147 – 159 
21 S TUDIA MYTHOLOGICA SLAVICA 2018
Swearing: Dissolution into 
Nothingness
Saša Babič, Piret Voolaid
In this study we will comparatively analyse swearing material form Slovenian and Esto-
nian language in order to show the lexical and structural similarities/differences between 
swearing and incantations present in the material as to argue that swearing is not only a 
manner to give voice to taboos, but is similar with incantations. The basic premise under-
lying the analysis is the existence of the “go to X” formula found both in the material and 
in the two genres analysed. Place X is the place of origin, non-existence or chaos, where 
the unwanted is sent to. There are more than 50 different variants of “go to X” we can 
detect in both Estonian and Slovenian language; besides we consider the phrases which 
carry the idea to negate someone to somewhere but they are in different formulation.
KEYWORDS: swearing, incantation, folklore, linguistic anthropology
Swearwords are expressions, which are labelled as a bad language with taboo lexis, 
though swearwords do not have literal meaning when used in the swearing expression. 
What we consider of special importance is that swearing is a highly emotive language 
that has been present all through the history, remained in our mental dictionary, therefore 
it can be classified also as part of folklore. Although swearing has been highly ubiquitous 
among humans, this genre was rather neglected as a research topic until recently. In this 
research, we aim to focus on swearing forms, where the speaker sends the listener to 
some place. Analytical material mostly comes from Slovenian language as representative 
of the south Slavic group of languages, and Estonian language, a representative from 
Finno-Ugric group of languages. The linguistic and cultural differences notwithstanding, 
the comparison is we believe possible due to the similar social censorship on swearing 
that these languages and cultures demonstrate: in Slovenian and Estonian languages and 
cultures social censorship on swearing is quite high, documented by the fact that it is not 
desirable to use taboo lexis even in relaxed everyday speech. The comparison between 
two different languages from Indo-European language groups from southern and northern 
part of Europe shows us differentials on different levels: from lexis to the background 
concept of swearing topologies. Looking into the lexis of swearing reveals the concept 
of exorcising person or situation on similar level as incantations try to exorcise evil or 
illness. At the same time, similar concepts to incantations are the ones of order and chaos, 

SAŠA BABIČ, PIRET VOOLAID 148 
origin and emptiness, which are revealed in some forms of swearing. These categories 
show that swearing is not only a manner to give voice to taboos, but is similar with in-
cantations, which implies that commonness and magic, lower and higher, profanity and 
sacred are all in a constant dialogue in its substrata of swearing when we talk about it.
Swearing was neglected part of research for long time, not only that it wasn’t rese-
arched on contemporary levels (in different periods), there even hasn’t been made an 
archive with swearing expressions. Only from 1980s swearing became more visible and 
researchers tried to show different forms and motivations of swearing. For this article 
we are taking in consideration mostly discussions and databases with general view on 
the topic, and specific for Slovenian and Estonian language.
Looking on the international levels, most important and comprehensive works are 
from sociologist Geoffrey Hughes on history of foul language (1998), which is mostly 
discussing English language, later he has written also encyclopaedia of swearing (2006), 
and Magnus Ljung (2011) with cross-cultural linguistic study at different levels of swe-
aring: from lexis to context of use. 
The first Slovenian monograph on the topic was from sociologist Bernard Nežmah’s 
(1997) published PhD, the next monograph considering the topic of swearing among 
other short forms of folklore was published in 2015 by folklorist Saša Babič (2015); 
though lots of material (partly with short discussions on swearing) can be also found in 
other phraseology discussions (Jakop (2005), dialectological dictionaries (Ivančič Kutin 
2007), slang dictionaries (Loog 1991), collections of swearing (Pšajd 2005) or internet 
open dictionaries, where users can contribute the headwords with explanations (http://
razvezanijezik.org/). 
There are some recently done researches on swearwords in Estonia in master degree 
level, e.g. on the use of swear words in Estonian Drama (Sutter 2017), and on the per-
ceiving and translating swear words in audio-visual media (Treiel 2016), otherwise no 
scientific monograph has been published yet on swearing in Estonian language. 
SWEARING IN LANGUAGE
Swearing is quite wide area of expressions bearing variety of functions, from cursing 
someone, or simply filling in a slot in speech or writing, amplifying the speaker’s expressi-
on or expressing his surprise. 
By Ljung’s (2011: 4) definition swearing is:
1. The use of utterances containing taboo words.
2. The taboo words are used with non-literal meaning.
3. Most swearing qualifies as formulaic language.
4. Swearing is emotive language. Its main function is to reflect or seem to reflect the 
speaker’s feelings and attitudes. 

