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

[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.