.
.
.
oEPISTLES FROM A GOBLIN PRINCESSo
(8-2-08) The Lamentable State of the English Language
Posted 2nd August 2008 at 06:29 PM by Teresa Edgerton
Updated 23rd December 2012 at 06:20 AM by Teresa Edgerton (Because.)
Updated 23rd December 2012 at 06:20 AM by Teresa Edgerton (Because.)
I've decided to begin by posting a slightly edited version of something I previously published on my Chronicles Network forum, simply because the topic is of absorbing interest to me, and I would like to see the discussion revived. Perhaps, too, it will receive a little more exposure here.
And so ...
ON THE SAD IMPOVERISHMENT AND THE THREATENED DEMISE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
I was recently poking around a website I sometimes visit, and I came across a thread in which members were complaining about authors who seem to do their writing with a dictionary or a thesaurus in hand. They started out (quite properly, I thought) discussing authors who sprinkle in words they apparently don’t understand themselves, words that jar, that don’t match the tone of the rest of the story. I won’t mention the names of the specific authors, because I’m not familiar with their work, and it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment; let’s just say that I approve of the general principle. But then the conversation turned to one of our more literate and respected SFF authors and his use of two particular words that were unfamiliar to one of the people taking part in the discussion.
Now it happened that I knew both words, so perhaps I was prejudiced in the author's favor, but in each case it seemed to be that he had chosen the precise right word to convey everything he meant to say. Each word came with a wealth of interesting associations that would never be conveyed by the more general term. And if the reader doesn’t know one of those words ... is it really too much work to open up a dictionary and look something up, every once and a while? It seems absurd to me that authors should be expected to choose less expressive and specific language out of fear that someone somewhere might not understand it. Yet it appears that this is the way we are heading.
I also bewail the fact that it apparently isn’t enough that the English in everyday use is becoming blander and blander, and less and less precise, but that writers (the very people who should be cherishing the language and making good use of its richness and variety) are expected to abet the ongoing impoverishment of our vocabulary, and God forbid that any one of us should challenge the reader with the occasional unfamiliar word!
Now I find this appalling. I also find it distressing, irksome, offensive, and altogether odious. All of these words describe my feelings, but none of them describe exactly the same one, although you may find some of them under the same heading in your thesaurus. There are shades of meaning in most of our English words -- the ones that haven’t already been drained of all their force and color to the point where they’ve become practically useless -- and while some of those differences are subtle, others are highly significant, and if we allow ourselves to lose those lovely gradations of meaning, our language will become a dull and listless thing. But even more than that: Clarity will suffer instead of being enhanced. It will be like putting aside a glorious selection of colors in favor of a palette of dingy greys, difficult to distinguish one from the other. If we don’t ultimately die of boredom, it’s possible that the English language will.
And shouldn’t those of us who are avid readers, writers, and aspiring writers -- and more particularly, readers and writers of the fantastic -- be resisting this trend, rather than participating in and encouraging it?
I have said elsewhere -- and I have said it often enough that people may be tired of hearing me say it -- that a writer should not use words in writing that he or she would not use in conversation. But this is simply to say that we should use words that we ourselves feel at home with, words that we use easily and naturally, not that we should limit ourselves to only those words we can be sure that every reader will understand. Instead, we should seek out good books, expose ourselves to the works of writers who inspire us with their masterly use of the language, absorb and internalize the very best that the language has to offer, so that rather than limiting our working vocabularies we will expand them. One doesn’t gain a wide and flexible vocabulary by thumbing through a dictionary or a thesaurus (although I’m all for consulting these useful resources in their proper time and place), one achieves it by seeing words used in their proper context.
We are the ones who can keep the language vital and exciting. We can provide the inspiration and the context for readers and writers now and in the future. Whether we’ve asked for the job or not, we have a place among the stewards of our shared linguistic heritage; what it will be to future generations is partly up to us. Will we pass on something expressive and moving, lively and witty, terrifying and invigorating -- or a drab handful of words that have lost whatever vitality they once had?
I welcome your thoughts.
And so ...
ON THE SAD IMPOVERISHMENT AND THE THREATENED DEMISE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
I was recently poking around a website I sometimes visit, and I came across a thread in which members were complaining about authors who seem to do their writing with a dictionary or a thesaurus in hand. They started out (quite properly, I thought) discussing authors who sprinkle in words they apparently don’t understand themselves, words that jar, that don’t match the tone of the rest of the story. I won’t mention the names of the specific authors, because I’m not familiar with their work, and it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment; let’s just say that I approve of the general principle. But then the conversation turned to one of our more literate and respected SFF authors and his use of two particular words that were unfamiliar to one of the people taking part in the discussion.