SWEARING: DISSOLUTION INTO NOTHINGNESS 149 
Taboos
1
 are to be found wherever swearing exists, suppression of offensive words or 
euphemistic variations are perennial features (Hughes 2006: xx). According to Hughes 
(2006: 462–463) the term now denotes “any social indiscretion that ought to be avoided” 
and has acquired the modern meaning of ‘offensive’ or ‘grossly impolite’ rather than 
‘strictly forbidden’. Nowadays taboo generally describes the one which is unmentionable 
because, on a hierarchical scale, it is either ineffably sacred, like the name of God, or 
unspeakably vile, like cannibalism or incest. People treat unpleasant word as taboo to the 
extent that everybody else treats it as taboo (Pinker 2007: 357). The use of taboo words 
for matters like excrement, the sex organs or the act of having sex is no doubt offensive 
to many whatever the mood of the speaker, although most swearwords are now usually 
“demystified” into mere forms of words (Hughes 2006: xxiii).
Within European speech communities, swearing and obscenity are not constant in their 
modes, styles and referents; taboo words change with time. Some models of swearing 
appear to be universal, while others are more specific to a culture and period of time; one 
kind of swearing might be present in one culture though absent in another, or be used 
more frequently in different cultures (Nezakat-Alhossaini, Esslami-Rasekh 2013: 518). 
Within speech communities, variants emerge over time on the basis of nationality, class, 
and gender (Hughes 2006: xxi). For most of swearing is characteristic either blasphemy 
(intentional contemptuous use of religious symbols or names) or profanity, which Hughes 
(2006: 31) categorizes most of (probably contemporary) swearing and are also considered 
as part of taboo concepts.
SWEARING AS SPEECH ACT
Sapir (1929) emphasized that language and culture are related and it is not possible to 
understand one without understanding the other. In direct relation to this association 
Austin (1962) and Searle (1969) introduced speech act theory by which they claimed 
that people do not only utter words in terms of grammatical structures and words, but 
they can carry out actions through these utterances. By Austin’s (1962) terminology 
these utterances are performative verbs, which are divided into verdictives, exercitives, 
commissives, behabitives and expositives. Behabitives are related to social behavior and 
include apologizing, congratulating, commending, condoling, cursing, and challenging. 
Therefore, swearwords are speech act, which is categorized as behabitive, especially the 
kinds which send people to other places (go to hell). Although swearing may have the 
form of performative (for example, forms “go to X”) it does not intend to perform as 
action but express feelings. This is due to the fact that cursing utterances are not uttered 
only to insult the addressee, but also to relieve the speakers of anger, in other words, the 
1
 The word ‘taboo’ was brought by explorer Captain James Cook in his Voyage to the Pacific Ocean (1777) 
from the Melanesian languages: it referred to the complex social and anthropological meaning: to physical 
locales that were sacred, set apart for gods, kings, priests, or chiefs, and therefore prohibited for general use; 
in general it significated that a thing is forbidden (Hughes 2006: 462).

SAŠA BABIČ, PIRET VOOLAID 150 
perlocutionary act is not always for the person to whom the curse is directed but for the 
performer. That is why swear words might be understood also as therapeutic act, which 
is obvious especially in traffic (Podjed, Babič 2015).
Swearing is particular type of linguistic behaviour, emotive speech. By Roman Jakobson 
(1960) swearing is part of emotive language: it consists of so-called “emotive or expressive 
function, focused on the addresser, who aims direct expression of the speaker’s attitude 
toward what he is speaking about”. The purely emotive stratum in language is presented 
by the interjections. Also Lyons (1981) classifies swearwords as ‘emotionals’, since they 
do not have any truth value, and when uttered it is not clear whether the punishment called 
is happening or not. These utterances only express emotions, such as anger, surprise, 
fear, sadness, complaint. Cursing and swearing utterances are often directed only towards 
the speaker not the hearer or the addressee (Nezakat-Alhossaini, Esslami-Rasekh 2013: 
518) and are not meant to be insulting, though in argues their only function seems to be 
insulting and therefore general public understands them as insulting utterances.
Speakers give additional emphasis to their speech while swearing, often in combina-
tion with other emphasizing techniques like stress, intonation and tone of voice, not to 
mention non-linguistic phenomena like gestures and facial expressions. The contribution 
of swearing in such situations is the added strength supplied by the taboo words necessary 
for swearing to take place (Ljung 2011: 5). Referring to the context of use: the actual 
choice between anger, surprise and joy can be only made in the individual speech situation 
and sometimes not even then. Addressee makes their own interpretations on the basis 
of linguistic and non-linguistic information as is available to them (Ljung 2011: 23). In 
many languages there seems to be general agreement among the speakers that the most 
typical exponents of swearing are exclamations of irritation, pain or surprise containing 
expletives, and as stressing-the-point.
In this paper we are focusing on the formulaic form of swears and incantations using the 
imperative form of the verb “go to X”, which undeniably indicates focus on the addressee.
