The Corruption of Language

Ben Grono *

Language that carries political discourse is constantly under threat of

corruption, making George Orwells ideas about the manipulation of
language as relevant to politics now as they were over half a century
ago.ThisessaybeginsbyexploringthelanguagethatOrwellcontested
from vague and meaningless discourse to far more manipulative
conceptsbeforefocusingonthewayinwhichtheobjectiverealitythat
Orwell subscribed to has been undermined and how the use of
languageincontemporarypoliticshasmovedindirectionsthathedid
notenvisage.AsperceivedbybothNietzscheandLakoff,theconceptof
truthitselfiscaughtupinaconstantbattletoinfluencethewaypeople
perceivetheworldaroundthem.Thisframingandreframingillustrates
a much more complex link between truth and language than even
Orwell envisaged. In conclusion, the difference between corrupted
language and persuasive framing is now blurred beyond Orwells
recognition, leaving the revival of language as yet another concept in
dispute.

Thehumanabilitytouselanguageandcommunicatewithothersabout
matters not immediately in front of us gives us an understanding of
reality greater than our personal experience. 1 This shared truth
transformsaworlddominatedbytheunilateralexerciseofpowerinto
onewheredeliberationcantakeplaceandpowercanbenegotiatedand
shared. 2 Orwellrealisedthatthereisonecaveattothisprogressiverole
that language plays in human society. Because the limits of language
often prescribe the limits of thought, vague expressions, deliberate
ambiguities, obscured meaning, and unfathomable phrases corrupt
public language and obstruct people from formulating complex

*BenGronoisinhissecondyearofacombinedBachelorofArts(PoliticalScienceand

InternationalRelations)/BachelorofEconomicsdegreeattheAustralianNational
University.HeisacurrentresidentofBruceHall.
1MurrayEdelman,ThePoliticsofMisinformation(2001)88.

2J.G.A.Pocock,VerbalizingaPoliticalAct:TowardaPoliticsofSpeech,inMichaelJ.

Shapiro(ed),LanguageandPolitics(1984)30.
56 Cross sections | Volume IV 2008

arguments, carrying out serious deliberation and making informed

decisions. 3 Public language is integral to discerning truth, deliberating
on the state of reality, and sharing power. Yet language seems to be
most corrupted by public figures who are most influential in our
society.

The way that the language of contemporary politics is misused to

deceive us and obscure reality mirrors Orwells imagined future in
whichtruthandhonestyareabsentfrompoliticaldiscourse. 4 However,
nomatterhowdeceptivecontemporarypoliticaldiscoursemaybe,the
corruption of language is nothing new. This corruption is central to
exploitative politics, and, as Orwell proclaims, the defence of the
indefensible. 5 Ambiguitymustberecognisedasdeliberateandamajor
purposeofsomepoliticallanguage. 6

In Politics and the English Language, Orwell was most critical of vague
and incompetent political language that concealed reality by tending
away from concrete meaning. 7 This language weasel words, stale
metaphors, managerial buzz words, pretentious diction and other
meaninglessphrasescontinuestoproliferateincontemporarypolitical
discourse. Seeking a shield against attack, public figures instinctively
use ambiguous expressions, described as weasel words, to complicate
meaning. 8 Reflecting the observations made by Orwell in his own era,
contemporary political discourse is padded with the buzz words of
manageriallanguage,signallingconformityandapprovalattheexpense

3LudwigWittgenstein,TractatusLogicoPhilosophicus(1922)21;DonWatson,Death

Sentence:TheDecayofPublicLanguage(2003)28.
4RichardJenkyns,Mothertongue,Prospect106,16January2005;FrankFuredi,Politicsof

Fear(2005)5;DouglasKellner,From1984toOnedimensionalMan:CriticalReflectionson
OrwellandMarcuse(2006).
5TimothyGartonAsh,OrwellforOurTime(5May2001)TheGuardian

<http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/politicsphilosophyandsociety/story/0,6000,4860
93,00.html>at15April2008.
6Edelman,aboven1,81.