Now it happened that I knew both words, so perhaps I was prejudiced in the author's favor, but in each case it seemed to be that he had chosen the precise right word to convey everything he meant to say. Each word came with a wealth of interesting associations that would never be conveyed by the more general term. And if the reader doesn’t know one of those words ... is it really too much work to open up a dictionary and look something up, every once and a while? It seems absurd to me that authors should be expected to choose less expressive and specific language out of fear that someone somewhere might not understand it. Yet it appears that this is the way we are heading.
I also bewail the fact that it apparently isn’t enough that the English in everyday use is becoming blander and blander, and less and less precise, but that writers (the very people who should be cherishing the language and making good use of its richness and variety) are expected to abet the ongoing impoverishment of our vocabulary, and God forbid that any one of us should challenge the reader with the occasional unfamiliar word!
Now I find this appalling. I also find it distressing, irksome, offensive, and altogether odious. All of these words describe my feelings, but none of them describe exactly the same one, although you may find some of them under the same heading in your thesaurus. There are shades of meaning in most of our English words -- the ones that haven’t already been drained of all their force and color to the point where they’ve become practically useless -- and while some of those differences are subtle, others are highly significant, and if we allow ourselves to lose those lovely gradations of meaning, our language will become a dull and listless thing. But even more than that: Clarity will suffer instead of being enhanced. It will be like putting aside a glorious selection of colors in favor of a palette of dingy greys, difficult to distinguish one from the other. If we don’t ultimately die of boredom, it’s possible that the English language will.
And shouldn’t those of us who are avid readers, writers, and aspiring writers -- and more particularly, readers and writers of the fantastic -- be resisting this trend, rather than participating in and encouraging it?
I have said elsewhere -- and I have said it often enough that people may be tired of hearing me say it -- that a writer should not use words in writing that he or she would not use in conversation. But this is simply to say that we should use words that we ourselves feel at home with, words that we use easily and naturally, not that we should limit ourselves to only those words we can be sure that every reader will understand. Instead, we should seek out good books, expose ourselves to the works of writers who inspire us with their masterly use of the language, absorb and internalize the very best that the language has to offer, so that rather than limiting our working vocabularies we will expand them. One doesn’t gain a wide and flexible vocabulary by thumbing through a dictionary or a thesaurus (although I’m all for consulting these useful resources in their proper time and place), one achieves it by seeing words used in their proper context.
We are the ones who can keep the language vital and exciting. We can provide the inspiration and the context for readers and writers now and in the future. Whether we’ve asked for the job or not, we have a place among the stewards of our shared linguistic heritage; what it will be to future generations is partly up to us. Will we pass on something expressive and moving, lively and witty, terrifying and invigorating -- or a drab handful of words that have lost whatever vitality they once had?
I welcome your thoughts.
Total Comments 49
Comments
-
just seen while channelsurfing
on MTV
" I Have Another Live On The Web'
that is too bad for wordsPosted 3rd August 2008 at 08:09 PM by HardScienceFan
-
I agree completely.
Writers should not have to slump down to a lower level for the simple reason that readers can't be bothered to learn more words. I find it daily at my workplace.
One day, I said the word "penance" and they didn't even know what it meant, two people who are both older than I am just looked at each other completely clueless.Posted 3rd August 2008 at 08:29 PM by Sylvetra_Snake -
Was this a US or UK board?
I have heard the old saying that a US reader considers a word in a book that he does not understand to be the fault of the writer - whilst in the UK they consider it their fault and look it up.
I tend to go by the feel of the sentence the word is in and the build up to it - that usually solves most meanings.
I agree to using a wide language base, though I have read one or two books where I do feel that the author was sitting there with his thesorusPosted 4th August 2008 at 01:13 AM by Overread -
I love words and like learning and hearing new ones. I don't want to have to sit there reading with a dictionary, but I like a writer that knows what they want to say and how best to say it, regardles if they use words I don't yet know. Also I think word choice is important in characterisation, different character will have a different vocabulary.
If someone is just using words because they think it sounds good that is a turn off, but a talented writer with varied prose that suits their story is a definite turn on in readingPosted 6th August 2008 at 05:58 PM by Tansy -
My position as regards to vocabulary must be clear; I approve of it. The English language is so rich in synonyms and subtleties that getting exactly the right one can take s considerable time, but it is worth the effort.