This kind of swearwords can be paralleled to one-partite incantations (exorcising form 
without histriola): they include only exorcising of the unwanted person. We can hear this 
kind of swearing most often as a consequence of anger, when we are trying to express 
our emotion obviously with sending a person to exact place. The form is understood 
insulting, though is quite often in use. With focus on “X” i.e. locations, we can link this 
swearing form with incantations: swearing sends the unwanted force/evil/person/part of 
person similarly as incantations exorcises curse or disease. 
METHODOLOGY
The analysis for this research was made on the database of Estonian sayings and phrase-
ologisms (EKFA) which is including also swearing expressions (unfortunately most of 
them are without illustrating context), and archive of Institute of Slovenian Ethnology for 
Slovenian material (created in 2010 with material, collected mostly from live communication 

SWEARING: DISSOLUTION INTO NOTHINGNESS 151 
and media by Saša Babič). Firstly, were selected units with the form “go to X” and then the 
forms which indirectly send addressee to other places (in passive form, as to be taken there). 
Material was categorised into three major groups for easier interpretation, which follows. 
INCANTATIONS VS. SWEARWORDS
Already Hughes (1991: 4) linked swearing with spell, incantation and the curse as: “/…/ 
forms seeking to invoke higher power to change the world or support the truthfulness of 
a claim”. The same as incantation
2
 is communicative form between conjurer and impure 
forces, with which the conjurer sends messages, is demanding or sending demon forces 
or evil to go away (Radenković 1982: 8; Kropej 2009: 145), swearing is doing similarly 
with the person with whom speaker does not agree. Forms “go to X” chase or send pe-
ople to the places where they came from or where nothing exists, like in an example of 
Slovenian incantation against curse: 
Pojdite vsi vsi hudi uraki / V te visoke gore, strme pečine, / Kjer nobeden človek 
ne prebiva, / Nobena človeška noga ne hodi, / Tam naj bo vase pribežališče 
[Go, all all bad spells/Into these high mountains/steep cliffs/where no human 
lives/No man’ s foot walks/There should be your home (literal translation)] 
(Dolenc 1999: 102).
We can see a similar tendency in the Estonian material in the form of different incan-
tations where Devil is sent to X (e.g. to physical places, nature):
Kurat mingu koplesse, üle aia uppa. / Taha tare tatresse, saadan saba 
metsa, pagan mingu pajusse. [Devil should go to the pasture, over the 
fence into the beans, behind the house into the buckwheat, devil should 
go into the willows]
3
There are also texts about cursing diseases, for example erysipelas was cured by the 
healer by stroking it gently and saying:
Ühest kurjast oled tulnud, aga üheksakümne üheksa kurja sisse mine tagasi. 
/ Üle üheksa jõe, üle üheksa mere ja sealt iialgi tagasi ära tule! [You have 
come from one evil, but you go back to ninety nine evils / Over nine rivers, 
over nine seas and don't ever come back from there!] (Kõiva 2011: 235)
2
 Incantations are words and rituals with healing function or to expel the evil (spell, curse, disease) away. It 
forms ritual with words, magic objects and fixed moves, fixed time, and often also a place of ritual. The exorcist 
demands an illness or the spell to go away. The ritual is supposed to have magical power which effect on a 
person and his/her surroundings (nature); its practical realization is usually individual. The words of incantations 
most often stay secret.
3
 Witchcraft words come from Jakob Hurt's collection from 1895, H III 25, 302 (13).

SAŠA BABIČ, PIRET VOOLAID 152 
Similarly, as headache or stomach-ache is result of curse and needs to be expelled with 
incantation, it can be interpreted for swearing with the form “go to X”: as it is also seen 
from phraseology (ta paneb mu pea valutama (Est.) / glava me boli od njega (Slo.) [he 
makes me headaches]; teeb mu südame pahaks/ajab oksele (Est.) / želodec se mi obrača 
ob njem (Slo.) [makes me sick/to vomit]), a person can “make somebody a headache” 
or “somebody makes one’s stomach twist/the thought of somebody makes one sick”, 
similarly as when curse is put over somebody. People with curse over them had heada-
che or they felt sick; these were problems which were often healed with incantations. 
Swearing
4
 with the structure “go to X” expells that person as the evil that comes along. 
Function in swearing is close to incantation – the person is expelled as a demon: we are 
so sick of our interlocutor, that we wish he/she wouldn’t exist (Nežmah 1997: 131), and 
that the listener would vanish. That is why the person is to be exorcised. And speaking 
the wish out is at the same time insult for the listener and catharsis for speaker; therefore, 
it is positioned on the border of acceptance. 
PLACES OF DISSOLUTION
The adverbial slot in the phrase ‘go to X’ may be filled in by variety of expressions, all 
having different connotations through time, though they are connected with chaos, where 
nothing living exists or the place of origin to return the evil back from where it came 
(the spells are also expelled with counting back, but it does not emerge in swearwords).
