Politics and the English Language
Pure Wind
By David Young, published Jun 18, 2006
Published Content: 12 Total Views: 15,143 Favorited By: 0 CPs
Must we move towards more concise and simplistic phrasing at the risk of losing
all complexity in argument? Upon first reading “Politics and the English Language,” I discovered Orwell to be a very able writer with a lucid style and a very transferable sort of wisdom. However, upon a closer, more focused reading of the essay, I found myself wondering whether modern English would indeed be better off without the metaphors that have defined the political language of our era. Should we never again use the “verbal refuse” that has played so large a role in the construction of politics and modern English as we know it? (637). This essay begs such a question, and our educated response to its frustrated aspirations must be a vehement “no.” Orwell’s answers to the alleged “general collapse” of the English language - while rightly founded in his frustration over totalitarianism - can cover neither the span of modern English nor the entirety of its political functions. Moreover, beyond the blatant oversimplification and screaming assumption in the essay, we must observe Orwell’s own inability to attain to its idealistic standards (626).
You may also like...
- English as Global Language, TEFL International
- Analyzing Orwell: 1984 and Politics and the English Language
- The Disappearance of Sensuality in the English Language
- Learning the English Language: No Doubt The Hardest Language to Understand
- Misleading E-mail Claims Senators Voted Against the English Language
- The Role of the English Language in Chile
- Evolution of the English Language
- The Italian Language Legacy
- The Canadian Divide Between French Quebecois and the Rest of Canada
- John Osborne: The Angry Young Man of the English Theater
Comments
Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Most Commented On

