Saturday, November 7, 2009
Politics and the english language response.
In this essay by George Orwell, we read about the opinions of Orwell on the use of language as a way to confuse people. He thinks that the english language is being manipulated into something that it never was meant to be. His thesis is that we use language foolishly because our minds are foolish, but our minds are foolish because our language is "slovenly"(206). He does not believe in flowery language and i do have to agree with Orwell on that one. He also has rules that he thinks people should follow in writing and speaking. He says to never use flowery language when a simpler form is better. Dont use unnessecary words in unnessecary sentences. If a work does not have to be used, don't use it. He also goes on to say that breaking the rules is better that not meaning what you say. Orwell pretty much follows all of his own rules but he does break some of them. It is probably just the time period that he has written in, but his language is somewhat flowery at points, but i think it was just because he was a scholar. He could have taken out some of the more flowery language and put in more easily understood words. As Orwell is writing, i get the feeling that he feels very strongly about the downhill slope of the English language. I did have a few questions though. I didn't understand why this was so important to him. Is dissecting the English language really as important as he says it is? And in dissecting it, doesn't he really just make it more complicated also? Of course there are the college professors and scholar who do over complicate a very simple thing. But i think that Orwell could have made his own rules simpler by just saying, "keep the language so that all different types of people can understand it, but do not lose the point of your ideas by oversimplifying either. I don't know. maybe that would make it more complicated also.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I like using long phrases that lengthen my sentences though. :(
ReplyDeleteAnd for his usage of flowery language, maybe he used those words because there are no other possible substitutions for them that conveys what he's trying to say exactly.
And it kinda makes sense that he dissect the language, because if you're not going to call something out that is obviously very wrong, or is going down the wrong path, then there would be no hopes in trying to straighten it out, no? It's kinda like sex. Some people use it as a manipulation method. And if we don't "dissect" sex, per se, and tell people that it's only strictly for reproduction and recreation, then peole will obviously use it as a manipulation as well. :D (yeaaah... the analogy's kinda lame, just bear with me. haha.)