Imagery, as a stylistic feature or as a category of stylistics, contains a lot and allows for the vivid representation of culturally significant meanings and values. At the same time, imagery can also play the role of a function enhancer, even for those linguistic units for which it is optional. The imagery of euphemisms, which was the subject of the study, is indicative in this regard. Euphemisms containing imagery are figurative euphemisms. In order to clarify the key concept of ‘figurative euphemism’ and to determine the characteristics and properties of figurative euphemisms from a linguocultural perspective, a set of methods was used. The leading method was descriptive and analytical, and comparative analysis was also used. In addition, contextual analysis was used to correctly identify euphemisms, and a survey of representatives of different linguistic cultures and ethnic groups was conducted to obtain relevant research material. Scientific novelty is determined not only by the diversity of the material studied (the survey covered 17 countries: Russia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Angola, Mozambique, Guinea-Bissau, the Republic of Guinea, Benin, Mali, Niger, Cameroon, the Republic of Congo, France, Laos, Cambodia), but also by the identification of a new principle for classifying euphemisms, according to which euphemisms are divided into figurative and non-figurative. It is argued that the imagery of euphemisms is created by tropes and figures. The transfer of figurative euphemisms to another sociocultural reality occurs as a result of the acceptance of transferable images; otherwise, they are rejected or transformed. The results of the study are of practical importance for intercultural communication. It is argued that the literal translation of figurative euphemisms deactivates their key function in a new language if linguocultural, national and linguistic factors are not taken into account.
Marianna Ivanovna Zvereva (2025) studied this question.