GalacticCactus Forum
Forums => English & Linguistics => Topic started by: Noemon on June 17, 2008, 10:47:59 AM
-
I've been enjoying this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7457287.stm), and thought I'd share.
-
That was fun in a painful sort of way.
I wonder what it is about corporations that seems to encourage buzzwords like these.
-
I've occasionally wondered the same thing. If my experiences in the business world are typical, I think that it may have something to do with people with junior high level literacy being put into positions of power. The people in the upper echelon don't necessarily have the vocabulary necessary to express what they need to get across, so they'll create awkward phrases to describe what they're trying to get across.
The awkward turns of phrase spread in the same way any other meme does, I suppose.
Of the items listed in the article, the two that I've been hearing most lately at my workplace are "get your ducks in a row",which has been popular here for years, and "drill down", which has only really caught on in the last 6 months or so.
-
I also think that a big part of management philosophy is that if you can change the words you use, you'll change the way you think. It's one of the basic principles in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, for instance. Hence the insistence on terms like "challenges" instead of "problems" and "right-sizing" instead of "downsizing."
-
Yeah, you're right; that's definitely one of the things feeding into the phenomenon.
I think that there's also something of the emperor's new clothes at work.
-
But aren't they beautiful clothes though?
-
Oh, they're fantastic. And any time they get worn, the tailor fixes them, no questions asked. It's that sort of holistic, cradle-to-grave approach that has allowed him to grow his business so efficiently.
-
I also think that a big part of management philosophy is that if you can change the words you use, you'll change the way you think. It's one of the basic principles in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, for instance. Hence the insistence on terms like "challenges" instead of "problems" and "right-sizing" instead of "downsizing."
As annoying as I find it when it's enforced from above, I think there's some truth in that idea.
-
I can think of some good evidence against that idea, but none for it. Of course, that doesn't mean that there isn't any.
Terms for races are a good example, I think. A term like negro becomes tainted with racism, so we move on to colored, and then to black, and then to African American (though black is still very common). Changing the words didn't change how people viewed blacks.
Of course, maybe that doesn't actually contradict what you said. If someone is racist, telling them to use black instead of colored isn't going to magically change their views. But I still think that changing your views comes first, not changing your language.
-
Terms for races are a good example, I think. A term like negro becomes tainted with racism, so we move on to colored, and then to black, and then to African American (though black is still very common). Changing the words didn't change how people viewed blacks.
I'm not sure we can say that. People's views concerning blacks certainly has changed during that time period, and it's not obvious, at least to me, that the influence only went one way.
Of course, maybe that doesn't actually contradict what you said. If someone is racist, telling them to use black instead of colored isn't going to magically change their views. But I still think that changing your views comes first, not changing your language.
I think that changing the language can influence the views. Note that this is a far cry from saying that will change the views.
-
It's kinda like saying that ultra-violent video games or movies can influence somebody's behavior vs. saying that they cause people to behave violent.
-
Terms for races are a good example, I think. A term like negro becomes tainted with racism, so we move on to colored, and then to black, and then to African American (though black is still very common). Changing the words didn't change how people viewed blacks.
Of course, maybe that doesn't actually contradict what you said. If someone is racist, telling them to use black instead of colored isn't going to magically change their views. But I still think that changing your views comes first, not changing your language.
Which is why I stubbornly insist on calling my husband "a cripple" or "crippled", instead of "a person with a disability" or "differently abled".
There is no one more accepting and accommodating of cripples than I am. I suspect that people who insist on euphemizing it are mostly afraid to deal with it. And some of the best-adjusted cripples I know feel the same way. They're quadriplegics out there working full time, married with kids, and call themselves cripples. It's the folk I know who sit on their butts all day and refuse to try to live a regular life who call themselves "a person with a disability".
I think it's a lot like the way that the most out and in-you-face homosexuals call themselves "queer". Or the prevalent ghetto use of "nigga". It's taking back the negative slur and saying that there is nothing wrong with the way that they are.
-o-
And I am guilty of using the management speak "going forward". I find it more polite than telling the person, "Shut up already about that. What's done is done and neither you nor I can do anything about that. So put it behind you and get on with your job. I am not going to spend any more time listening to you kvetch about this."
-
I'm not sure we can say that. People's views concerning blacks certainly has changed during that time period, and it's not obvious, at least to me, that the influence only went one way.
Good point. I think the only thing that's obvious is that changing the word that's used does not immediately change anything. There's no magical mental transformation when you start saying "rightsized" instead of "downsized." I think this is because the label for the idea is not the same as the idea. It seems to take more effort to change those ideas, and I think people perceive this sort of forced vocabulary change as shallow, transparent, and manipulative.
I think that changing the language can influence the views. Note that this is a far cry from saying that will change the views.
Do you have any examples?
-
I think people perceive this sort of forced vocabulary change as shallow, transparent, and manipulative.
Exactly!
BTW, my ex is a big fan of "challenges" instead of "problems" and other similar language modifications. Not the reason for the divorce, but probably a factor. ;)
-
BTW, my ex is a big fan of "challenges" instead of "problems" and other similar language modifications.
Given what you've said about his love for The 7 Habits and related motivational stuff, I'm not at all surprised.
-
Yup.
To me, Tony Robbins' name is a bad word (which I had apparently successfully blanked out! I just had to use IMDB and look up Jack Black -> Shallow Hal to find his name). Covey I don't actively dislike, abut I'm not a huge fan either.