All right, I spend too much of my time playing with words rather that building the serious structures I ought to, but they're such glorious toys.Posted 12th August 2008 at 11:20 PM by chrispenycate 
-
new words = new worlds. simple as that.
what's wrong with wanting to better yourself? charlie chaplin learnt a new word every day and then made a point of using that word correctly in conversation. not something i'd imagine happens a lot in rotherham, and it shows when you try to interview somebody for a job.Posted 12th August 2008 at 11:40 PM by chopper - While I personally agree with everything said here in principle, in my experience, most people are impatient with those whose vocabularies are broader then theirs.
Unless you are Stephen Fry, using even moderately unusual words brings nothing but resentment from those who are less in love with the language. You can almost hear people thinking *how I am supposed to carry on feeling superior to this person now that they confronted me with a word I don't understand*
Well, that's in conversation. With reading, they may be tempted to toss your book to one side, unread, and not bother to buy anything else you write.
I am sure, however, that there are plenty of people on this planet who read English and appreciate it's versatility and breath and will continue to do so for a very long time.
To be honest, I think the real problem is that today's new readers are yesterday's illiterati.Posted 28th August 2008 at 03:17 PM by staticsplitscreen -
So many good comments and I haven't responded to any of them -- for which I apologize. I spent the whole middle part of August in the hospital after surgery, and the last part recovering from that experience, and it's only now that I feel capable of putting a series of more or less coherent words on a virtual page.
(Well, to be honest, there was one night when I woke up and couldn't get back to sleep and I spent the time mentally composing a lengthy and absolutely brilliant response to some of the messages up above -- and then couldn't remember any of it in the morning. Which leads me to think that it might just have been one of those things that seem to be relevant and terrifically insightful in the middle of the night, but in reality are just random mental babblings.)
But here I am wide awake, and more or less recovered from the hospital, so I'll give it another try.
Overread, I don't remember whether it was a British or an American site that set off the original version of the tirade up above, but I suspect that it was an international site like this one. I don't have any opinion on whether it's true that British readers might blame themselves for not knowing a word while Americans might blame the writer for using it, but it would be interesting to find out. What I have seen is that people with large vocabularies themselves are generally quite pleased at the opportunity to learn a new word, while those with smaller vocabularies often feel imposed on.
"New words = new worlds", I like that very much chopper. I have a feeling I will probably borrow that the next time I'm ranting about this particular subject. I hope you don't mind.
And Sylvetra, I've encountered that same sort of dumbfounded response in the workplace, after using what I believed to be a perfectly ordinary word -- and while not from people who were older than I am, by people who were supposedly better educated. (Did you know, by the way, that they teach remedial English courses at universities these days? How do you get into one of these schools in the first place if you need a remedial course in something so basic?)
But I've lived long enough by now to expect that sort of thing in everyday life. What bothers me is when I encounter it among readers, and SFF readers at that, and particularly in regard to a book that seemed to me to be written in very clear language, not in the least esoteric. And what bothers me even more is the sometimes quite startling anger that readers direct at such books. Rather than deciding that the book is simply not for them -- as they might if the subject matter were unappealing or the premise of an SF story, for instance, relied on an understanding of technical or scientific ideas that was over their heads -- they act as though they’ve been personally insulted. Well, maybe they do feel insulted, maybe they believe on some unconscious level that the author set out specifically to make people like them feel small and ignorant. (Which, if you think about it, would be a very strange thing for a writer to do, as that’s no way to sell books.)
Which brings me to the thing above all else that really disturbs me: if those of us who truly love books and ideas and words don’t stand up for the English language, then who will? And the only answer that I’ve been able to come up with is: academics and word snobs. And if it reaches the point where words that are specific and evocative and full of shades of meaning are only to be found in works of scholarship and obscure literary magazines, then that kind of language will in truth become just as elitist as some people already think it is. Which means, I fear, that it won’t be readily accessible, anymore, to those of us who just want to pick up an entertaining book and along with enjoying the story and the characters be delighted by a particularly apt choice of words here and there, or a turn of phrase that contributes to the tone and atmosphere, or is especially revealing about the characters (as Tansy points out) or the setting. And I, personally, would miss that kind of writing, because without it my pleasure in reading would be greatly reduced.
Of course there will always be older books to turn to, and fortunately for me I genuinely like books by nineteenth and early twentieth century writers (in large part because they knew how to get the most out of the language, even if they did get a bit carried away at times) but darn it, I’d like to continue to get the same kind of pleasure from books written by my contemporaries and have a chance to enjoy some vivid writing without the Victorian prolixity.