In swearing we can divide three major groups of mentioned places to which one 
expels another person:
I. places linked with religion and supernatural;
II. sexual and reproductive organs as place of extinction;
III. places signified by non-taboo expressions that connote taboo words. 
I.
First group of swearing with using religion and supernatural concepts are used from “ce-
lestial swearing”, which is linked to the notion of the incorrect use of God’s name: For 
example: Bog te nima rad (Slov.) [God doesn’t love you]; bog daj, da bi crkno gnes [God 
give, that you’d die today]; jumal kuradi sind (Est.) [God damn you] etc.; in Christian 
cultures there is also taboo against infernal swearing, probably in all likelihood as instance 
of ‘word magic’ (Ljung 2011: 6), for exapmle: naj te vrag (Slo.) [let the devil take you]. 
Places mentioned from religion and supernatural concepts in “go to X” swearing 
are either from pagan religion (mostly in dialects (Pšajd 2005: 57) or Christian religion. 
4
 Slovenian preklinjati ‘to swear’ (and similarly in other South Slavic languages) originates from old church 
Slavic language klęti which is supposed to come from Indo-European root *kleh1- with the meaning ‘yell, 
shout, sound, resound’. 
Estonian vanduma ’to swear’ is based on Baltic-Finnic word stem. Rough equivalents in various contexts are 
also tõotama, lubama; kiruma, siunama, kirumissõnu lausuma.

SWEARING: DISSOLUTION INTO NOTHINGNESS 153 
But no matter which religion is taken, the place mentioned is always place where (supposed 
to) no human soul lives, which is conceptually linked to the place of chaos, like hell or 
devil as metonymy of hell: pojdi k hudiču (Slo.), mene helvettiin (Fin.), mine pőrgusse / 
mine Ellvetsi (Est.), minge kuradile (Est.) [Go to the devil/hell]. Persons in these utterances 
are expected to be active as we send them to go there by themselves. The other way to 
express the same is just making person passive and devil or negative supernatural being 
takes the person or gives her/him fatal strikes, like: Da bi te hudič! (Slo.) [Let the devil 
hit you!]; Perün
5
 aj te vdari (Slo.) [Let Perun strike you]; Svarun
6
 te fčesni (Slo.) [let 
Svarun strike you]; gron
7
 v tebe fčesni¸gron v tebej vstreli (Slo.) [let the thunder hit you], 
kurat võtaks (Est.) [devil may take you]. These forms do not have the structure “go to X”, 
never-the-less conceptual background of it is the same. This swearing makes the person 
passive, but receiving the same punishment of expulsion. When the negative supernatural 
being harms the person, it also takes one’s soul to the land of chaos. Therefore, also this 
kind of swearing metaphorically takes unwanted person to the land of chaos.
Places, mentioned in swearing, which remained from pagan religion, are places 
where curses were exorcised, like woods in: mine metsa (Est.) [go to the forest], mene 
metsään (Fin.) [go to the forest] or even the emptiness mine tühja kätte [go into empti-
ness] (Est.) or kas või tühi võtaks (Est.) [Emptiness may take you], mene tyhjäksi (Fin.) 
[go into emptiness], mine soo peale / mine lauki (go to the swamp), mine seenele [go to 
pick mushrooms]. What is obvious is that Estonian language managed to keep pagan 
concept of places where nothing living with soul exists in swearing, while south Slavic 
languages kept only some pagan gods in dialect swearing and even there it is quite rare; 
though with naming pagan gods we can predict also some places. 
As an expression of transformation and sending the person to outer world are also 
swearwords with mentioning the hardest diseases. These swearwords are nowadays 
extremely rare, most often found only in archives, like Da bi te kuga! / Kuga te poberi! 
(Slov.) [I wish the plague would kill you!]
8
; katk sind võtaks (Est.) [Plaque would take 
you!] These utterances directly wish person a horrible death and transformation. 
II.
The group of swearing, where violated taboos are from non-religious world are different: 
non-religious taboo is restricted to words considered to be vulgar and/or embarrassing, 
typically vernacular words for excrement, sexual intercourse and various other sexual 
practices regarded as deviant and the sexual organs (Ljung 2011: 7). This swearing uses 
vulgar names for genital parts, which are by itself part of taboo topics. Words for places 
in these swearing gained vulgar connotations through time. For example, pizda which is 
5
 Perun is pagan Slavic god of thunder, lightening and war; he was the main god in Slavic mythology (Kropej 
2008: 46)
6
 Svarun is pagan Slavic god; father of Svarožič, persumably god of sun (Ovsec 1991: 123).