7GeorgeOrwell,PoliticsandtheEnglishLanguage,firstpublishedinHorizonin1946,The

CompletedWorksofGeorgeOrwell<http://www.george
orwell.org/Politics_and_the_English_Language/0.html>at2April2008.
8DonWatson,WatsonsDictionaryofWeaselWords,ContemporaryClichs,Cantand

ManagementJargon(2004)5.
The Corruption of Language | Ben Grono 57

ofsimpleverbs,activevoiceandmeaning. 9 Ourgrowingawarenessof
thenaturalenvironmentonwhichwedependhasspurredthecreation
ofthemostrecentsetofbuzzwordsandmeaninglessterms.Themost
notorious of these wordsoften labelled as astroturfingare the
adjectivessustainableandgreen,whichcan(andare)appliedtoany
idea or policy in search of support. 10 Other phrases include being
proactive, social responsibilities, sustainable value creation, and
stakeholder engagement. 11 The 2007 Sydney APEC Leaders Declaration
on climatechange, energy security, and clean development remains a prime
example of vague language tending away from the concrete. APEC
economies announced that we agree to work to achieve a common
understanding on a longterm aspirational global emissions reduction
goal to pave the way for an effective post2012 international
arrangement. 12 Considering that a decade had passed since the Kyoto
Protocol was adopted, and binding emissions reduction targets on
many national economies entered into force in 2005, 13 the aspirational
(and not binding) goals that the APEC declaration refers to are
meaningless weasel words designed to give nothing more than the
appearanceofcommitment.

Whilst weasel words allow politicians to escape without making any

real commitments, meaningless political language can also exclude
people from communication altogether. People can only engage in
political discourse if they are familiar with the terms being used to
communicate meaning. Pretentious diction and pompous language
both meaningless jargon are used to conceal meaning and shield
againstuncertainty.Peopleareexcludedfromwholeareasofdiscourse,
particularly when related to economics, because they are not fluent in

9GeorgeOrwell,aboven7.
10Furedi,PoliticsofFear7.
11StephenMcGrail,BewarethoseCorporateWeaselWords,TheAge(Melbourne)23

February2008.
12AsiaPacificEconomicCoorperation,SydneyAPECLeadersDeclarationonClimateChange,

EnergySecurityandCleanDevelopment(2007).
13UNFCCC,Essentialbackground:KyotoProtocol(2008)UnitedNationsFramework

ConventiononClimateChange<http://unfccc.int/essential_background/items/2877.php>
at10April2008.
58 Cross sections | Volume IV 2008

meaningless words like diversity, transparency, social cohesion,

inclusion,addingvalueandstakeholding. 14

Orwellsattackonvagueandimpreciselanguageextendstowordsthat
have so many interpretations that dishonesty is signalled simply by
evokingthem. 15 Orwellargueddecadesagothatdemocracy,freedomand
justice each have conflicting meanings and yet all three of these terms
are still evoked daily. 16 The fact that these provocative terms are so
vagueandopentointerpretationposesathreattopoliticaldeliberation
because they can be used to justify any policy or program.
Contemporary political discourse is riddled with other examples of
contested references, most notably terrorism, 17 competitiveness, 18
andefficiency. 19

While ambiguous language surely conceals meaning and makes truth

less accessible, Orwell also described the potential of language to
actively shape meaning and corrupt thought itself. The concepts of
Newspeak and doublethink in Nineteen EightyFour demonstrate the
potential of language to manipulate and restrict public thought.
Doublethink is the manipulation of language so that expressions hold
two contradictory ideas at once. 20 In Nineteen EightyFour doublethink
set logic against logic and was able to represent war as peace and
slavery as freedom. 21 Examples of contemporary doublethink that can
beobservedintheUnitedStatesBushadministrationincludetheClear
SkiesInitiative(whichrelaxedcleanairstandardsforUSindustry), 22 the

14Furedi,PoliticsofFear7.
15Orwell,aboven7.
16RonPaul,WhatstheMeaningofFreedom?DontAskaPolitician(2005)Antiwar.com

<http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=4737>at19April2008.
17RosAtkins,HasTerrorismBecomeaMeaninglessWord?(2007)BBCNewsWorld

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldhaveyoursay/2007/04/has_terrorism_become_a_meani
ng.html>at21April2008.
18PaulKrugman,CompetitivenessADangerousObsession(1994)73(2)ForeignAffairs

28.
19MurrayRothbard,ConceivedinLiberty,VolumeIVTheRevolutionaryWar17751784

(1979)266.
20Kellner,From1984toOnedimensionalMan:CriticalReflectionsonOrwellandMarcuse

(2006).
21GeorgeOrwell,NineteenEightyFour(1949)6.

