Loss

To start my presentations, I generally start out with an activity on euphemisms. We don't even realize all the ways we avoid saying death from day to day. This past presentation, I started out with an interactive word cloud activity. I THINK you can se the results if you follow this link: https://www.mentimeter.com/s/05c075030ac0b8df2accae4119d9a3d3/1b813080d118

Euphemisms are used in many languages, but English has so many bloody other terms... I did a quick informal poll during my session with the francophones. In French we’d say the “M” words (mourir, mort), but there are a few others: decéder, perdu. 

So 'perdu' is used in French and 'lost' in English. Interesting. 

I wonder when those terms first came into use in the sense of death? It’s not like we’re going to find the person again... at least not in the literal sense. And those who believe in an afterlife wouldn’t necessarily connect with an idea of ‘loss’ I don’t think... Someone who prescribes to a strong religious context would more likely believe they know where a loved one has gone, and have promise to see that individual again. 

So why loss? 

Really, even the relationship isn’t lost. It can be said to have been terminated or changed (depending on personal constructs - I like to think we need to defer to the person who is grieving to point to one or the other)...But I don’t think the gut reaction to use “loss” instead of death is logical in any sense. 

Why do we employ euphemisms? The definition of euphemism says it best. As described by the Oxford English Dictionary:  A mild or indirect word or expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing. 

So something in our everyday world has us thinking that the real, accurate words are too harsh. Crazy right? 

Canadian society (in both French and English!) would prefer to use a word like “loss”... even though it makes absolutely zero sense.