7
 Grom
8
 In Polish it is still often to say Cholera! in the meaning of swearword [Damn you] nowadays. There cannot 
be found anything similar in contemporary South Slavic languages, and even the archival material brings only 
plaque.

SAŠA BABIČ, PIRET VOOLAID 154 
present in all Slavic languages, is from old Slavic word for uterus, but it gained vulgar 
connotation (only in Russian where it kept some of primary meaning and function of 
naming); kurac is the old version of name for rooster in south Slavic languages; jebati 
originates from the naming of sexual intercourse, but the connotation previously wasn’t 
marked so heavily etc. Similarly, in Estonian where, for example, word munn [penis] 
comes from Uralic root variant muna [egg]. Anyhow, besides that this lexis is part of 
taboo topics, it cannot be ignored that all of this lexis is direct origin of person’s life.
Sexual organs are the very beginning of human physical existance, and if someone is 
sending the other into these same organs (with emphasizing of parents, especially ‘mother’: 
pejt v pizdo materno [go to mother’s cunt]), mine putsi / mine vittu (Est.) [go to cunt], 
pejt v kurac (Slo.) [go into cock], mine munni (Est.) [go into cock] it is obvious that the 
concept behind the swearing is sending the unwanted (person, behaviour of person etc.) 
back to where it came from. This swearing came into use more often in 20
th
 century, not 
before. It seems that with growth of atheism also physical origin became more relevant 
as taboo concept, used in free speech.
Connection with incantations can be found in mentioning number three, which 
is (especially in South Slavic swearing) also often used swearwords for the rising 
of expressivity. Number three is mythological number and has important value in 
different religions, beliefs, also in folklore material like fairy tales and incantations. 
Incantations often chase disease or curse with mentioning the number three: repeating 
the same words three times or even repeating the whole incantation three times (often 
in Slovenian incantations against curse). Utterances like pojdi v tri pičke materine 
(Slo.) [go into three mother’s cunts] are obviously oxymoron, but it seems that the 
number gives them bigger value. Though, we can never hear any other number in these 
collocations, but three. 
III.
Group of euphemisms uses words which are not taboo. Used words are either from con-
ceptually linked words with ‘to sober someone’ or ‘to get someone smarter’, or they are 
just replacing the original taboo word with similarly sounding word, irony of the original 
or some other choice.
Euphemisms that send person to make something which would make her/him to 
come to her/his sense, are in southern Slavic languages conceptually linked with salt: 
pojdi se solit
9
 (Slo.) [Go, salt yourself!]. The other way to sense someone is linked with 
bumping into head, which might sober one’s mind: Zaleti se nekam! (Slo.) [Go and bump 
into something].
These units don’t send the person to go to its origin or to chaos, just to perform (active) 
action that would clear one’s mind. Therefore, cannot be conceptually linked with extor-
ting in incantations; though even these euphemisms send addressees to make something.
9
 Salt is conceptually linked with wisdom in South Slavic languages, which is seen from phrasemes like: ne 
imeti niti trohice soli v glavi (Slov.) [not to have even a bit of salt in one’s head]; Ne soli mi pamet! (Mkd.) 
[Don’t salt my wisdom]

SWEARING: DISSOLUTION INTO NOTHINGNESS 155 
Other subgroup of euphemisms with keeping the formula “go to X” is keeping the 
same form of swearword; just the taboo word is replaced, like pejt v tri krasne/tri pirovske 
(Slo.) [go to three beautiful/three beer(-ish)], pojdi v pisarno (Slo.) [go to the office]
10
. 
Choice of replacing word is of different reason, some are just sounding similarly to the 
taboo word or have similar beginning or just the shortenage of taboo word is used (pojdi 
v pičko : pojdi v piiii* : pojdi v pisarno (Slo.) [go to mother’s cunt: go to cuuu* : go to 
office]). Euphemisms are of most variant lexis which can contain also some kind of irony 
in background, like pojdi v tri krasne (Slo.) [Go into three beautifuls], pojdi v tri pomu-
čkane marjetice (Slo.) [go into three squashed daises]. Vulgar word for penis, ie. kurac, 
is often replaced with word klinc [small spike] or just shortened to k***. Often heard 
euphemism in Slovenian is also pojdi nekam [go somewhere], in which we are sending 
person to indefinite place or we cannot determine what the place of dissolution might be. 
Estonian replaces taboo words either with descriptions of the untold, like Mine kassi 
saba alla (Est.) [Go under the tail of cat] or with sending the person far out Mine kuu peale 
(Est.) [go to the moon], even with joking version Mine kuu peale kurke soolama (Est.) 
[go to the moon to salt cucumbers]
11
 which is not connected to religious world neither 
to the origin. The euphemism that cannot be tracked in Slovenian is mine pane ennast 
põlema [Go burn yourself], which could be relict of the times of inquisition (in 17
th
 and 
18
th
 century). Conceptually the euphemism sends addressee to hell, and the change of 
word might seemly soften the expression, but it still strongly carries the original meaning.