22GeorgeLakoff,DontThinkofanElephant!(2004)100.
The Corruption of Language | Ben Grono 59

Healthy Forests Initiative (which allowed clear cutting in federal

land), 23 andthePatriotAct(weakeningprotectionsofcivilliberties). 24
Orwellwouldnotbesurprisedtoobservethatthislanguageisusedto
legitimisewhatmanyseeasindefensibleenvironmentaldegradation,
unjustwar,andinfringementoffundamentalrightsandliberties.

Rather than expressing two contradictory ideas at once, Newspeak is

the use of a onedimensional language so that contradictions, creative
expression and critical thought cannot be clearly expressed. By
restricting vocabulary to terms that only express the interests of the
powerful, there are no words available to clearly express critical
discourse,thusnarrowingtherangeofthought. 25 Inadditiontoempty
managerial language and meaningless political soundbites, a
contemporaryexampleofNewspeakistheUSmilitarysdescriptionof
IraqiSunnirebelsintheIraqwarasantiIraqiforces. 26 Notonlydoes
thetermantiIraqiforcesportrayIraqisasbeingopposedtotheirown
homeland, but it implies that the US forces are proIraqi. Most
importantly,thisexampleofNewspeakmanagestocompletelyconceal
the motivation of the Sunni rebels, successfullylimiting thought about
whattheyarecriticalof.

While doublethink and Newspeak are universally ambiguous, another

form of language manipulation has arisen that expresses a clear
meaning to some audiences and remains ambiguous to others. Dog
whistling communicating a message with plausible deniability that
only some people can hear has become common in a world where
prejudiced people still vote and yet prejudiced remarks are not
acceptable in public. 27 An example of dog whistling in contemporary
Australian politics was John Howards launch of the 2001 federal

23Ibid2122.
24InternationalHeraldTribune,ReturnofthePatriotAct(2005)InternationalHerald
Tribune<http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/18/opinion/edpatriot.php>at20April2008.
25StephenIngle,Lies,DamnedLiesandLiterature:GeorgeOrwellandthetruth(2007)

9(4)BritishJournalofPoliticsandInternationalRelations739.
2611thMarineExpeditionaryUnit,11thMEUBattlesAntiIraqiForcesinAnNajaf(2004)

GlobalSecurity.org<http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2004/08/mil
040812mcn03.htm>at19April2008.
27JoshFear,UndertheRadar:DogwhistlePoliticsinAustralia(DiscussionPaperNo96,

TheAustraliaInstitute,2007)2.
60 Cross sections | Volume IV 2008

election, where he boldly claimed that We will decide who comes to

this country and the circumstances in which they come. 28 As Watson
argues, Howards statement was a dog whistle because noone could
disagreewithhim,yetitallowedtheCoalitiontowinthe2001election
byappealingtoracistandxenophobicvoters. 29 Thedeliberatedistortion
of truth and the corruption of politics that Orwell criticised are still
flourishing in contemporary language through dog whistling,
Newspeakanddoublethink.Whereverthesemanipulativeattemptsare
made to distort meaning, one party will inevitably become more
powerfulattheexpenseofanotherandtruthwillbeconcealed.

