A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF EUPHEMISTIC EXPRESSIONS IN WAR AND CONFLICT RHETORIC
Keywords:
euphemism, war rhetoric, conflict discourse, pragmatics, ideological manipulation, mitigationAbstract
This article explores the pragmatic functions of euphemistic expressions in modern war and conflict rhetoric. Euphemisms are frequently used by political and military leaders to mitigate the brutality of armed conflict, manipulate public perception, and maintain ideological control. Through qualitative analysis of speeches, press briefings, and official statements related to recent military interventions, this study identifies the communicative strategies through which euphemistic language reframes violence, masks responsibility, and legitimises controversial actions. The findings reveal that euphemisms in war discourse serve not only a face-saving role but perform crucial pragmatic acts such as persuasion, justification, mitigation, and manipulation.
References
1. Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (2006). Forbidden Words: Taboo and the Censoring of Language. Cambridge University Press.
2. Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. Routledge.
3. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Longman.
4. Lakoff, G. (1991). Metaphor and War: The Metaphor System Used to Justify War in the Gulf. Journal of Cognitive Semiotics, 2(1), 1–23.
5. Lutz, W. (1989). Doublespeak: From Revenue Enhancement to Terminal Living. Harper & Row.
6. van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. SAGE Publications.
7. Beard, A. (2000). The Language of Politics. Routledge.
8. Jansen, S. C., & Sabo, D. (1994). The Sport/War Metaphor: Hegemonic Masculinity, the Persian Gulf War, and the New World Order. Sociology of Sport Journal, 11(1), 1–17.
9. Hodge, R., & Kress, G. (1993). Language as Ideology (2nd ed.). Routledge.
10. Crystal, D. (2003). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge University Press.