Is this too much to ask? Will the day come when the illiterati have it all their own way? If it does, I am going to be one very unhappy reader.Posted 3rd September 2008 at 07:40 PM by Teresa Edgerton -
I think there will never be a day when language is dumbed down and condensed into a pulp of common, simple words. Maybe it's just more my hope, but I think that we will reach a point where people will notice the lack of zest, and they will unknowingly begin using complex language again and taking the time to absorb many literary flavours. After all, people like variety. If they're confronted with the same phrases and the same words, they will subconsciously seek out gems when reading or listening. Language evolves, but I also think that it follows a pattern too.
Well, that's my opinion anyway. I hope I'm right...Posted 21st September 2008 at 02:32 AM by Leisha -
1. Academics
2. Word Snobs
3. Spelling Nazis.
Don't forget the role of the humble Spelling Nazi. Not sure about 1 or 2, but 3 may be genetic, which bodes well for the future of diversity and precision in language use. Irritating, yes; obnoxious, often; obsessive-compulsive, without a doubt. In fact, unstoppable! Especially when combined with a love of language.
I agree with Leisha. Its a pendulum thing, like so much else (I hope!). In any case, if people really are so stupid that they have no interest in the richness of written expression, then they deserve everything they get and the processes of evolution will bring the human species to a slow, grinding, inevitable and poetically just end. (And word lovers can "told you so" all the way down.)Posted 24th April 2009 at 07:32 AM by The Procrastinator - If more and more information is carried in audio-visual form, the importance of verbal precision becomes less critical.
Certainly, global communication doesn't help. The acceptance of "English" as a universal second language means it has to be simplified, but this doesn't mean it can't exist in parallel in its flexible, extended form. Not merely for those of us who appreciate the language for itself, but those who want to communicate an idea more complex than "I hit 'im, 'e fell down"Posted 24th April 2009 at 01:45 PM by chrispenycate - Since I wrote the entry above, I've been somewhat heartened by the fact that we here in the US have elected a president who is extremely literate and an excellent communicator. Possibly, intelligence and eloquence will come back into fashion, at least while the Obama honeymoon lasts.
And if it ceases to be "cool" to parade semi-illiteracy as a badge of honor, who knows what might happen after that?Posted 25th April 2009 at 04:22 AM by Teresa Edgerton -
I have often been looked at askance for using words that my peers fail to comprehend. Hmm like the above sentance for example !! Words like belligerent, morose often leave those around me confused. This includes intelligent people who simply don't have time to read.
My favourite example of the divide between readers and non-readers is the following.
I have two friends who are both readers, they have a daughter together who is now nearly three. As they enter into a carpet shop the child spreads her arms wide and shouts "Look Mummy, a plethora of carpets" The two shop clerks had no idea what the word meant. Two people who cope in the modern world, work, drive and converse quite normally out done by a nearly three year old girl
I can't illustrate the danger the language is in any better than that.
@ Teresa. Here's hoping that the 'Obama' factor can indeed help rejuvenate the language over in the big ol USA.
Ps I blame advertising companies for a lot of this.
Ariel FUTUR ???
Loreal Sublime pronounced Sub- leeeeem on the advert ??! Ridiculous
End of rant- can breathe normally again !Posted 11th June 2009 at 11:07 AM by Althain's Warden -
Interesting. I often use a Dictionary to look up words, and whilst committing them to memory is something one might not bear think about, i have expanded my vocabulary just by committing words to memory. Of course reading words as you say in their proper context is a better technique, and i admire your choice of language. Using words only used in conversation however, i do not agree with. I do not think there is anything wrong with writers, aspiring or professional, to have a theasurus/dictionary handy.
Good article though!Posted 11th November 2009 at 11:44 PM by bobbo19 -
The sad, lamentable state of the English language.
I find it not to be so much in the loss of meaning of words, but more the loss of proper grammar and spelling. I've played a few MMORPGs in my time and for each and every one I could have sworn I was the ONLY member-out of THOUSANDS-who ever used proper capitalization, periods, commas, question marks, etc., on those. And the others I've spoken to on there weren't just 12-year-old kids, either.
And with all the complaining I did about it, I only wound up looking like a stuckup, know-it-all snob. Which, of course, I protested against. I am NOT a stuckup snob. (But all too often considered a know-it-all).
Posted 29th March 2010 at 08:56 AM by Karn Maeshalanadae - Yes, this disdain that more and more people have for grammar, punctuation, capitalization, and spelling is distressing in itself, although I do think it is part of the bigger problem, which is that people are so lazy about the way they express themselves. Their justification is that so long as other people know what they mean everything is perfectly all right. But other people do not always know what they mean. Misunderstandings arise with alarming regularity. We see it on the forums, where someone says something that somebody else takes exception to, followed by the accusations: "I never said that." "You aren't reading my posts." "You are putting words into my mouth" ... and on it goes. It's true that sometimes people don't read carefully before they respond to another person's post, but more often then not, I find, the problem is that the second person did read the post and reacted to what the first person actually said rather than to what they may have meant.