Orwells ideas about truth and the corruption of language contain an

importantpremise.Orwellbelievedthatoneobjectivetruthexistedand
could be understood through clear and expressive language. 30 This
presumption gives great significance to clear and precise language, as
demonstrated above, and warns against ambiguous expressions and
distortionsoftheobjectivetruth.However,therelationshipbetweenour
ability to discern reality and express truth is far more complex than
Orwell asserted. 31 Luntz argues that perception is more real than
reality 32 and it is the closest we will come to any promise of truth.
Because of the various ways we interpret the world, reality is, in
Edelmansterms,asequenceofmomentsthatchangewiththesituation
oftheobserverandwithdifferentobservers. 33 Theclaimthatlanguage
should be clear and precise to describe a fixed world is ultimately
flawed. Instead, words and ideas evoke a multitude of reference
structures,images,conceptsandrelatedmetaphorsthatweusetomake
senseofreality. 34 Thisunderstandingoflanguage,widelyreferredtoas

28Australianpolitics.com,JohnHowardsPolicySpeech(28October2001)

australianpolitics.comNews<http://australianpolitics.com/news/2001/011028.shtml>at
April142008.
29Watson,aboven3,92.

30A.M.Tibbetts,WhatDidOrwellThinkAbouttheEnglishLanguage?(1978)29(2)

CollegeCompositionandCommunication163.
31StephenIngle,Lies,DamnedLiesandLiterature:GeorgeOrwellandtheTruth(2007)

739.
32NicholasLemann,TheWordLabTheNewYorker(NewYork)16October2000.

33Edelman,aboven1,5.

34Edelman,ThePoliticalLanguageoftheHelpingProfessions,inMichaelJ.Shapiro(ed),

LanguageandPolitics(1984)45.
The Corruption of Language | Ben Grono 61

aframe,makesrealitymanageableandmeaningful,andactstodirect
ourthoughtandactiondownparticularpathways.Forexample,people
could not understand the word swim without reference structures
suchasthefeelingofsuspensioninthewater,thestrokespeoplemake
while swimming, the benefits of an active healthy lifestyle, and any
reservations about the look of swimwear. As Edelman claims, images
then,ratherthanmeticulousdescriptions,becomethecurrencyinwhich
we think about and mutually negotiate changes in the world we
inhabit. 35 Thefactthatimagesareopentointerpretationmeansthata
central and unavoidable aspect of language and reality is ambiguity.
Truth can be argued to be a vast array of images and metaphors that
havebecomesowellestablishedthatwehaveforgottenthattheyarein
factonlyimagesandmetaphorsweusetomakesenseoftheworld. 36

Nietzscherealisedtheimportanceoftheseimagesandmetaphors,and
thatbysimplifyingourunderstandingoftruthtoamanageablereality
we are ignoring alternative simplifications that use different imagery
andmetaphors. 37 GemesexplainsNietzschesviewthatinbelievingwe
arenotreportinghowtheworldis;rather,weareprescribingawayof
lookingattheworld,ameansforfurtheringaparticularformoflife. 38
It is at this point that truth becomes central to politics once again.
Reality can be interpreted in a limitless number of ways that direct
thought,emphasisandpoliticalactioninparticulardirections.Reflected
inNietzschesconceptoftheUbermensch,theabilitytopromulgateour
ownversionofunderstanding,orframe,isbeneficialbecauseotherscan
cometoapproachtheworldandreachconclusionsinthesamewaythat
we do. Contemporary politics has become a fight to determine which
frames operate in the public mindset, which metaphors are used to
approachpolitics,andwhichversionoftruthismostdominant. 39 This
battle bears little resemblance to Orwells concerns. Instead of clearly
expressinganobjectiveneutralreality,victoryisnowthepropagationof
versionsoftruthusingframesandimagery.

35Edelman,aboven1,12.
36WalterKaufmann,ThePortableNietzsche(1982)4647.
37KenGemes,NietzschesCritiqueoftheTruth(1992)52(1)Philosophyand

PhenomenologicalResearch54.
38Ibid52.

