ATLAS OF LANGUAGE

AT-HAR4-0002 · ATLAS 260

Periphrasis

Indirect naming through a descriptive expression.

Part of the subject path Rhetoric and Style

Why is this entry in the Atlas?

F · Figure / procedure R1 · Distinct contribution to understanding

Periphrasis makes naming legible as a selection of properties. A descriptive detour can present a referent under a different aspect without abandoning reference. Unlike euphemism, its defining contribution is not necessarily mitigation but replacing direct designation with a perspectival description.

Colours and admission grounds

The rectangular label identifies the entry function: F – linguistic figure or procedure; A – analytical concept; G – foundational concept; E – selected concrete case. The rounded badge indicates the admission ground: R1 – distinctive contribution; R2 – necessary foundation; R3 – justified illustrative case. This editorial rationale explains the current selection rather than claiming an undocumented original selection history.

Explanation

Periphrasis replaces a direct, usually shorter designation with a descriptive or characterising expression. It may foreground properties, avoid a name, activate shared knowledge, negotiate taboo, or frame a referent solemnly, ironically, or evaluatively. The circumlocution does more than refer at greater length: its selected features determine the aspect under which the referent appears. Comprehension depends on contextual and shared knowledge. The conceptual movement reconstructs the direct designation, identifies the selected properties, and examines which perspective, social consideration, or strategic ambiguity emerges through the indirect route.

Movement of thought

1. The descriptive expression is first connected to its most plausible intended referent. 2. Its component features are tested for identifying force and required cultural knowledge. 3. A direct designation provides comparison for length, tone, and informational weighting. 4. Context shows whether avoidance, praise, irony, euphemism, or riddling effect predominates. 5. Alternative circumlocutions reveal how each selection of features frames the referent differently.

Scientific use case

Rhetoric, onomastics, pragmatics, translation studies, and discourse analysis examine periphrasis through referential knowledge, evaluation, and avoidance. Historical research reconstructs lost allusions and changing taboos.

Example

Instead of naming a city, an essay speaks of “the harbour city where warehouses step down to the water.” The circumlocution identifies and perspectivises at the same time.

Counterexample

A necessary factual description is not periphrasis when it replaces no established or contextually available direct designation. Mere verbosity without an identifiable indirect route of reference is likewise insufficient.

Distinction

Distinguish periphrasis from antonomasia, euphemism, and definition. Periphrasis is descriptive substitute naming generally; antonomasia specialises the exchange between a proper name and a characterising designation.

Effect on thought and perception

Periphrasis slows naming and opens an interpretive detour. It can create vividness, solemnity, and tact, but may also obscure, exclude, or stabilise stereotypical attributes.

Resonance

The name recedes and several properties begin to point together towards the object. Along the detour, recognition already carries an audible stance towards what is named.

Cite this entry

Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Periphrasis“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-HAR4-0002. ATLAS 260, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HAR4-0002

https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HAR4-0002

The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-15. Include your access date for precise references.

Historical background

Bullinger’s entry describes naming through an attribute or expanded description and distinguishes an emphatic circumlocution from an expression chosen to avoid offence. The latter can fall under euphemism in his taxonomy. This distinction reveals that length alone does not identify the communicative operation: a longer phrase can highlight, conceal, dignify or specify. The Atlas should therefore ask what the descriptive route makes salient and what it leaves implicit. The 1898 witness also shows why periphrasis is not simply a stylistic defect. A direct name may identify efficiently while contributing less context, whereas a descriptive substitute can supply an interpretive perspective. Whether that perspective is warranted has to be tested against the referent rather than decided by the elegance of the circumlocution.

How conceptual history changes the analysis

Periphrasis replaces an available name with a descriptive expression; its effect lies in selecting and weighting features, not in multiword form alone.