THE USE OF EUPHEMISMS IN MODERN POLITICAL DISCOURSE
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article presents the results of research aimed at defining the concept of "euphemism" and its role in modern political discourse. The study of euphemism is an urgent linguistic issue today, however, particular attention is devoted to the study of the phenomenon of euphemization in political discourse. Political euphemisms strongly influence public opinion by highlighting events and actions in a specific light. Official political speeches, as a means of communication between politicians and people, are especially important now during the period of Russian aggression against Ukraine. That is why the study was based on the speeches of three world leaders: U.S. President Joe Biden, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. It is revealed that in the context of the Russo-Ukrainian war, political leaders used euphemisms to downplay or mitigate the seriousness of certain actions or events. The peculiarities of euphemism functioning in contemporary political discourse remain relatively unexplored and require further study and detailed analysis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it