Sapir and Whorf came up with a complex proposition; the part of it we are interested in is to do with the idea that language doesn't only reflect how we think, it influences it. Basically, what we call something matters because it shapes opinions about what we are describing.
Recently, there has been much discussion about whether the people fleeing their war-torn countries should be termed 'migrants' or 'refugees'. By examining the implicature of these nouns, we can see why they leave the audience with different impressions of the same people. 'Migrants' suggests that they have chosen to move to improve their situation. 'Refugees' suggests that they have had to flee in fear of their lives. Which group would you be keener to help? But it is the same people.
Steven Poole called the manipulation of the audience through these kinds of choices 'unspeak' - deliberately choosing or avoiding emotive language to control opinion about an issue, even deliberately making the heart of the issue more difficult to understand. His book is worth dipping into. He tackles the interchangeable terms global warming/climate change in depth and this post does so more simply, so read that first.
No comments:
Post a Comment