Cover not available
Article published In:
Sex, Death & Politics: Taboos in Language
Edited by Melanie Keller, Philipp Striedl, Daniel Biro, Johanna Holzer and Benjamin Weber
[Pragmatics & Cognition 28:1] 2021
► pp. 5–24

Circumnavigating taboos

A functional and formal typology

 | Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich
 | Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich
 | Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich
 | Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich
 | Monash University
This article elaborates on Wolfgang Schulze’s keynote speech of the same title at the 26th LIPP Symposium in Munich in 2019. It is based on the slides from his talk and various teaching materials, of which some figures have been translated from German to English before their inclusion in this article. While this article’s foundation rests on Schulze’s theories and research, we have done our best to build upon his work; direct quotes and key concepts of his will be cited throughout the text. Schulze intended to write this article himself, but after his unexpected passing in early 2020, we decided to offer this contribution on his behalf.
Research on taboo is widely spread across diverse academic disciplines that each attribute slightly, yet noticeably, different meanings to the concept. This article proposes an all-encompassing definition applicable to all socio-cultural contexts. To arrive at this comprehensive understanding, we first briefly survey the history of taboo and its linguistic study. Then, we present a formal and functional typology of circumnavigating taboos, taking into account the concepts of mana and noa as proposed by Schulze (2019: 13, 15, 16). While the specific social restrictions resulting from tabooed relations vary from community to community, the purpose of taboo remains the same: social stability, protection and sustainability. Linguistic taboos contribute to these social functions by restricting the use of certain linguistic signs in certain situations. Such constraints necessitate strategies for avoiding taboo, including articulation shift, lexical substitution and the emergence of special languages, detailed here.
Keywords: typology, taboo, sociology, cognitive linguistics, anthropology, language
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The concept of taboo
  • 3.Form and function of taboos
    • 3.1The social function of taboos
      • 3.1.1Adherence to taboos
      • 3.1.2Taboo breaking
    • 3.2Linguistic taboo and tabooed language use
      • 3.2.1Definition
      • 3.2.2Theoretical perspective
      • 3.2.3Linguistic strategies
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 March 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.00019.bur
References (36)
References
Allan, Keith & Kate Burridge. 2006. Forbidden words: Taboo and censoring of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allan, Keith (ed.). 2019. The Oxford handbook of taboo words and language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burridge, Kate & Réka Benczes. 2019. Taboo as a driver of language change. In Keith Allan (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Taboo Words and Language, 180–199. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, James. 1821a. The three voyages of Captain James Cook round the world: Complete in seven volumes. Vol. V, being the first of the third voyage. London: Hurst, Rees, Orme and Brown. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1821b. The three voyages of Captain James Cook round the world: Complete in seven volumes. Vol. VII, being the third of the third voyage. London: Hurst, Rees, Orme and Brown. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doran, Meredith. 2004. Negotiating between Bourge and Racaille: Verlan as youth identity practice in suburban Paris. In Aneta Pavlenko & Adrian Blackledge (eds.), Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts, 93–124. Bristol: Channel View Publications. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Mary. 1966. Purity and danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Durkheim, Émile. [1897] 1963. Incest: The nature and origin of the taboo. New York: Lyle Stuart.Google Scholar
Frazer, Sir James George. [1890] 1911. The Golden Bough Part II: Taboo and the perils of the soul. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. [1927] 1961. Humor. In James Strachey (ed.), The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XXI (1927-1931): The Future of an Illusion, Civilization and Its Discontents and Other Works, 159–166.Google Scholar
. [1913] 1991. Totem und Tabu: Einige Übereinstimmungen im Seelenleben der Wilden und der Neurotiker. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer-Taschenbuch.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hock, Hans Henrich. 1991. Principles of Historical Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holzknecht, Susanne. 1988. Word taboo and its implications for language change in the Markham family of languages, PNG. Kivung 181. 43–69.Google Scholar
Knipe, Edward & David G. Bromley. 1984. Speak no evil: Word taboos among Scottish fishermen. In Ray Browne (ed.), Forbidden Fruit: Taboos in American Culture, 183–192. Bowling Green: Popular Culture Press.Google Scholar
Korn, Daniel, Charlie Hawes & Mark Radice. 2001. Cannibal: The history of the people-eaters. London: Channel 4 Books.Google Scholar
Kraft, Hartmut. 2004. Tabu, Magie und soziale Wirklichkeit. Düsseldorf: Walter.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin Tolmach. 2000. The Language War. Berkeley: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 1996. On actor-network theory: A few clarifications plus more than a few complications. [URL]. (12 November, 2020.)
Lefkowitz, Natalie. 1991. Talking backwards, looking forwards: The French language game Verlan. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
McWhorter, John. 2016. Euphemise this. [URL] (21 March, 2021.)
Mead, Margaret. 1934. Tabu. The Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 141. 505–512.Google Scholar
OED (The Oxford English Dictionary). 2000. John A. Simpson (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, [URL] (4 November, 2020.)
Osgood, Charles E., George J. Suci & Percy H. Tannenbaum. 1957. The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven. 2002. The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Pizarro Pedraza, Andrea (ed.). 2018. Linguistic taboo revisited: Novel insights from cognitive perspectives. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reutner, Ursula. 2009. Sprache und Tabu: Interpretationen zu französischen und italienischen Euphemismen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. [1916] 1995. Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Éditions Payot & Rivages.Google Scholar
Scholz Williams, Gerhild. 2009. Sensationslust, Tabu und Scham. Öffentlichkeit und Berichterstattung im 17. Jahrhundert: Thurneysser, Pierre de Lancre, Theatrum Europaeum. In Anja Hesse & Hans-Joachim Behr (eds.), Tabu: Über den gesellschaftlichen Umgang mit Ekel und Scham, 75–100. Berlin: Kadmos. [URL] (14 September, 2021.)
Schröder, Hartmut. 1999. Semiotisch-rhetorische Aspekte von Sprachtabus. Erikoiskielet ja käännösteoria. VAKKI:n julkaisut N:o 251. 29–50.Google Scholar
. 2008. Zur Kulturspezifik von Tabus: Tabus und Euphemismen in interkulturellen Kontaktsituationen. In Claudia Benthien & Ortrun Gutjahr (eds.), Tabu: Interkulturalität und Gender, 51–70. München: Wilhelm Fink.Google Scholar
Schulze, Wolfgang. 2009. Sprachtabu. Zur Linguistik des Unsagbaren. [URL] (7 December, 2020).
. 2019. Circumnavigating taboos: A functional and formal typology. [URL]. (12 November, 2020).
Steiner, Franz. 1956. Taboo. London: Cohen & West Ltd.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Druzhinin, Andrey S., Tom Scholte & Tatiana A. Fomina
2024. (Im)politeness mismatches in the multi-dialogic pragmatics of telecinematic satire. Language and Dialogue 14:1 ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Mensah, Eyo, Utomobong Nsebot, Gloria Umukoro & Lucy Ushuple
2024. Smash Her Calabash! The Metaphoric Construction of Phallic Masculinity in the Marketing of Herbal Aphrodisiacs in Nigeria. The Journal of Men’s Studies DOI logo
Ke, Yuguo
2023. Examining simultaneous pausing on the cognitive writing process: a micro-formative writing assessment. Current Psychology DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.