meaning changes and can even fade away

[miriam_e]

Strange how words shift and change in English. People who use computers often talk about their computers booting, or that they boot their computer up. Ask them what they think it means and they realise they have no idea beyond the immediate meaning of starting the computer.

It actually has a really nice, almost metaphysical meaning. In the very early days of computers we had to enter code by hand as a set of switches in binary numbers, each representing a very simple instruction to the microprocessor. It was slow and tedious, stepping through memory positions, entering in these numbers by hand. Then when the code was run it would start reading a program from a punched tape reader or some other device. This was considered to be rather an awesome feat, somewhat like lifting yourself by your own bootstraps. Later it became referred to as bootstrapping the machine, and still later it was simplified to just 'boot'. I love the idea of starting the machine being like someone lifting themself up by their own bootlaces. :)

There are lots of words that change in strange ways in English. The word 'let' is an especially odd one. It originally had the opposite meaning. These days it means to enable. It originally meant to obstruct or hinder. You can find it still being used in its ancient meaning in law, because legalese is so... modern.

This is one of the things I love about English. It is crazy and illogical, but it is a truly democratic language -- the most flexible in the world. It is constantly changing. English is defined, not by stuffy professors of language, but by the ordinary people who use it... us.

Comments

[annie-lyne.livejournal.com]

It's great, though I wouldn't say the phenomenon is confined to English.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

French is decided upon by a special committee. If they don't like it then it is not French. Latin is a dead language and hasn't changed for hundreds of years. Korean was designed to be logical and consistent, so I'm not sure how malleable it is. I don't really know about any others. My niece is learning Russian and she says it is incredibly rich and full of exceptions, and difficult to learn. It may be that it has evolved in a similar way to English. From what I've heard of Spanish it is a fairly small and regular language, with few new entrants to the vocabulary. (I want to learn Spanish one day.)

One of the really outstanding things about English is that it has no problem with "stealing" from other languages, or making up new words, or creating entirely new ways to speak. It is a weird language, and must be hell to learn, but it is a wonderful language for writers and poets and musicians.

It's kinda okay, y'know? ...here we are, on the web, buoyed up on a sea of bits, afloat on a tide of memes, in an infinitely mutable mindscape. What a blast! Sayonara, adieu, adiós, auf wiedersehen, arrivederci.

...see what I mean? :)

• Kinda isn't really recognised as a word yet, but has been in common use for many years, having variable meanings, such as "mostly", or "similar", or "not quite" depending on context.
  
• Okay is a new word constructed from the letters of two other words.
  
• Y'know doesn't appear to mean anything but has a genuine use in ordinary speech as a kind of spoken question-mark.
  
• Web has enlarged from something that spiders do to this worldwide network of computers.
  
• Meme is a word invented in 1976 by Richard Dawkins.
  
• Mindscape appears to have been constructed from "mind" and the second half of "landscape".
  
• Blast, being a good thing, was probably introduced by the drug culture.
  Many foreign words are happily adopted into English -- everyone knows those words for "goodbye".

I love this crazy, chaotic, goofy language.

[annie-lyne.livejournal.com]

You're right about French, but I'd imagine that "street" French would be vibrant and evolving as well, possibly not to a greater extent.

Welsh likes to steal words from English too.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Hey, that's a really interesting point about "street" French. I hadn't thought of that.

Heheh crafty Welsh. :)

[ratfan.livejournal.com]

Yes, re legal uses of words, I remember hearing the phrase "without hinder or let" which translates as "they aren't allowed to stop you" doing whatever it was. Lawyers are also careful to instruct witnesses to answer, "Correct" instead of "Right," because that word has become so broad in meaning that it can create confusion untold :-)

"So you got to the intersection and turned left?---Right.

You turned right?---What?

I hadn't realised until I thought about it that this simple little word had shifted sideways to imply not only agreement but also understanding,sometimes with the implication, "I'm not sure that's correct!" As in, "Ri-i-ght. Sure."

Sigh. I probably need to get out more

Ratfan

[author and court transcription typist]

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

I hadn't thought of "right" having multiple meanings in that way. Cool!

Confusion can arise from more than just meaning too. Have you noticed people, when talking over radios (especially military types) say "affirmative" instead of "yes", and "negative" instead of "no"? I used to think this was simply due to officialdom's love for needless complication of simple things, but some years back I learned a more likely reason.

I was programming my Amiga computer's speech output (amazingly advanced, that computer was, even today) and found that careful use of redundancy actually increases understanding. Simple single syllable words are much harder to understand in difficult circumstances (imperfect computer-generated voice, noisy radio communications, etc.) than multi-syllable words. "Yes" gives a single shot at understanding, and is a single syllable like "no". "Affirmative" gives more chances to hear what is being said, and even if the sounds are unclear, it is nevertheless obvious that it has 4 syllables. "Negative" has 3 syllables.

So flowery language can actually have great communication benefits in certain situations. "She sat on the chair" can then be far less useful than "the woman reclined upon the armchair". ("He what on the bear??") It became a neat challenge to program the computer's speech in ways to boost intelligibility without becoming awkward. Some words carry more of the meaning in a sentence than others, so expanding them selectively can be much more effective than simply lengthening all words, which can get tedious.

If you ever have to talk on a noisy phone line this info can be very useful.

[idealistagain.livejournal.com]

I have mixed feelings on this. Because on the other hand, you can get evil people who try to corrupt the language for the purpose of corrupting thought.

[idealistagain.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure how it is in Australia, but what alarms me is the increasingly Orwellian nature of the national vocabulary here.

"Sound science" is now a common part of the lexicon, but it means just the opposite.

Imperalism and war are justified in the name of bringing democracy and peace.

Etc etc.

I'm also not really keen on this "reclaiming language" concept. Reclaiming from what? The words never belonged to oppressed groups to begin with and on the contrary were used as insults and tools of oppression. You might as well talk about "reclaiming nuclear technology".

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

As you say, language is used by powerful people for very bad things. At the moment its misuse is particularly obvious. We (yes, in Australia too) have a big crop of particularly weak politicians at the moment and it takes strength to resist the urge to lie and cheat in order to get elected. Unfortunately, few politicians are up to that at the moment. I don't think it is something that is just characteristic of this time. Occasionally we get good people in power, though more often we don't. Now is one of those times when we don't. The big difference today is the ability of a larger portion of the population to see how naked the Emperors are. A little while back I listened to a talk by one of Australia's most idolised politicians from when I was a kid. I was appalled. I doubt he could have got away with such patriotic manipulation today.

"Reclaiming" words is just a shorthand way of describing the methos used to defang words that are used to vilify people. It is simply a useful technique for undoing some of the damage that can be done by hurtful use of language. You're perfectly right. Words never belong to anybody, while at the same time they belong to everyone. "Reclaiming" is more about gaining some control over how you are described.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

But at the same time we retain the ability to change it back. (Like changing "dyke" from a bad word to a neutral one.) If some authorities had total control over the language then it could likewise be corrupted, but we wouldn't be able to repair it. Though, as annie_lyne noted above, that would likely just give rise to a split in the language -- the "authoritative" form and the "street" form.

But, yes. You're right. Language is such a powerful tool for both good and bad that we ignore the ramifications at our peril.

One of the oddest things I've seen again and again is when people think words are powerful for completely the wrong reasons. They confuse the symbol for the thing it represents, which is why people believe that spells, incantations, and spoken prayers have power. It always surprises me how many people have this problem.

The power of words lies in the way they can be used to tug on our emotions and subvert our logic. That can be a good thing when poets and novelists use it, or a bad thing when politicians or advertisers manipulate our motives.