What Euphemisms Tell Us About the Interpretation of Words*

Abstract. In the last decade or so, linguists of different persuasions have found the assumption that words have fixed meanings unsatisfactory. Word meanings, it is suggested, are dynamic and negotiable. The present article addresses the question of how we go about negotiating word meanings. It is assumed that the meaning of a content word will have some features of meaning which fix reference and connect a word‐form with a class of referents. If, in a particular context, we connect a word‐form with some referent which we see as a member of a set of referents which does not coincide with the set of referents that we assign the word in question out of context, the class‐distinctive features of the members of the contextually induced set automatically become features of meaning and we have created a novel contextual meaning. The question then arises: under what circumstances are we willing to link a word with a novel category of referents. It will be revealed that we accept a word as adequately used provided it implies the new type of referent or constitutes a description of it.