Link to incantations with number three is often also in euphemisms with replacing 
words that are phonetically somehow similar to original taboo words (pojdi v tri pomu-
čkane marjetice (Slo.) [go into three squashed daisies]) or Mine kus kolmat (kao kus 
kolmkümmend) (Est.) [Go where is three / Disappear where is thirty]), where is obvious 
ellipsis.
CONCLUSION 
All languages have words for strongly expression of disagreement or for emphasizing 
the content. It is not surprising that these words are from taboo lexis, which violates 
communication rules: with using taboo lexis one gains attention, and at the same time 
these lexis has catharsis effect (Ljung 2011; Podjed, Babič 2015). This phenomenon is 
10
 Some euphemisms, like the one, can be found only in some internet sources (like in open dictionaries: http://
razvezanijezik.org/) and we cannot find them in other language corpuses. We predict very limited use of them 
and creative solutions how people substitute swearwords.
11
 There are plenty of funny protective formulas in Estonian material that seem to be quite new material:
mine perse kui peegel, tule välja kui neeger, oled sitaga koos kui mustikamoos [go to ass as mirror and come 
out as negro, you are covered with shit as blueberry jam], käi perse kui tuul, vahi välja kui ahv [go to ass as 
wind and watch out as monkey].
There are also lots of creative constructions in Estonian with repartees or responds how to answer when some-
body was sent by somebody to somewhere. Sometimes the answers can be very absurd and funny: 
Mine perse! - Kas see on sul kummist? [Go to ass – Is it made from gum?]; Mine ära! – Ise oled mära [Go 
away – You are the mare] etc.

SAŠA BABIČ, PIRET VOOLAID 156 
most obvious in swearing. Swearing has in all time periods used words which were from 
taboo lexis. With using concepts and words in forbidden context, the content gained 
extra expressivity. Although swearing is violating communication manners rules and 
taboos against the use of holy names and referents (Hughes 2006: xvii), it remained in 
our languages. With researching the swearing material from different time periods and 
places, we can grasp deeper levels of society. 
Analysis of Slovenian and Estonian swearing with form “go to X” showed not only 
that this material preserved some pagan gods and concepts of sacred places (Svarun, 
Perun, concept of forest, swamp mountains etc.), which are not living in religious context 
anymore, but also the concepts of places, where (wo)man does not live, and places of 
chaos and emptiness, which can also be linked with incantations. Looking at this forms of 
swearing makes clear that it is similar to incantations, i.e. words and rituals to expel the 
evil, also curse among it. Incantations send curse into emptiness or its origin. Similarly, 
swearwords with formula “go to X” send another person into his/her origin (inherent with 
physical conception), or into chaos, which is conceptually fitting hell or devil’s place. 
At the same time, it reveals different concept of human origin and existence: when 
the religion and god were on pedestal and higher forces gave life to human being, the 
worst violation was mentioning god and devil in swearing. With sending someone to 
hell one was vanished into chaos and devastation. With acceptance that human being is 
originated in human body with sexual intercourse and accepting the world of intimacy as 
important part of human existence, swearing gained lexis from the field of reproductive 
and intimate organs and sexual intercourse. Sending the person back into mother’s uterus 
or even further, into penis (which would be pre-conception period, pre-existence), can 
show us only the concept of aiming to negate the existence of that person.
In both cases utterances with the form “go to X” deal with person’s origin, birth, 
existence, trying to negate it or to break it off, as if the “persecuted person” was the evil, 
curse which has overflown one’s life and needs to be expelled: we are exorcising the 
person, trying to negate her/him. With his/her extinction, our headaches and sickness 
would vanish; our life would become nicer and calmer. In these swearwords person can 
be expelled either to the place where no (religious/Christian) soul exists, like hell, or into 
one’s conception origin with the thought that if he/she hadn’t even been born, if he/she 
returned back to cunt or dick, wherever he/she came from, life would gain colours again 
(Nežmah 1997: 131). Therefore, these places, either places of non-existence or places 
of origin, have the function of places of dissolution. Both concepts of these places are 
sending one into nothingness, non-existence: where nothing living exists, when a person 
was still nothing for our culture. What becomes obvious is the fact that in both concepts 
– religious of physical – places of dissolution are directly connected with the concept 
of our existence and socialisation. Swearwords with form “go to X” try to negate our 
existence either way. 
Connection with incantations can be found also in mentioning number three, which 
is also often used swearwords and euphemisms for the rising of expressivity. Number 
three is mythological number and has important value in different religions, beliefs, also 
in folklore material like fairy tales and incantations. Incantations often chase disease or 

SWEARING: DISSOLUTION INTO NOTHINGNESS 157 
curse with repeating the same words three times or even repeating the whole incantation 
three times. Utterances with mentioning number three are obviously oxymoron, but it 
seems that the number gives them bigger value. 
