Euphemisms of Birth and Marriage as Units of Linguacultural Concepts in Old English

The article describes the semantic features of Old English euphemisms for birth and marriage. For the first time, euphemisms denoting sexual relations, pregnancy, and childbirth were described and analyzed based on lexicographic and thesaurus sources of the Old English period. The conceptualization of these taboo phenomena in the Anglo-Saxon period depended on a variety of historical and cultural factors. The concepts of birth and marriage in Old English culture were analyzed based on their stereotypical core and cognitive structure. Euphemistic lexemes were systematized in accordance with their onomasiological features, with contextual uses drawn from the explanatory dictionary of Anglo-Saxon concepts. Metonymic and metaphorical shifts proved to be the most popular euphemization mechanisms, with metonymy being the most productive word-formation method. From a semasiological perspective, these euphemisms are characterized by descriptiveness. A significant predominance of euphemisms for marriage demonstrated a quantitative asymmetry. The research also revealed a gender aspect in the formation of euphemistic lexemes, as well as certain shortcomings in the structure of modern Old English lexicographic sources.

1. Aleksikova Yu. V. Conceptual metaphor as a way of euphemism formation in modern English. Vestnik Tambovskogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki, 2009, (3): 148–154. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/kzjcbr

2. Borisenko T. V. The concept of WIFE in Russian and English linguistic consciousness. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2020, (6): 39–46. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V061

3. Bykova O. I. Secondary conceptualisation and categorisation by means of euphemisms. Cognitive Studies of Language, 2016, (26): 201–203. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/wthlhn

4. Golev N. D. Lexicographizing as a method of describing vocabulary: Revisiting the theoretical legacy of Olga Blinova. Voprosy Leksikografii, 2021, (21): 5–32. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17223/22274200/21/1

5. Grigorieva Yu. S. The evolution of the concepts of cyning and dryhten within the Old English period (based on Old English poetry). Vestnik NSU. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, 2007, 5(1): 74–83. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/hyhzjr

6. Karasik V. I. Regulatory concepts. Language, Consciousness, Communication, eds. Krasnykh V. V., Izotov A. I. Moscow: MAKS Press, 2005, iss. 30, 95–108. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ubcvaz

7. Karasik V. I. Linguacultural concepts: Approaches to study. Sociolinguistics yesterday and today, ed. Troshina N. N. Moscow: INION RAS, 130–159. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/mttzwd

8. Kurganova N. I. Parameters for describing the ethnocultural specificity of concepts in the linguistic consciousness of Russians and French. Language – Semiotics – Culture: Proc. Intern. Sci. Conf., Minsk, 20–21 Nov 2023. Minsk: MSLU, 2024, 65–70. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/gmxhwm

9. Linskaya E. A., Trifonova N. S. The most frequent ways of forming euphemisms as a means of language manipulation in the political discourse of the mass media. Modern paradigms of linguistic research: Methods and approaches: Proc. XVII Intern. Sci.-Prac. Conf., Sterlitamak, 17–18 Nov 2022. Sterlitamak: Sterlitamak branch of UUST, 2022, 118–125. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/okqyij

10. Lunina S. A. Euphemization of death conceptual domain in Old English. SibScript, 2025, 27(1): 34–48. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2025-27-1-34-48

11. Moskvin V. P. Euphemisms: Systemic connections, functions and methods of formation. Voprosy Jazykoznanija, 2002, (3): 58–70. (In Russ.)

12. Peresypkin A. P. The second nomination: New research perspectives. Vestnik Leningradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. A. S. Pushkina, 2012, 1(2): 48–54. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/pjbqfx

13. Proskurin S. G., Proskurina A. V. Duality in language and culture: Values and meta-concepts. SibScript, 2024, 26(1): 37–48. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2024-26-1-37-48

14. Ryabko O. P. Theoretical principles of direct and indirect derivation nomination. The Humanities and Social Sciences, 2018, (6): 258–265. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ystjvr

15. Solodilova I. A., Sokolova T. Yu. Euphemism identification criteria. Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2017, (11): 73–78. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ylqice

16. Uvarova E. A. Semantic mechanism of euphemization. Izvestiya of Tula State University. Humanities, 2010, (2): 452–460. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ndmext

