There is no swifter route to the corruption of thought than through the corruption of languageWhen one surveys our contemporary culture, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that we are undergoing an evisceration of language.
— George Orwell —
We humans can communicate by many means – by touch, by expressions, by giving — even by our mere presence in situations where we would be more comfortable elsewhere, such as when sharing grief or loss with another. But our primary means of communication is by language.
Genesis speaks of the Tower of Babel, where man’s great hubris was disrupted by the confusion of tongues. Anyone who has traveled to another country and culture has experienced the discomfort of being in a strange environment without the comfort of clear communication. Yet far more insidious is the dissolution of the power of words within a culture, with a nominally common tongue.
Common (but not exhaustive) aspects of this linguistic chicanery are:
Overloading of Adjectives
One such example is the overloading of adjectives. In object-oriented software development, there is the functionality of overloading a software object’s functionality, i.e., giving a derivative object more capabilities than the parent while using the same name and core functions. In language, the effect is the opposite: words are stripped of their original meaning, lessened by hyperbolic use. Consider the contemporary use of the word “awesome.” Derived from the Greek achos, meaning pain, it confers an emotion variously combining dread, veneration, and wonder inspired by authority, the sacred, or the sublime. It implies the experience of being in the presence of someone or something far greater than oneself. In modern culture, it has become an adjective for virtually everything even mildly pleasing. Almost anything can be “awesome”: clothes, parties, cars, pleasant situations. But if everything is awesome, then nothing is awesome. The language has been robbed of the ability of describing those things which truly inspire awe, which remind us that there are things far greater than ourselves. If we can no longer speak of awe, then we forget there are things which inspire and deserve our awe.Term-Swapping
Another example is the term-swap, common in politically correct speech. My office nurse recently attended a conference on sexual dysfunction and counseling, taught by a specialist from San Francisco. He stated that in his clinic, you no longer ask if people are married, but whether they are “partnered”. You no longer inquire whether people are having sex, but ask whether they are “body-fluid bonded”. This is an attempt to influence thought by transforming speech. “Married” carries the connotation — derived from centuries of common use and consensus of meaning — of two people, man and woman, committed to one another in a contractual relationship, ideally for life, for better or worse. “Partnered” means any two people sharing a roof at this moment in time, here today and gone tomorrow, with commitment optional. Whatever your opinion on gay marriage, surely these two situations have different personal implications for those involved, and unequal impact on society as a whole. But “partnered” is a great leveler, making the lesser equal to the greater. And “body-fluid bonded”? Not only is term-swapping an attempt to remove the influence of higher principles on behavior, but it is invariably cumbersome, lacking in rhythm and impact, and downright ugly. Language has, like music, a rhythm and power of its own. Politically correct term-swapping, however, is the electronic organ of language — playing all the right notes, but abrasive and irritating to the ear. Even course street-slang is preferable: “Are you two f***ing?”, while coarse, is a slap in the face, while “Are you fluid-bonded?” is like lukewarm decaffeinated coffee.Redefinition
Redefinition is another land mine in the field of language, especially problematic in discussions of religion, race, and belief systems. Societies and cultures over time reach mutually agreeable definitions, especially in socially significant topics and situations. The term “racism,” for example, has always referred to hatred of another person or class of people based solely on their skin color, tribal affiliation, or behavioral patterns or speech which suggests such an affiliation. In modern progressivism, racism is now used to pigeonhole and reject those whose political or philosophical orientation differs or disagrees with yours. Hence the progressive African-American or liberal white views non-progressive whites — or all whites — as racist, but they themselves are never racist. Similarly, all Christians are “fundamentalists,” “intolerant,” “superstitious,” and other disparaging designations — often labeled so by those most intolerant and misinformed about the nature, convictions, and practices of such believers.This destruction of the consensus of meaning in language is becoming ever more widespread, invoked as it is by media and politics, and extensively promulgated in our educational system and workplaces. It functions as a universal weapon of control in totalitarian societies. We must resist this trend and encourage restoration of integrity and honesty in language if we are to avoid the repressive cultural outcomes that will otherwise invariably result.
Similarly, we can no longer talk about gender — previously referring only to male and female sexes, XX and XY — but now must understand it as any sexual identification, as in transgenderism: you are a female if you “identify” as one, even if your DNA is XY.
But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.The breakdown in language points to a culture increasingly out of touch with consensus in communication, and the substitution of fantasy and emotionalism for a world based on reality and truth. Furthermore it points to an increasingly authoritarian trend as we are coerced into using such language at the risk of criticism, ostracization, and even persecution if we fail to succumb to its intimidation.
— George Orwell —
We should not go lightly into that linguistic darkness, for therein lies demons. Resistance will take courage, but failure to do so will reap a dark harvest which we will deeply lament for a long, long time.
