Robert Fisk: Take my word for it, the English language is facing destruction
There is,
you see, an element of coercion, of correctness – not political but semantic –
in this ocean of verbal porn. Who dares question lecture titles like
“Contextualising Iranian Accented Cinema – Exilic, Diasporic, Ethnic” at the
British Museum? Or suggest that the title of an article in America’s most
prominent philosophical journal in 2012 – “On the Supposed Inconceivability of
Absent Qualia Functional Duplicates” – might just be a bit over the top. Noam
Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist par excellence,
complained to a French newspaper last year that “when I hear words like
‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering,
I reach for my gun”… But if, for example, I read Russell or analytical philosophy,
or even Wittgenstein, it seems to me that I can understand what they are
saying… On the other hand, when I read Derrida… I do not understand. It’s as if
the words were marching past under my eyes. Chomsky called this
“charlatanism”.
...Since comedy is an essential part of tragedy, it’s well worth looking at the language which now imprisons us – the “international dictator” – as farce; worthy of scorn, but with its own rip-roaring, maniacal, highfalutin but totally unintended humour. Those who wish to be part of this world – a place of climbing, preferential treatment for those who learn the correct argot, especially if they embrace or encourage “centres of excellence” – have created a special box of words, a “platform” needless to say, which has now been embraced not just by public relations experts but also, alas, by academics, even bishops.... My favourite is “space”. I belong to a generation in which space usually related to Outer Space, in which my British comic hero Dan Dare forever battled the Mekon, the over-brained monster who sought world dictatorship over all science from a levitating chair. More mundanely, “space” was the rather dull word my mum and dad used in furnishing a room. Is there enough “space” for the wardrobe in the upstairs bedroom? But no more. Here, from my personal collection of clippings over 15 years – all can be referenced to the culprits if readers desire – are new uses for “space”:
“A spectacular space in which exploration in
depth can take place” (Tony Blair describing a London house in which
“interfaith interaction” can occur); “a socially relevant space” (film
director Katherine Bigelow talking of her movie work environment); the “spaces
created by imperial rule” (Edinburgh University Press on British rule in Aden);
“to create a space for alternative thinking and writing” (Denis MacShane on
Polish leader Tadeusz Mazowiecki’s cooperation with communist rule); “a
functioning commercial space”, “bar-restaurant space”, “non-commercial space”,
“public house space”, “two-storey space” and lots of other “spaces” (an
English-language Lebanese paper reviewing a cafe in a 19th century Beirut
building); “air exhibition space”, “performance space”, and “well-curated
space” (all from a Vancouver art gallery brochure); “a reclaiming of space” (an FT reviewer on women in Paris); “a space for different
arguments” (an Irish Times feature on a Northern Ireland human
rights festival); “to retain a space” (Cambridge historian Hugh Drocon on
Nietzsche); and “a radical step change in our development of leaders who can
shape and articulate a compelling vision and who are skilled and robust enough
to create spaces of safe uncertainty [sic] in which the Kingdom grows” (the
Church of England on training bishops).
This very last bit of
clerical befuddlement was hoovered up by the Financial Times’ indefatigable
Lucy Kellaway, who actually awards gongs for this flannel. She has also
discovered “to action forward” and “actioning forward” – business guff which is
clearly a cousin of “moving forward”, “moving on”, “seeking closure” and other
advice given to traumatised war veterans, mourning relatives or divorce
victims. She has awarded prizes for “Nerbs” – nouns pretending to be verbs: “to
effort”, “to potentiate”, “to future”, “to language” and “to town hall”. This
is addictive. I have only to look at my own archives, in which an IT expert,
anxious to ensure that the internet offers “factually accurate content above
the ersatz”, informs me that “new internet business models have been …
trialled”. We now “rewild” the countryside, while I notice that a women’s equal
pay campaigner, asked by The Irish Times last month what she
liked to do in her spare time, responded: “I journal every day.” Well, sure. I
keep a diary too… read more:
https://hawkingsbaydispatch.com/2018/09/29/fisk-the-english-language-is-facing-destruction/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/english-language-destruction-technology-internet-jargon-political-war-poets-a8523796.htmlhttps://hawkingsbaydispatch.com/2018/09/29/fisk-the-english-language-is-facing-destruction/
see also
Michiko Kakutani - The death of truth: how we gave up on facts and ended up with Trump
Beginnings and endings
