Weaselwords...Eureka?

[Zorbuddha]

If this is not the answer to all the problems, it might at least serve to mollify many of them.

I ran across this and thought some here might get a kick out of it.

http://www.weaselwords.com.au/index3.htm

Latest Reviews

'Spare Don Watson, author of Death Sentences from all of these weasely, wishy-washy, and worst of all, ugly bits of management-speak that have drifted out of consulting sessions and into the social realm.' Forbes.com

'In a blast that should be posted on every newsroom wall, Watson denounces journalists ``who reproduce without comment words that are intended to deceive or manipulate''' Bloomberg

'Death Sentences is a call to arms to save discourse from leaders who 'vandalize the language' The San Diego Union-Tribune

Review of the Weasel Words Dictionary by the Journal of Australian Studies. Click here to read
http://www.api-network.com/cgi-bin/reviews/jrbview.cgi?n=1740513215

---

'De-perimiterisation is now being regarded seriously as as an alternative paradigm...' MessageLabs Intelligence Monthly Report for May 2005 (thanks to Stuart Rogers)

'...former Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission chairwoman Lowitja O'Donoghue said Mr Howard's speech was mostly weasel words...' The Age, 6 June

'It wasn't a moment of violence. It was a moment of clarification.' Russell Crowe answering reports that he supposedly roughed up a British TV executive.

'He's being funeralised this Friday.' Bride to be expressing her sadness about the approaching funeral of a relative. Heard on "Dr Phil"(from Lynda Myres)

[Zorbuddha]

1. Did nobody check this out?

This hit the second page in record time. I'm shamelessly kicking it.

[Igel]

2. There's an older book out by an anonymous writer under the

name Petr Fidelius. It must be from the '70s. It's only in Czech, and I don't think it was ever formally published for public distribution.

It deals with the Czechoslovak's Communist Party writings, in the newspaper, public speeches, radio reporting, public documents.

One section deals with the "Communist Party". It's the people, then it's the workers, then it's the Party members, then it's the leading party members, then it's the senior leadership. At each step, those not agreeing with the next higher rung aren't really "in" their rung--if some among the "people" don't agree with the "workers," then they're not really part of the "people". If Party members don't agree with their leaders, they're not *really* in the Party. And unless you ostracise the dissident elements, you, too, are leaning towards being dissident.

The semantic shifts are subtle and gradual in any given speech or document, but consistent: they start by giving all power to an all-inclusive "the people", but end up dehumanizing and marginalizing anybody that disagrees with them, with only the topmost leaders wielding any power whatsoever.

The shifts are too consistent to be accidental. Now *that's* using weaselwords. Not just employing foul sounding neologisms.

[Zorbuddha]

3. Fascinating, thanks. And sobering.

While reading your insightful and somber comment, I realized how we have become so prone to make light of the most dire of issues. Are we just laughing to keep from crying, or have we truly become lightweight?

This is serious as a heart-attack and I thank you for putting it in a proper context.

(Your sig-line quote is well-taken by me, and a lesson for all.)

[Igel]

5. There's actually a burgeoning literature in Central

Europe (not Russia, surprising?) about the political manipulation of language.

It's rather different from Lakoff, who argues that dems should manipulate language to their ends. The European work looks at how it was actually done, and how so many people could blithely spout the correct rhetoric without stopping to think what the propaganda actually meant.

I really enjoy listening to political speeches in the US from time to time, from either party; I suspect the repubs are worse than the dems, but haven't kept track. What the party bosses did in Central Europe didn't require any great insight; but recognizing what they did, and defending against it, surprisingly, requires keeping your wits about you.

[Zorbuddha]

6. I think you have focused the issue

to its most significant point. When rhetoric becomes automatic it can turn against oneself. Words have largely lost power in an age of intellectual laziness and gross ineloquence. Wordiness masquerades as articulation and the power of words has been reduced to propaganda and manipulation, rather than nuance and meaningful insight. (edited to add that last phrase)

Thanks for your input here, I sense I could learn a great deal from you.
You aren't from Prague, by any chance, are you?

[Zorbuddha]

4. See today's Senate testimony for todays weaselword lesson

Extraordinary!

Especially Byrd and Kennedy v Rumsfeld.