Even something as small as a misplaced comma can alter the meaning of a sentence and lead to misunderstandings. The rules are not there to provide the elite with something to complain about; they are there to promote clarity. Clarity, in turn, can prevent misunderstandings. It is not snobbish to care about these things.
On another note, I am always astounded to find a cavalier attitude toward writing basics among aspiring authors -- the very people who (one would suppose) are striving to learn how best to express their ideas in writing. It begins with respect for the language, and yet we see so many who treat it with such flagrant disrespect in their ordinary postings, it is hard to believe that they do respect it. When the time comes that they post an extract for critique, they will excuse their errors by saying that these are things they want to do well but they continue to struggle. Well then, why not practice doing things the right way at every opportunity, and so reach a point where it all comes naturally? One does not rid oneself of bad habits by continuing to practice them.
And a clarification on something I said before. I did not say that writers should not use words they don't use in conversation, I said they should not use words they wouldn't. There is a difference. I am sure we all know words that we may never have the opportunity to use in conversation, but I would hope that any word we use in our fiction is one that we would feel comfortable using if it happened to be appropriate to a subject under discussion and was the best word to express our meaning. (This applies particularly to our online conversations in forums like this one, because I know that we each have words that we become thoroughly familiar with through our reading, but hesitate to use when speaking because we are unsure of how to pronounce them. That's a different problem altogether.)Posted 30th March 2010 at 03:05 AM by Teresa Edgerton -
Interesting discussion. Is it really getting worse, or is it that people whose written words we would never have seen until recently are now becoming more visible, thanks to online gaming and forums like this one? Until a few years ago, I would have had no way of knowing what the standard of written English for the average teenager was. I didn't even have much of an idea of anyone else's when I was at school.
And if it is getting worse, will there ever come a time when publishers, too, are no longer bothered about such standards? Either because they know most of the reading public isn't, or (even more scary) because the publishing firms can no longer find enough people with top-flight written language skills to employ as editors?Posted 30th March 2010 at 08:57 PM by HareBrain - Of course I don't use the words I write in everyday conversation; ninety five percent of the people I talk to have English as a second language, if they have any at all and, as we have observed, my wording can get people here scampering for a dictionary. After all, the primary purpose of a language is communication; all aesthetic considerations must run far behind. And calmly observing the ignition of several theatre seats causing fumes that could discomfort those with respiratory difficulties is not an acceptable substitute for yelling "FIRE!".
But it's so nice to use the right word, rather than agonising over the compromise between precision and likelihood of comprehension.Posted 30th March 2010 at 10:17 PM by chrispenycate -
Brilliant discussion, I just had to jump in here with two of my most memorable experiences...
My husband and I had been dating for a few weeks when I accused him of being pedantic. He was the first man I'd met (with the exception of my teachers) who knew what it meant. We've been together ten years.
Sadly I often feel that men like my other half are a minority. I have been working in hospitality for a long time now. You'd think I'd know better, but I often forget to 'dumb-down' my vocabulary before I start work. About two years ago I had a short conversation with a pair of customers that still makes me cringe.
Two 20-something men come to the bar and wave me over. In a startling example of the stereotypical Australian accent, the first says to me, "Gidday! My name's John and this is Big."
I raise my sarcastic eyebrow and introduce myself. Turning to the second man I say, "Nice to meet you, 'Big'. Say, that's a pretty funny nickname, how did you end up with a moniker like that?"
'Big' blinks at me in confusion before replying, "Who's Monica?"Posted 7th March 2011 at 07:18 AM by Lucky_Lola -
Does a speaker need to dumb it down?
Teresa,
I've got to say that I couldn't agree more with what you said. But how do you feel about the spoken word. Should we dumb down what we say to make sure everyone understands. I often have the dilemma in preaching. A very good example for me come a couple of years ago when I was preaching a series of sermons and was trying to summarize them in 3 or 4 words in a memorable phrase which I would place on a white board. I had a sermon in which my summary was "Jettison your Guilt." I'm not sure how many people understood it, but I had about 5 people ask me for a definition, and everyone I asked, save my wife, did not know the definition. A few said they guessed from my sermon what it must have meant.
I am still unsure whether I was at fault for the lack of understanding or not.
ParsonPosted 18th August 2011 at 11:13 PM by Parson
