The power of double-speak

Euphemisms have been used since ancient times to avoid giving offense, but now politicians are using them to
hide the realities of war.

Deferred success, person who is hearing-impaired – are these phrases in any current dictionary? Where did
they originate? Does anyone actually use them? While our media are frequently charged with dumbing down
and our teenagers with being inarticulate, and perhaps both accusations have merit, some of our leaders are
busy creating a whole new vocabulary. Listen to political speeches these days and you’ll find yourself having to
spontaneously translate newly-combined words from your own language. It could be the Minister for
Education finding reasons why our children are now leaving school without having mastered simple arithmetic
(they’re motivationally challenged), or someone from the Department of Transportation explaining why the
differently-abled are still denied access to numerous subway lines. All politicians seem to be semi-fluent in
double-speak.

The ancient Greeks used euphemisms for certain religious words so they did not offend the gods. Native
English speakers in previous centuries used euphemisms mainly to avoid giving offence to each other. Better
to say ‘I have to visit the rest room’ than directly announcing your intention to use the toilet. ‘He passed away
yesterday’ is a bit more sensitive than ‘Tom has just died’. As we know, language evolves with time and trends.
So now we have the rather modern ‘She’s rather full figured’, which is certainly kinder than ‘She’s fat’! Even
more recently, ‘blended family’ has been used to replace the much longer ‘Divorcees Jack and Mary have got
married and their kids from previous relationships are now one big family’. But in the 21st century, the use of
euphemism or double-speak is also being exploited for far more sinister purposes. If you don’t believe this,
listen hard to what our military leaders are really telling us and read between the lines of the next ‘factual’
report on any country afflicted by war.

Even if you deplore their policies, you have to agree that our military leaders are clever. Once you dehumanize
the enemy, it’s far easier to drop your bombs and mask the horror of war. Your own civilians reading the
paper or listening to their leaders on the evening news are less likely to protest or comprehend the claim that
‘An attack on soft targets is the only way to destroy the terrorists hiding among them’ than the admission that
‘We also had to kill innocent men, women, and children who lived in the town.’ We are now so used to
double-speak that we are in danger of becoming truly desensitized. We hear about military campaigns and the
statistics of death, but the actual gruesome details are quite remote. Our politicians and our generals know
that if we actually saw what is left after a bomb has dropped and witnessed the grief of the survivors, we
might demand an end to the fighting.

The greatest hypocrisy, of course, is the use of language to glorify or justify the actions of your army and then
to denounce exactly the same actions when they are carried out by the opposing army. A military report that
announces ‘Our soldiers were forced to take cover’ is factually no different from the statement that ‘Their
soldiers ran away and disappeared,’ but the latter sounds far more cowardly. And, of course, when the
government supports the actions of a rebel group that it believes could serve as a potentially useful ally, the
rebels are more likely to be called ‘freedom fighters’. This label instantly creates an image of bravery and
selflessness. As soon as the government decides that the group might not be a useful ally after all, its
members become ‘terrorists’; in other words, evil and inhumane. Whether you realize it or not, your opinions
are being made for you by the words that someone else chooses to say or write.

When I was child, I used to believe that war was about good versus evil, and it was easy to know whose side
you should be on. Now when I hear of another case of young soldiers being killed by ‘friendly fire’, I almost
wish I was still that naïve.

Student Profile page

This week we talk to Anastasia, Natalia, and Camilla to find out about their experiences of learning English.
Interviewer: How long have you been learning English?
Anastasia: Since I was five. My mother did an interpreting course at university and she started teaching me
English from my young years.
Interviewer: (1)__________________________________________________?
Anastasia: Communication and reading. I love to read literature in the author’s own language. This has always
been very much fascinating for me. And, also communication because I want to talk to people and it doesn’t
matter where I am there is always someone who can speak English.
Interviewer: (2)__________________________________________________?
Anastasia: Grammar! Yes, It really fascinates me, because you have so many tenses and basically I have
studied all of them but I can’t always get them right. And when I read the grammar or the vocabulary, I think
‘yes I know that’, but when it comes in terms of speaking or writing I’m always confused. Because I think ‘Well
maybe this will do’ or ‘I’ve read something like this before’ and sometimes I hit the bulls-eye and sometimes I
can’t believe I could get it so wrong.
Interviewer: What do you think Russian students should know about studying here?
Anastasia: Don’t be afraid to talk. It doesn’t matter if you make a mistake, they’ll explain. The way to teach is
much more relaxed here.
Interviewer: (3)__________________________________________________?
Anastasia: Nothing. I just need a few minutes to adjust and I’m usually OK.
Anastasia is organizing a meal at a Russian restaurant in Parnell this Saturday. If you want to go, put your
name on the list in the Student Room.

Interviewer: (4)_________________________________________________?
Natalia: I think it’s really different, because, like, I’m in a home-stay family so I’m living with people from other
countries. I’m living with a Swiss girl and a Russian girl so it helps a lot because I have to speak English with
them and also, with the family I’m always speaking English, so it’s really challenging. In Brazil we speak
Portuguese the whole time.
Interviewer: Do English and Portuguese have anything in common?
Natalia: Sometimes the words are pretty much the same. So visually you can do the relation between the
English word and the Portuguese word. It doesn’t always work though and sometimes you can get it wrong.
Interviewer: (5) ?
Natalia: Oh, well I think they have to incorporate English into their lives as much as they can. Use songs,
television, reading, anything. And try to go to an English-speaking country.
Interviewer: (6) ?
Natalia: Definitely, I think that language is all the result of… Oh how can I say it? Language is a way of
representing what a country… who the people are. That’s the way I see it. I think they are totally connected. In
Brazil, we… our sentences overlap, we often start talking before the other people has finished. And here I’ve
noticed other people do that a tiny bit but nowhere near as much. So, sometimes conversations here seem to
drag for me. I don’t know.
Natalia has just finished the Teachers of English as a Second Language course. She’s now going to take a well-
deserved break in Fiji.
Interviewer: Can you describe a typical English class in Sweden?
Camilla: The classes have about 20 students. All the four skills are important, and we do a lot of vocabulary
and grammar. The teacher always stays in front of the class.
Interviewer: (7) ?
Camilla: Absolutely. You know, you can speak English in the whole world and you can’t speak Swedish. So for
most of us it’s vital.
Interviewer: (8) ?
Camilla: Oh that’s difficult. It’s a big difference. But maybe one is, for example, the way we order our words in
a sentence is quite different. In English, you can say ‘I want to travel round the world’ but we say ‘round the
world’ first, and then ‘I want to travel’ after, so adverbs can go in different places.
Interviewer: (9) ?
Camilla: Yes, one time when I called to the hotel to make a reservation, they didn’t get what dates I wanted.
When you speak face to face, it’s easier. You can use gestures. But on the phone your pronunciation must be
crystal clear.
Camilla is also hoping to improve her French while she’s here. If you speak French and want to learn a little bit
of Swedish, you can meet her in Room 5.