Euphemisms are of two kinds: one group only replaces taboo words with phonetically 
somehow related words, which have often some different meanings. These swearwords 
show us that swearing is linguistic expression with special function of higher expression of 
intense emotions, but are usually not taken literally. The form “go to X” is so meaningful 
by itself that even other lexical elements cannot change the function of the utterances and 
the original taboo word can be traced back. That is why even the concept of this group 
stays unchanged: to negate person or to expel him/her.
Another group of euphemisms has changed the concept of negating the person into 
sending him/her to come to his/her sense either with metaphor of “salting”, i.e. making 
one smarter, or with sudden shock of the hit/punch (zaleti se nekam (Slo.) [hit yourself 
somewhere]). These utterances changed the concept from sending person into chaos 
to get the punishment or send the person to pre-existing forms and places into almost 
positive wish for someone to ‘become smarter’, which could be interpreted as transition 
into another state of mind.
Swearwords are taken as collocations, phrasemes and their function is on the first 
place, no matter the lexical filling. Even if taboo words were replaced by another, socially 
acceptable words, still all speakers could recognize their function and the utterances as 
swearing. As swearwords are mostly taken as socially judged utterances, even if they give 
more expressiveness to the content are not desired in communication. In official language 
swearwords are even forbidden in terms of collective agreement. But even though the 
usage of swearing remains high, many people use it as “ready-made expressive tool”, 
not even thinking about the concept behind it. The acceptance of swearing utterances 
in unofficial language bases mostly only on the (un)usage of taboo words, not on the 
concept behind it, which brings contradictory situations that it’s better to say Pojdi v tri 
pomučkane marjetice [go into three squashed daises], which just covers true concept of 
negating someone Pojdi v tri pizde materine [go to three mother’s cunts], than pojdi se 
solit [go, salt yourself], which sends someone to come to his/her sense.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Research for this article was supported by the Centre of Excellence in Estonian Studies 
(CEES, European Regional Development Fund) and is related to research projects IUT 
22-5 (Estonian Research Council) and Mobilitas Pluss Postdoctoral Researcher Grant 
MOBJD33. The authors wish to thank dr. Aleksandar Takovski for detailed pre-reading 
and useful suggestions, Mare Koiva and Reet Hiiemäe for help with Estonian incantation 
material, and the anonymous reviewers for the valuable comments.

SAŠA BABIČ, PIRET VOOLAID 158 
REFERENCES
Austin, John Langshaw 1962: How to do things with words. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. (http://
pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/item/escidoc:2271128/component/escidoc:2271430/aus-
tin_1962_how-to-do-things-with-words.pdf (15. 03. 2018).)
Babič, Saša 2015: Beseda ni konj. Estetska struktura slovenskih folklornih obrazcev. Ljubljana: 
Založba ZRC, ISN ZRC SAZU.
Dolenc, Milan 1999: Zagovori v slovenski ljudski medicini ter zarotitve in apokrifne molitve. 
Ljubljana: DZS.
Hughes, Geoffrey 2006: An Encyclopedia of Swearing. The Social History of Oaths, Profanity, 
Foul Language, and Ethnic Slurs in the English-Speaking World. London and New York: 
Routledge. 
Jakop, Nataša 2005: Pragmatična frazeologija. Ljubljana: ZRC, ZRC SAZU.
Jay, Timothy 2009. The Utility and Ubiquity of Taboo Words. – Association for Psychological 
Science 4, 153-161. Jay, Timothy 2000. Why We Curse: A Neuro-Psycho-Social Theory 
of Speech. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Kropej, Monika 2008: Od ajda do zlatoroga. Slovenska bajeslovna bitja. Celovec, Ljubljana, 
Dunaj: Mohorjeva.
Kropej, Monika 2009: Slovenian Charms Between South Slavic and Central European Tradition. In: 
Charms, Charmers and Charming. International Research on Verbal Magic (ed. J. Roper). 
New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Pp. 145–162.
Kõiva, Mare 2011. Eesti loitsud [Estonian Incantations]. Tallinn: Kirjastus Pegasus.
Ljung, Magnus 2011: Swearing. A cross-cultural linguistic study. New York: Palgrave Macmillam. 
Loog, Mai 1991. Esimene eesti slängi sõnaraamat [First Estonian Slang Dictionary]. Tallinn: Mai 
Loog.
Kutin Ivančič, Barbara 2007: Slovar bovškega govora. Ljubljana: ZRC, ZRC SAZU.
Lyons, John 1981: Language and Linguistics. An Introduction. Berkley: Cambridge University Press.