17. Fedoseeva D. A. Cognitive theory of metaphor and an overview of the embodiment approach to cognition (review). Metod, 2017, (7): 306–314. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/zuqlzr

18. Khvostenko A. A. Construction of cognitive models of the affinity terms "wif" and "hūs-bonda" on the material of Old English texts. Cognitive Studies of Language, 2022, (3): 419–421. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/khfbjp

19. Yatsenko M. V. The issues of description of the semantics and conceptosphere in the Old English poetry (on the words denoting "sea"). Three L’s of modern humanities: Linguistics, literary studies, and linguadidactics: Proc. All-Russian Sci.-Prac. Conf., Moscow, 23 Nov 2023. Moscow: MSPU, 2024, iss. 2, 196–200. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ymtpde

20. Brooke C. The Medieval idea of marriage. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991, 325.

21. Cardwell S. Be wifmannes beweddunge: Betrothals and weddings in Anglo-Saxon England. Anglo-Saxon England, 2022, 49: 81–106. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0263675122000126

22. Coleman J. Sexual euphemism in Old English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 1992, 93(1): 93–98.

23. Hartmann R. R. K. Lexicography and its interdisciplinary contacts, with special reference to linguistics and onomasiology. Lexikos, 2005, (15): 70–89. https://doi.org/10.5788/15-0-5

24. Held V. Birth and death. Ethics, 1989, 99(2): 362–388. https://elibrary.ru/hhiitf

25. Hennessey A. M. How childbirth became philosophy’s last taboo. Why do the arts put death before birth? IAI.tv, 10 Aug 2017. URL: https://iai.tv/articles/why-do-the-arts-put-death-before-birth-auid-867 (accessed 10 Aug 2025).

26. Hetherington M. S. Sir Symonds D'Ewes and method in Old English lexicography. Texas Studies in Literature and Language, 1975, 17(1): 75–92.

27. Huff C. Delivery: The cultural re-presentation of childbirth. Prose Studies, 1991, 14(2): 108–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/01440359108586435

28. Jones P. M., Olsan L. T. Performative rituals for conception and childbirth in England, 900–1500. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 2015, 89(3): 406–433. https://doi.org/10.1353/bhm.2015.0076

29. Kārkla Z. Bursting volcano, rushing river and heartbeat monitors: Inscribing subjective experiences of childbirth in contemporary fiction. Subjectivity, 2023, 31(2): 180–194. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41286-023-00172-9

30. Kubánek V. Lexicographic approaches to Old English. Master's thesis. Univerzita Karlova, 2024.

31. Lees C. A. Engendering religious desire: Sex, knowledge, and Christian identity in Anglo-Saxon England. Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, 1997, 27(1): 17–46.

32. Markus M. Terms for pregnancy in the history of English: An onomasiological approach based on the OED. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 2005, 106(1): 7–21.

33. Meyer M. Early Anglo-Saxon penitentials and the position of women. The Haskins Society Journal, 1990, (2): 47–61.

34. Monk C. Defending ‘rihthaemed’: The normalizing of marital sexuality in the Anglo-Saxon penitentials. Selim: Journal of the Spanish Society for Medieval English Language and Literature, 2011, 18: 7–48.

35. Perrone V., Hengchen S., Palma M., Vatri A., Smith J., McGillivray B. Lexical semantic change for Ancient Greek and Latin. Computational approaches to semantic change, eds. Tahmasebi N., Borin L., Jatowt A., Xu Y., Hengchen S. Berlin: Language Science Press, 2021, 287–310.

36. Romano M., Rodríguez A. L. Old English text types: Evidence from the lexis. Atlantis, 1996, 18(1/2): 368–378.

37. Sianturi J. S., Damanik B. A. R. Deconstructing duality: A semiotic analysis of denotative and connotative meanings in common English proverbs. Young Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2025, 1(2): 195–207. https://doi.org/10.66867/yjssh.v1i2.154

38. Strable-Sovers R. Celestial or human childbirth?: Medical and scientific terminology in Anglo-Saxon Marian Texts. Paper presented at The 26th Annual Indiana University Medieval Studies Symposium, Indiana University, 7–8 Mar 2014. https://www.academia.edu/6362477/Celestial_or_Human_Childbirth_Medical_and_Scientific_Terminology_in_Anglo_Saxon_Marian_Texts (accessed 10 Aug 2025).