39Fear,aboven27,15.
62 Cross sections | Volume IV 2008

Politicalstrategistsonbothsidesofpoliticshaverealisedthattheycan
alterthegoalsweseek,whatcountsasgoodorbadoutcomes,theway
we reason, and what counts as common sense to their own advantage
bymanipulatingtheframesthatweuse. 40 Lakoff,anadvisertotheUS
DemocraticParty,arguesthatiffactsarepresentedtousthatdonotfit
theframeofreferencewithwhichweusetointerprettheworldwewill
simply ignore them. 41 Luntz, an adviser to the US Republican Party,
shares the same sentiment. Lemann summarises his view that if you
introduceasubject usinglanguage that will produce a strong opinion,
no subsequent information will get people to change their minds. 42
Luntzs word labs harness the language of ordinary citizens so that
political rhetoric can be developed to manipulate already existing
framesofreferenceintheAmericanpsyche. 43 AnexampleLakoffuses
of manipulative framing is the term tax relief in the US. 44 Framing
usingthewordreliefimpliesthattheremustbeanaffliction,andthat
those who relieve the affliction are heroes, whilst those who insist on
preventing relief are unfavourable. This being the case, the term tax
relief subconsciously frames taxation as an oppressive affliction and
those who reduce taxes as liberators. Tax relief was first used by the
Republican Party, but with constant repetition it is now used by
Republican and Democrat alike. 45 This manipulation has skewed the
entirepublicframeofreferenceawayfromtaxationasforthecommon
good towards taxation as an unfair burden, making any argument to
maintain or increase taxation lost from the beginning. 46 Orwell would
argue that the framing and reframing of contemporary political
language is manipulative, and it is. However, given the ambiguous
natureoflanguageandperceptionitself,noobjectivetruthwilleverbe
discernedandframingwillremainunavoidable.

The irrelevance of any objective truth to political discourse has been

recognised for many years. Nietzsche openly sought to seduce his

40Lakoff,aboven22,xv.
41MattBai,TheFramingWars,TheNewYorkTimes(NewYork),17July2005.
42Lemann,TheWordLab.

43Ibid.

44Lakoff,aboven22,3.

45Ibid4.

46MattBai,aboven41.
The Corruption of Language | Ben Grono 63

readersthroughextremerhetoricandPlatoarguedthattruthwasnota
requisite element of rhetoric, which is designed only to persuade. 47
Traditionally, leadership has been defined as the moment when a
politician enlightens the thoughts of his audience to create a public
frame of reference for events. 48 Luntz claims that framing, far from
being manipulative, simply validates peoples gut instincts and helps
them to understand the world from the assumptions they already
have. 49 However,framingandmanipulativelanguageincontemporary
politicsisquitedistinctfromalloftherhetoricthathascomebeforeit.
Our deeper understanding of the human psyche and cognitive science
has been accompanied by the development of focus groups that act as
scientific word labs from which political strategists can draw the most
manipulative language. 50 US Conservatives alone have invested more
than two billion dollars over fifty years into thinktanks that research
language and framing. 51 Also, the principal means of public
communication has been transformed. The inequality is widening
between those who have enough resources and access to the media of
mass communication to reshape ideas about the world and those who
areleftasapowerlessaudience. 52 Furthermore,increasinglyshorttime
slots are given to convey events to an audience with low levels of
political participation, which in turn reduces political language to a
seriesofshortsoundbitesandframedimages. 53 The distinctnatureof
contemporarydiscoursehasgivenrisetoafarmoremanipulativeform
oflanguageusedtoframereality.

Orwellsconcernforthecorruptionoflanguageisjustified,andsotoois
concern for the now contested notion of truth itself. Contemporary
political discourse is constantly manipulated and attempts must be

47Gemes,aboven37,48;Lemann,aboven32.
48Watson,aboven3,132.
49AustralianBroadcastingCorporation,PostmodernpoliticsABCBackgroundBriefing,19

March2006.
50JosephSzimhart,Review(2007)OrwellDidntKnow:PropagandaandtheNewFaceof

AmericanPolitics<http://home.dejazzd.com/jszimhart/what%20orwell.htm>at20April
2008;Lemann,aboven32.
51Lakoff,aboven22,26.

52Edelman,aboven1,82.

