Why Language Matters

photo by southtyrolean

Do you ever wonder how your words can effect powerful change? As a writer, have you ever feared that your work can’t change anything? Have you ever wondered how much power prose can actually yield?

George Orwell is here to tell you why language matters.

If you’ve never read Orwell’s essay “Politics and the English Language”, I urge you to take 10 minutes of your day to read it. This post is an overview of the points Orwell makes, but there’s no substitute for the original (I would certainly never claim myself capable of substituting Orwell!).

The driving idea behind “Politics and the English Language” is that modern English has become sloppy because our thoughts have become sloppy. This creates a vicious cycle in which sloppy language allows our thoughts to become even sloppier. As Orwell says:

“A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language.”

Sloppy Habits

The main bad writing habits listed by Orwell fall under the blanket problems of “staleness of imagery” and “lack of precision.” Here are some of the worst offenders:

Dying metaphors: Though you may not be guilty of using “take up the cudgel for” or “ride roughshod over” in your writing, Orwell’s main point holds true today. If a metaphor no longer evokes an image for the author or the reader, it should not be used. Otherwise, it only serves to add a pile of extra words with no added meaning — a clear sign of an author’s laziness.

Verbal “false limbs”: Phrases such as “give rise to” or “exhibit a tendency to” are another example of adding words without adding meaning. Such verbal false limbs often take a simple, active verb (“create”) and transform it into a floppy, less powerful phrase (“give rise to”). This sentence-padding allows the writer to actually be less precise.

Pretentious diction: Words such as “categorical” or “exhibit” or “utilize” are often deliberately used to make a statement sound impartial and scientific. Foreign words and Latin phrases serve the same purpose. A simpler word is often more accurate and clear.

Meaningless words: Although abstract language is sometimes necessary, language that avoids any concreteness will often fail to convey meaning. Words like “values” or “living” or “human” can be used with broad strokes to allow for broad interpretation. Sometimes such words are deliberately used to manipulate understanding. Orwell writes:
“It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning.”

The Danger of Imprecision

Imprecise language is especially dangerous in political speech or writing, when stale phrases and overly abstract language can be used in “defense of the indefensible.” Orwell gives examples such as “transfer of population” and “elimination of unreliable” — I’ll leave you to imagine what those euphemisms mean.

Although Orwell wrote this essay in 1946, his argument is highly relevant today. How many of you were frustrated by the empty phrases spewed in the recent presidential debates? Orwell points to this type of language, in which the speaker/writer has largely disconnected himself from what he is saying by neglecting to think — he essentially becomes unconscious of his words. With flowery language and empty metaphors, it’s easy to talk a lot and say little.

“And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favorable to political conformity. “

Our language is suffering from fuzzy, watered down meaning.

But all hope is not lost.

Orwell is quick to point out that this downward spiral is reversible. By avoiding these habits, we can bring our language to a higher point of clarity and allow ourselves to think more clearly.

“… and to think clearly is a necessary first step toward political regeneration: so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.”

Here are Orwell’s rules for achieving clear meaning and fresh imagery:

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.

3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.

5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

For a great summary of the questions Orwell advises writers to ask themselves, visit Jesse Hines at Robust Writing: 6 Questions Precise Writers Ask Themselves.

Now, my questions to you are: Do you think language has the power to effect change? Or do you think language is defined by the way we think?