I once had an online conversation with a writer who really, really doesn’t like me. We were arguing about something and he responded, that writers should be careful of the words and phrases they use, as they need to be precise.
He was objecting to my use of the phrase “knee-jerk” to describe a decision that he claimed had been taken after consulting everyone involved. While the original discussion that engendered his comment was never enough to really get my juices flowing, his statement about the importance of precise language stuck with me (you may draw your own conclusions regarding what interests me from the preceding sentence).
Of course, it’s probably a good thing for prose intended for publication to be quickly and easily understandable by the widest audience possible. But is it really that important outside of the confines of a book? Even within those confines, I’d argue that a certain amount of transcending the rules is acceptable, so you can imagine that precision in daily language is something that I really don’t think is all that important.
xkcd.com recently summed up my view of this:
Link to the original comic here.
Sums it up, doesn’t it? It just seems to me that if people understand what you’re talking about, it’s fine. I have worked with a large number of accountants and engineers in my time and, as you can imagine, many of them disagree vehemently with this point of view. And yes, I’ve seen a strong correlation between people who need everything to be in neat little labelled boxes and people who think this way – but that’s not the point today. I really want to focus on the language implications, because these are the ones that have more to do – in my opinion – with being a global citizen.
How often do you find yourself involved in a conversation with someone in which language barriers mean that you have to pay attention to the context of what the person is saying in order to be able to understand a particular word? If you move in the circles I do – and I assume that anyone reading this probably does – you often find yourself trying to understand some heavily accented English, or even trying to make yourself understood by reviving those old French lessons. When you are in the latter position, my structured adversary is probably not the kind of person you want listening to you.
Experience teaches one to relax this requirement for others, and eventually brings one to understand that it isn’t all that important. I think what irritated me most about the original discussion was that he wasn’t focusing on the message but on the language, which has in human history led to a whole bunch of stupid (including the once-relevant PC parrots) , and is something I can never understand.
So I have more questions than answers for you. Was he doing it on purpose to bug me? I doubt it – he seemed genuinely mad at me for using the phrase. But it was clear from the context that it was just a place holder for “making an insufficiently reasoned decision and the wrong one, to boot”, which leads me to the conclusion that he chose to interpret it that way, and to take umbrage.
In this particular case, it’s his problem… But what does he need to get over something like this?
Essentially, the best way to get past this is actually to be truly global in your outlook. A big-picture approach is required, and you really can’t get that from books or from your peers, and you can’t really get that if your main contact with the larger world is online, with people you’ve never met.
So, you ask, where is my nemesis from?
If you guessed he’s an American who doesn’t move too far from his home in the midwest, you get full marks. No bonus points this time, because we all know it was just too easy. Of course, this is unfair to many midwesterners who actually have outgrown the limitations of their geography, but such is life when space forces one to generalize…
Anyway, I promised eclectic, and eclectic this blog will be. Art, travel and guest bloggers are coming now that we’ve goteen some of the philosphy and our first list out of the way…