53Lemann,aboven32.
64 Cross sections | Volume IV 2008

madetorevivelanguageandmeaningindebate.Theclearandprecise
language Orwell argued for is needed in any society where power is
shared. Effective communication, the relationship of trust between the
governorsandthegoverned,andtheabilitytorecognisedishonestyand
incompetence are all reliant on expressive language. 54 Due to the
ambiguous nature of such a cause, any effort to revive language from
the corrupted state described by Orwell and outlined above will not
inspire widespread support. Instead, as Orwell recognized, the fate of
political discourse lies with the assertion of plain and meaningful
language. Orwell points out that this is not an attempt to establish a
standard English, strictly enforce the rules of grammar, or
systematically replace Latin words with their Saxon equivalents. 55
Instead,languagemustberevivedbyguardingagainsttheuseofready
made phrases and making a conscious effort to use a word or phrase
that best suits the intended meaning. Orwell establishes these
aspirationsasasetofrules,howeverWatsongoessofarastoadvocate
for loud expressions of mockery, sorrow and anger to be directed at
publicfigureswhentheycorruptlanguage. 56

Moving beyond Orwells primary concerns, the ambiguous nature of

truth and the concept of framing also relate to the corruption of
language and politics. The act of framing itself is unavoidable and
cannotbereferredtoascorruption.However,thedeploymentofframes
designed to deliberately manipulate political discourse verges on
corruption. The problem lies in drawing the line between persuasive
rhetoricandpremeditatedspin.Lakoffattemptstodistinguishbetween
the two. He claims that his own framing and reframing of issues
communicates how politicians feel by providing them with the correct
metaphors and images to express what they really believe, and
enlightens the public on truths not already exposed. 57 Lakoff then
arguesthatmanipulativeframinginvolvesspinandpropaganda,where
the frames being used are known to be false, misleading or fear
inducing. However, the line between the two is arbitrary. To take the

54Watson,aboven3,178.
55Orwell,aboven7.
56Orwell,aboven7;Watson,aboven3,182.

57Lakoff,aboven22,100.
The Corruption of Language | Ben Grono 65

example of tax relief, language would not necessarily be made better

by using a more objective term like tax decrease. To many people the
notionoftaxasanafflictionalreadyconstitutesameaningfulreality,so
they have no need for any language revival. This being the case, the
bestwaytoguardagainstdeceptionisforpeopletobeconsciousofthe
images and frames that they use themselves and to be able to realise
when others are framing an issue for them. Contemporary political
discourseisconstantlyatriskofmanipulation,andwhetherthethreatis
vague and imprecise Orwellian language or the contested nature of
truthandtheframingofreality,effortstorevivelanguagecanandmust
bemade.

Orwells ideas about language are still relevant to contemporary

political discourse. However, wider philosophical arguments about
truth and recent developments in framing have eclipsed much of
Orwells work in significance. The very idea of reviving language to
expressthetruthisnotpossibleinaworldwherepeopleunderstand
realitythroughvaryingreferencestructures.However,Orwellsworkis
stillrelevanttothesewiderconcernsandcannotbeforgotten.Nomatter
howthesphereofpoliticsistransformed,Orwellswarningsaboutthe
power of corrupted language to manipulate and deceive others will
alwaysbeworthheeding.
66 Cross sections | Volume IV 2008

Bibliography
11thMarineExpeditionaryUnit,11thMEUBattlesAntiIraqiForcesinAnNajaf
(2004)GlobalSecurity.org
<http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2004/08/mil040812
mcn03.htm>at19April2008.

AustralianBroadcastingCorporation,PostmodernPoliticsABCBackground
Briefing,19March2006.

AsiaPacificEconomicCoorperation,SydneyAPECLeadersDeclarationon
ClimateChange,EnergySecurityandCleanDevelopment(2007).

Atkins,Ros,HasTerrorismBecomeaMeaninglessWword?(2007)BBCNews
World
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldhaveyoursay/2007/04/has_terrorism_become
_a_meaning.html>at21Apr2008.

Australianpolitics.com,JohnHowardsPolicySpeech(Oct282001)
australianpolitics.comNews<http://australianpolitics.com/news/2001/0110
28.shtml>atApril142008.

Bai,Matt,TheFramingWars,TheNewYorkTimes(NewYork),17July2005.

Edelman,Murray,ThePoliticsofMisinformation(2001).

Edelman,Murray,ThePoliticalLanguageoftheHelpingProfessions,in
MichaelJ.Shapiro(ed),LanguageandPolitics(1984).

