Sensitive Areas of Language: Taboos and Euphemization of the Concept of “Woman” in English, Russian and Kazakh Linguistic Cultures

The article explores the linguistic mechanisms of tabooing and euphemization associated with the concept of “woman” in Kazakh, Russian, and English. The relevance of this topic lies in the fact that gender-marked vocabulary intersects with cultural prohibitions, etiquette norms, and cognitive schemas that influence the choice of speech strategies. Thus, studying the ways in which women’s physiological, age-related, and social realities are named and replaced, allows us to clarify the interaction between language, culture and thought. The purpose of the study is to identify the semantic, cognitive and pragmatic parameters of euphemistic and tabooed units in a comparative aspect. The work includes the following areas: analysis of lexico-semantic models of euphemization, reconstruction of frames and cultural scenarios, comparison of literary and corpus material, identification of universal and specific strategies in three linguistic cultures. The novelty of the research is determined by the combination of cognitive-framework analysis with corpus and discourse methodologies, as well as a focus on women’s issues as a sensitive linguistic and cultural area. The material includes literary texts J. Steinbeck’s “Of Mice and Men”, M. Bulgakov’s “The Master and Margarita” (“Мастер и Маргарита” ), and A. Nurpeissov’s “Blood and Sweat” (“Қан мен тер”), corpus resources (BNC, COCA, NCRL, National Corpus of the Kazakh language). It has been established that English predominantly uses metaphorization and periphrases (for example, expecting, those days ), while Kazakh demonstrates socio-role and etiquette strategies (e.g. аяғы ауыр, ұятты сөз ). In both languages, euphemization is particularly active in the domains of physiology, age, and social roles. The results obtained confirm both the universality of the physiological content delineation and the cultural specificity of the methods of speech euphemization. The practical significance is related to the possibility of using data in intercultural communication, teaching foreign languages, lexicography, translation studies, and NLP tasks for processing sensitive vocabulary.

1. Abdimaulen, G., Sagidolda, G., Zhylkybay, G., Adilova, G., Serikbayeva, A. (2022) Representation of the Concepts "Man/Woman" in the Kazakh and English Proverbs. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research. Vol. 5. No.5. Pp. 1553-1561. DOI: 10.47191/ijsshr/v5-i5-02. (in English)

2. Biber, D. (1993) Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing. Vol. 8. No.4. Pp. 243-257.

3. Elubaj, A., Sarseke, G. (2023) Qazaq zhane turik maqal-matelderindegi “ajel” konceptisin lingvomadeni zertteu aspektileri. Shoqan Ualihanov atyndagy Kokshetau universitetining habarshysy. Filologija serijasy. No.4. 5-17-bb. [Yelubai, A., Sarseke, G.(2023) Aspects of linguocultural research of the concept of "woman" in Kazakh and Turkish Proverbs. Bulletin of Kokshetau University named after Shokan Ualikhanov. Philology series. No.4. Pp. 5-17. DOI: 10.59102/kufil/2023/iss4pp5-17. (in Kazakh)

4. Guzzetti, M. (2023) Forbidden Words and Female Anatomy: Gender and Language Taboos in the Oxford English Dictionary. LEA – Lingue e Letterature d'Oriente e d'Occidente. Vol. 12. Pp. 137-156. DOI: 10.13128/LEA-1824-484x-14254. (in English)

5. Ismailova, H. (2023) Semantic Changes of English Euphemisms. Journal of Advanced Zoology. Vol. 44. Iss. S-6. 2023. Pp. 1794-1800. (in English)

6. Karabekova, E.A., Nurkaziyeva, A.R. (2024) Gender-Specific Symbolism in Proverbs: A Comparative Study of English, Russian, and Kyrgyz Cultural Perspectives. American Journal of Education and Learning. 2024. Vol. 2. No.5. (in English)

7. Monakhova, E., Yuriyeva, E., Amanzholova, J. (2023) Linguistic Means of Reflecting Gender-Related Changes in Modern Society (Exemplified by English-Language Newspaper Advertisements). E3S Web of Conferences. 2023. Vol. 389. Art. 08004. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202338908004. (in English)

8. Ongarbayeva, G. (2024) Phraseological and Conceptual Representations of “Woman” in Russian, English, and Karakalpak: A Comparative Approach. Theoretical Aspects in the Formation of Pedagogical Sciences. International Scientific Online Conference. 2024. No.3(17). Pp. 17-22. (in English)

9. Ostrosko, D. (2016) Euphemisms and Other Expressions Referring to Tabooed Parts of the Body: Master’s Thesis. Maribor, 375 p. (in English)

10. Ramanova, A.A., Umatova, Zh.M., Abdulmanov, A.A., Uabiyeva, A.A., Kurmanova, Zh.B., Zhumasheva, K.B., Kussainova, D.Zh. (2024) Expressing Gender Opposition in Kazakh Proverbs Through Metaphor. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. 2024. Vol. 14. No.5. Pp. 1308-1317. DOI: 10.17507/tpls.1405.03. (in English)

11. Salata, I. (2020) Tendencies in Using Feminitives in Modern English, Ukrainian, and Russian: Difficulties in Translation. Molodoj Uchenyj. 2020. No.2.1(78.1). DOI: 10.32839/2304-5809/2020-78.1-24. (in English)

12. Sinclair, J. (1991) Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 179 p. (in English)

13. Vakhitova, T., Kuzembayeva, G., Yergazina, A., Zhumakhanova, A., Khairullina, R. (2024) Kazakh and Russian Kinship Terminology: A Comparative Linguistic and Cultural Analysis of Lacunae. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics. Vol. 8. No.1. Pp. 28-43. DOI: 10.32601/ejal.911517. (in English)