowed, call of nature, intimacy “sexual intercourse”, demise, help “servant”, etc.),
but they have, in comparatively recent times, generated a whole set of lexical items,
especially rife in the US, the so-called PC (i.e. politically correct) words, arguably
induced by the need for appropriateness: they were preoccupied with achieving
“positive discrimination”. Terms like to alter “to spay”, homeland “Bantustan”,
Caucasoid (cf. Negroid) have, gradually and proliferatively, led to such monstrous
coinages like alternative dentation “store teeth”, differently hirsute / hair disadvantaged /
folicularly challenged “bald”, cosmetically different “ugly”, differently sized / horizontally
265
BDD-A15600 © 2010 Editura Presa Universitară Clujeană
Provided by Diacronia.ro for IP 88.99.165.207 (2017-06-17 19:44:59 UTC)
CONSTANTIN MANEA
challenged / having an alternative body-image “obese”, vertically incovenienced /
challenged “too tall / lanky”, uniquely-fortuned individual on an alternative career path
“unemployed person”, alternatively schooled “uneducated”, domestic incarceration
survivor / domestic artist / human ecologist “housewife”, substance abuse survivor /
person of differing sobriety / chemically inconvenienced “drunken (person)”, parasitically
oppressed “pregnant”. Such elements of public face-mediated, polite selection have
recently influenced not only the journalese current in this country, but also contemporary
public communication itself, e.g. a disponibilizạ – cf. Eng. to make redundant, parteneri
media “sponsors”, Eng. previously owned / prior-owned cars – Rom. maşini rulate, etc.
5. Conclusions: The typological and varietal richness of the corpus under
study is obvious, no less than the conceptual, imaginal and formal inventiveness of
the terms examined. The most frequent terms have a (broad) social relevance. Most
euphemisms start from the human being’s limitations, of either a physical or
spiritual nature: the religious sphere, that of man’s various conditions and ailments,
and that of the (former or still current) taboos. The most valuable contribution such
bird’s-eye views can have to the advance of lexicology, lexicography and sociolinguistics
is, we think, analyzing the specific contributions of derogatory and offensive,
respectively euphemistic terms and phrases, to the style and register make-up of
today’s (Anglo-American and Romanian) media discourse – which is, admittedly,
the most prone to change. In a future contribution, we propose to examine the way
such euphemistic abundance is reflected, through either direct borrowing or calking /
loan translation, in the press materials produced by Romanian journalists, especially in
view of the (global) proliferation of the politically correct lexical elements. Similarly,
one can construct (hard as that effort might prove) a profile of the main shades of
thinking and sensibility which trigger specific (more often than not, ideological)
codifications characteristic of the sociolinguistics-linked process of stylistic demotion
and promotion, as it is expressed through the offensive and derogatory vs. the euphemistic
terms, respectively; this path could lead to fruitful developments for the sociolinguistic
research of Romanian itself.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Collins English Dictionary and Thesaurus, © HarperCollins Publishers, 1992
HRISTEA, Theodor, Probleme de cultivare şi de studiere a limbii române contemporane,
Academia Universitară Athenæum, Bucureşti, 1994
MANEA, Constantin, MANEA, Maria-Camelia, PC Vocabulary and Euphemism in English
and Romanian, in vol. Second International Conference in Sociolinguistics, University
of Craiova, Editura Omniscop, 1999
Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language ©1995 Zane Publishing,
Inc. ©1994, 1991, 1988 Simon & Schuster, Inc.
266
BDD-A15600 © 2010 Editura Presa Universitară Clujeană
Provided by Diacronia.ro for IP 88.99.165.207 (2017-06-17 19:44:59 UTC)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)