Nezakat-Alhossaini, Marzieh and Abbass Esslami-Rasekh 2013: “May bread run and you run after 
it”: the function of cursing in Persian. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 70.. Pp. 
517–525. (Doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.089)
Nežmah, Bernard 1997: Kletvice in psovke. Ljubljana: Nova revija. 
Ovsec Damjan J. 1991: Slovanska mitologija in verovanje. Domus, Ljubljana.
Podjed Dan, Babič, Saša 2015: Crossroads of anger: tensions and conflicts in traffic. Ethnologia 
Europaea : journal of european ethnology 45/2. Pp. 17–33.
Pšajd, Jelka: Še zdaj, n ate sveti den, moreš Preklinjati? Psovke in kletvice iz Pomurja in Porabja. 
Murska Sobota, Ljubljana: Pokrajinski muzej & ZRC, ZRC SAZU.
Sapir, Edward 1921: Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace. 
Internet: http://www.ugr.es/~fmanjon/Sapir,%20Edward%20-%20Language,%20An%20
Introduction%20to%20the%20Study%20of%20Speech.pdf (15. 03. 2018).
Searle, John R. 1969: Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Berkley: Cambridge 
University Press.
Sutter, Kadi 2017, „Sellist sõna sinu suust mina seltskonnas ei talu!“. Vandesõnade kasutamisest 
eesti algupärase näitekirjanduse põhjal. Magistritöö [“I Shall Not Permit This Kind of 
Language in Polite Company!”: On the Use of Swear Words in Estonian Drama: Master 
Thesis]. Tallinn: Tallinn University.

SWEARING: DISSOLUTION INTO NOTHINGNESS 159 
Treiel, Liis 2016. Vandesõnade tõlkimine ja tajumine audiovisuaalses meedias. Magistritöö [Perceiving 
and translating swear words in audiovisual media. Master Thesis]. Tallinn: Tallinn University.
Internet databases 
EKFA = Baran, Anneli & Hussar, Anne & Õim, Asta & Õim, Katre (comps.) Eesti kõnekäändude ja 
fraseologismide andmebaas 1998–2005. [Database of Estonian Sayings and Phraseologisms 
1998–2005.] Internet: http://www.folklore.ee/ justkui (15. 03. 2018). 
Razvezani jezik. Prosti slovar žive slovenščine [Untightened language. Open dictionary of live 
Slovenian language]Internet: http://razvezanijezik.org/ (15. 2. 2018)
PREKLINJANJE: IZNIČENJE V PRAZNINO
Saša BaBič, Piret Voolaid
Kletvice kot ekspresivno sredstvo, zapolnjeno s tabujskim besediščem, v govoru 
velikokrat služijo kot poudarek, terapevtsko sredstvo ali pa kot žalitev – njihova 
funkcija je odvisna od konteksta in udeleženci komunikacije jo razberejo tako 
iz sobesedila kot tudi iz mimike in načina govora. V prispevku so primerjalno 
obravnavane slovenske in estonske kletvice z obliko “pojdi v X”, pri katerih ugo-
tavljava podobnosti z zagovarjalnim obrazcem (predvsem za izganjanje uroka). Z 
vzporejanjem kletvic iz dveh jezikov (slovenskega in estonskega) iz dveh različnih 
jezikovnih skupin (južnoslovanske in baltskofinske) sva prikazali podobnosti 
konceptualnega ozadja te vrste kletvic: prostor X je prostor izvora (religioznega 
ali fizičnega) ali pa neobstoja oz. kaosa, kamor pošljemo neželjeno osebo in jo 
na ta način metaforično izničimo. Očitno se kaže razlika v razumevanju našega 
izvora in bivanja, saj je bilo v času, ko je imela religija večji vpliv na razumevanje 
našega obstoja, glavno tabujsko besedišče vezano na svet religije, v današnjem 
svetu, ko je kot naš glavni izvor dojeto spočetje v telesu, pa na genitalije. Obenem 
se pri tej vrsti kletvic pokaže pomen geografskega prostora v konceptualizaciji 
prostorov: v estonskem jeziku je prostor neobstoja lahko močvirje, gozd, praznina, 
medtem ko v slovenskih kletvicah ni izražen (razviden je le v slovenskih zagovorih: 
visoke planine, globoka morja). V obeh jezikih, tako slovenskem kot estonskem, 
je več kot 50 različnih variant kletvic (vključno z evfemizmi), ki negirajo obstoj 
sogovornika in ga podobno kot urok želijo izničiti. 
Dr. Saša Babič, Research Fellow, Estonian Literary Museum, Vanemuise 
42, 51003 Tartu, Estonia, Sasa.Babic@zrc-sazu.si
Dr. Piret Voolaid, Research Fellow, Estonian Literary Museum, Vanemuise 
42, 51003 Tartu, Estonia, Piret@folklore.ee