Taboo replacements

[Steve Gustafson]

Robert Whiting wrote:

>The classic example of this (hunting-taboo replacement by a more
>general word) is often taken from English "deer", originally the
>general Germanic word for 'wild animal' (cf. Ger. "Tier") which
>by being used as a euphemism for the hunted animal has come to be
>specialized in that meaning, with the original meaning being
>taken up by loanwords ("animal, beast").

I suppose the question is, what justifies calling any of these processes a
'taboo?'  I can think of few literary or historical sources suggesting that
the "hart" --- a word which, of course, was still current in Shakespeare's
and King James' English, and thanks to literary preservation, remains
understood today --- was an object of particular reverence, awe, terror, or
disgust, so that the -vox propria- became somehow too hallowed for everyday
use, or too indecent.  This would be an excellent test for the hypothesis,
in that it took place during recorded history, among literate people, whose
religious and social customs are set forth in many sources.

-Taboo- has a relatively specific meaning in cultural anthropology; does
this linguistic process fit that definition?  If 'hart' became the object of
a -taboo- they're likely to explain it somewhere.  After all, they -do-
offer us clues as to why -thou- became obsolete.  (Whether those reasons are
properly called a 'taboo' are another matter; the point is, they dropped the
pronoun for a reason, which is explained for us.)

---
With wind we blowen; with wind we lassun;
With weopinge we comen; with weopinge we passun.
With steringe we beginnen; with steringe we enden;
With drede we dwellen; with drede we wenden.
                                  ---- Anon, Lambeth Ms. no. 306