You see, when I started this blog, I swore to myself that I will try to maintain as civil a tone as possible, and shall only strive to increase awareness about a field that I hold so dear. Hold the _lamp of knowledge_ (and a couple of more fancy metaphors that our school prayers taught us), that is.
And this is why I revised the beginning of this post:
What addles the heads of smart Why do people spout absolute Karan Thapar is a man of great erudition and a delight to watch when he is taking politicians apart with his sharp wit and steely demeanor. But I have always been a bit uncomfortable reading his pieces on language. It’s true that his aim is to just be humorous, but it helps language myths spread even more and I consider it disingenuous. Have a look at two of his articles.
The first part tracks down changes in the English language (how words like rubber, cock, pussy, prick etc. have gotten sexual connotations). It’s a straightforward list, but there are a few things of linguistic interest here.
When people talk of language change, most only think of lexical changes, and it goes with the common (and wrong) simplification that a language __is a combination of a bag of words (BOW)1 and a need for communication (NFC)2. Together, these two assumptions are responsible for most of the misconceptions people have about language.
For instance, people are worried about lexical changes because that critically affects the BOW assumption and people sit on their armchairs and theorize about language, ranting against usage that doesn’t match up with the NFC assumption. To me, however, lexical changes are the least interesting. Condoms are made of latex, which is a kind of rubber, so rubber got another connotation. Big deal. Since euphemisms is a big industry anyhow, you can expect to have loads of words to refer to what non-prudes call a penis, mostly deriving from the shape, size and function of the same. Tiny and floppy? Willy. Hard and solid? Tool. Pointy and cylindrical? Prick. You get the idea. Interestingly, though, despite all these lexical changes, the structure of the English language has remained largely unchanged over several centuries. Once they know some of the vocabulary of those times, students of literature can swoon on reading Shakespeare with more or less the same ease as students of IITs can wince on reading Chetan Bhagat. English grammar has changed remarkably little in the past 400 years. Geoff Pullum has a interesting piece about this here.
Anyhow, we are back to the HT article. It continues on about how Americans are destroying English. This is a misconception that at least makes sense if found in the British, because it can ring of patriotism there (as George Bernard Shaw said, “Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it”). However, in India, this sentiment can only be ascribed to our long-standing British English fetish. And how does the article say have Americans destroyed English? By saying things like deplane where Her Majesty would say disembark (although I do admit I find it difficult to imagine the Queen in the role of airline/airport service staff). You be the judge and tell me which terminology is more transparent. Other atrocities committed by the Americans include saying least worst option instead of easiest option (do I even need to mention that the two are different in meaning?).
The articles talk about how Indians have added to the misery of the English language by introducing terms like ‘pass out’ for ‘graduate’. This is something that I have already discussed in detail on a Google Buzz thread once 3. To its credit, it does support the word prepone, a pet Indianism of mine, so to speak.
Now now now. I know it was all probably written in humor. But this is not the first attempt at creating humor out of a bag of false claims and old wives’ tales about language. It would be nice if people who are respected and whose opinions are taken at face value wrote more responsibly and read up about language. And if the purpose of such articles is to merely be humorous, HT has a Sunday column called “Funny Business”. Put them there. That way, people are less likely to take them seriously.
Anyhow, Tata! I am back to my apping drudgery.
P.S. The commenting system in place now is Disqus. And it doesn’t make you register! But it would be better if you could comment using your FB/Google/Twitter account
Footnotes:
1 This coinage is credited to Geoffrey Pullum who has written about it in many places including here.
2 Languages are obviously used by people to communicate, so that’s not a problem. But there is a problem in the blanket assumption that everything that languages are must be somehow explainable by resorting to an NFC argument. This is a position that just isn’t supported by fact.
3 The military term “passing out parades” is not restricted to India and is widely used, especially in the UK, whose version of English we love so much. Just three samples that I have pulled off with a simple Google Search:
Coordinated marching in the sun can be quite exhausting, but no one actually _passes out_ while parading. Clearly, therefore, “passing out” in the sense of “completing studies at an institution” is well attested usage in both hemispheres. If you don’t like it, don’t use it, but don’t fume and froth about it.