Fear,Josh,UndertheRadar:DogwhistlePoliticsinAustralia(Discussion
paper96,TheAustraliaInstitute,2007)117.

Furedi,Frank,PoliticsofFear(2005).

Ash,TimothyGarton,OrwellforOurTime(5May2001)TheGuardian
<http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/politicsphilosophyandsociety/story/0
,6000,486093,00.html>at15April2008.

Gemes,Ken,NietzschesCritiqueoftheTruth(1992)52(1)Philosophyand
PhenomenologicalResearch4765.

InternationalHeraldTribune,ReturnofthePatriotAct(2005)International
HeraldTribune<http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/18/opinion/edpatriot.php>
at20April2008.

Ingle,Stephen,Lies,DamnedLiesandLiterature:GeorgeOrwellandtheTruth
(2007)9(4)BritishJournalofPoliticsandInternationalRelations730746.

Jenkyns,Richard,MotherTongue,Prospect106,16January2005.
The Corruption of Language | Ben Grono 67

Kaufmann,Walter,ThePortableNietzsche(1982)3347.

Kellner,Douglas,From1984toOnedimensionalMan:CriticalReflectionsonOrwell
andMarcuse(2006)DouglasKellner
<http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/from1984toonedimensional.p
df>at15April2008.

Kellner,Douglas,AnOrwellianNightmare:CriticalReflectionsontheBush
Administration(2006)DouglasKellner
<http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/orwelliannightmare.pdf>at
15April2008.

Krugman,Paul,CompetitivenessADangerousObsession(1994)73(2)Foreign
Affairs2844.

Lakoff,George,DontThinkofanElephant!(2004).

Lakoffm,George,andFerguson,Sam,CrucialIssuesNotAddressedinthe
ImmigrationDebate:WhyDeepFramingMatters(2006)TheRockridgeInstitute
<http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/lakoff/immresponse/view>at23
April2008.

Lakoffm,George,andFerguson,Sam,FramingVersusSpin:RockridgeasOpposed
toLuntz(2006)ChelseaGreenPublishing
<http://www.chelseagreen.com/about/politicsandpractice/news/2006/june9b>at
18April2008.

Lemann,Nicholas,TheWordLabTheNewYorker(NewYork),16October
2000,100117.

McGrail,Stephen,BewarethoseCorporateWeaselWords,TheAge
(Melbourne),23February2008.

Orwell,George,PoliticsandtheEnglishLanguage,firstpublishedinHorizonin
1946(2003)www.georgeorwell.org<http://www.george
orwell.org/Politics_and_the_English_Language/0.html>at2April2008.

Orwell,George,NineteenEightyFour(1949).

Paul,Ron,WhatstheMeaningofFreedom?DontaskaPolitician(2005)
Antiwar.com<http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=4737>at19April2008.

Pocock,JGA,VerbalizingaPoliticalAct:TowardaPoliticsofSpeech,in
MichaelJ.Shapiro(ed),LanguageandPolitics(1984).

Rothbard,Murray,ConceivedinLiberty,VolumeIVTheRevolutionaryWar1775
1784(1979)266267.
68 Cross sections | Volume IV 2008

Szimhart,Joseph,Review(2007)OrwellDidntKnow:PropagandaandtheNew
FaceofAmericanPolitics
<http://home.dejazzd.com/jszimhart/what%20orwell.htm>at20April2008.

Tibbetts,AM,WhatDidOrwellThinkAbouttheEnglishLanguage?(1978)
29(2)CollegeCompositionandCommunication162.

UnitedNationaFrameworkConventiononClimateChange,Essential
Background:KyotoProtocol(2008)UnitedNationsFrameworkConventionon
ClimateChange<http://unfccc.int/essential_background/items/2877.php>at10
April2008.

Watson,Don,DeathSentence:theDecayofPublicLanguage(2003).

Watson,Don,WatsonsDictionaryofWeaselWords,ContemporaryClichs,Cantand
ManagementJargon(2004).

Wittgenstein,Ludwig,TractatusLogicoPhilosophicus(1922)21.