• Veronika Katermina Kuban State University, Krasnodar, Russia



euphemism, manipulation, educational process, teacher’s role, student’s personality, pedagogical discourse


Nowadays a language presents a great interest not only as an independent phenomenon but also as a means of communication. In the course of a verbal communication between interlocutors there is an exchange of information as well as a manipulative influence. The latter is one of the main elements of an effective educational process.

Euphemism is a mild or indirect word or expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant. It is the act or an example of substituting a mild, indirect, or vague term for one considered harsh, blunt, or offensive. Euphemisms with communicative function of evasiveness, politeness, and concealing, play dual parts in everyday social lives.Euphemism, a kind of polite language, can combine the teachers’ role and the students’ personalityfactors together.

A verbal manipulation made by a teacher-manipulator with the help of euphemisms promotes improvement and an effective transformation of all the components moving an educational process forward. It regulates a positive interpersonal communication between a teacher and a student as well as within the class; it influences the work with the educational material and its further presentation; it creates a favourable working atmosphere during the lesson.


Author Biography

  • Veronika Katermina, Kuban State University, Krasnodar, Russia
    English Philology Department, professor


Holder, R.W. (2003). A Dictionary of Euphemisms. How not to Say What You Mean. Oxford University Press Inc., New York: Crown Publishers, Inc. 312 p.

Katermina, V. (2017).Manipulative Potential of Vocatives in Pedagogical Discourse. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference Society. Integration. Education, Vol.1. Rezekne: Rezeknes Academy of Technologies, pp. 228-237. DOI:

Rowson, H.A. (2002). Dictionary of Euphemisms and Other Doubletalk. New York: Castle Books. 463 p.

Warren, B. (1992). What Euphemisms Tell Us about the Interpretation of Words.StudiaLinguistica. 46/2. P. 128-172.

Williams, J. (1975). Origins of the English language. New York: Free Press. 486 p.

Zhestkova, E (2016). Problem Approach to the Study Literary Subjects in Pedagogical High School. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference Society. Integration. Education, Vol.1. Rezekne: Rezeknes Academy of Technologies, pp. 286-299. DOI:

Карасик, В. И. (2002). Языковой круг: личность, концепты, дискурс. Волгоград: Перемена, 477 с.

Кацев, А. М. (1988). Языковое табу и эвфемия. Ленинград: Изд-во ЛГУ. 80 с.

Ковшова, М. Л. (2007). Семантика и прагматика эвфемизмов. Москва: Гнозис. 320 с.

Леонтьев, А. А. (1999). Психология общения. Москва: Смысл. 365 с.

Михальская, А. К. (1998). Педагогическая риторика: история и теория. Москва:Издательский центр «Академия». 432 с.

Москвин, В. П. (2007). Эвфемизмы в лексической системе современного русского языка. Москва: ЛЕНАНД. 264 с.

Олешков, М. Ю. (2007). Моделирование коммуникативного процесса (на материале устных дидактических текстов). Нижний Тагил: Нижнетагильская гос. соц.-пед. академия, 336 с.

Сеничкина, Е. П. (2006). Эвфемизмы русского языка. Москва: Высшая школа. 151 с.

Суворова, С.Л. (2012). Феноменология исследования понятий «дискурс» и «педагогический дискурс». Вестник ЮУрГУ, № 4. Вып. 15. С. 84-87.

Шейгал, Е. И. (2000). Эвфемизация в политическом дискурсе. Языковая личность: проблемы креативной семантики. К 70-летию профессора И. В. Сетенберг: Сб. науч. тр. Волгоград: Перемена. 280 с.

Шляхов, В.И., Саакян, Л.Н., Толстова, Н.Н. (2013). Иносказания в русском речевом взаимодействии. Москва: Русский язык: курсы. 187 с.

Шмелев, Д.Н. (1997). Эвфемизм. Русский язык: энциклопедия. Москва: Большая рос. энцикл.: Дрофа, 703 с.