In the spring of 1942, I made my first attempts to join the American Army. This essay has nothing to do with army life but rather it has to do with language. At that time, in 1942, the lingua franca of the world was French. The language of diplomacy was conducted in French, which accounted for it being taught so heavily in the school systems.
Less than three years later, at the end of the Second World War in 1945, the lingua franca of the world was clearly English. I attempted to use the English language with more or less spotty success. However, I am much delighted by this turn of events because I would be hopeless as a speaker of French.
Now here we are, say 65 years later, and it seems to this observer that English is being challenged on at least two fronts. A large part of the world speaks Spanish and the Chinese language seems to be gaining on all of the front runners. I gather that the Mandarin version of the Chinese language is much preferable to the Cantonese version. My grandson, who is a student at Northwestern University, is studying Chinese. He spent this summer in China and seems to have won an argument to be readmitted to the closed Shanghai World Festival through his powers of persuasion in Chinese. I don’t speak a word of Chinese, either Cantonese or Mandarin. So the next time I see that kid, I will tell him to speak English in a fashion that is understood by millions of people like me.
For the time being, I suspect that English is the lingua franca of the world. Not long ago, I sought to understand why this was so. So I consulted Sven Lernevall, who is a scholar on matters of this sort. Sven told me that he used English because it is a “rich” language. Sven’s native tongue, of course, is Swedish. But if English is a rich language, it is probably due to additions to that language by modern speakers of the tongue.
This essay does not propose to be a scholarly work in any sense. It is simply the effort of a blind person who, being deprived of sight, depends entirely on language. So let us proceed into the proceedings.
Not long ago I was advised by a physician to try to avoid falling down. I took Dr. Alterman’s advice very seriously but I also wondered whether, if I had to avoid falling down, there was such a thing as falling up. I did not ask the doctor that question because I feared he would ask me to leave his office.
Then there is the case of being “knocked up.” No one ever said that a person could be knocked down and meant it as a medical condition or, in one such case, as a compliment. The one such case involved the English, who use the term “knocked up” as a great compliment. For example, an Englishman might say, when it comes to cooking, “the French have it all knocked up.” Of course, there is a case for being knocked down as a result of violence, but when it comes to paying a compliment, as in the case of the French cooking, being knocked down is a term that is never used.
Now we proceed to a newer term, which is called being “ramped up.” In the last two years or so, the term being “ramped up” has come into usage by newscasters who are attempting to distinguish themselves from each other. The term is always being “ramped up,” never being “ramped down.” The term obviously means increased output of one sort or another, as in the case of more tonnage and in the case of Afghanistan where our involvement is now greater than it was.
Another new term has come into my ears over the past six months or so. It is called “spot on.” What in the world is “spot on?” What in the world “spot on” means has totally eluded me. I heard a golf game for a minute or two the other day and when the golfer hit a ball that landed on the green, the announcer said that it was “spot on.” If he had said that the ball was on the green within close putting distance, I would have understood him. But no, it was being “spot on.” These are additions to the English language that I suppose Professor Lernevall would find pretty dubious, but there they are.
Then there is the reference to being “plated.” Being “plated” actually is a baseball term and has to do with driving a run in. When I hear that term being broadcast, I feel a sense of revulsion. I have an equal sense of revulsion with baseball announcers who announce a homerun as “going yard.” This is preposterous business. For at least 150 years, when a hitter drives a run in it has simply been called driving a run in and when a ball is hit over the fence, it is a homerun. But commentators, in an attempt to distinguish themselves, have now attempted to use the terms being “plated” or “going yard.” That is the signal for me to turn the set off.
Another new term that has come into usage recently is “doubling down.” In the case of the war inAfghanistan, we have sent a certain number of troops to fight that war and now it is reported that we are “doubling down” by sending more troops. I suspect that I understand what doubling down means but this speaker of the English language is not enthusiastic about its usage.
There is also a new term being heard recently. It is “calling him out.” As best I understand that term, it means rebuking someone for an act he has committed. It is not a sports term. It is a euphemism for the term “being rebuked,” if I am anywhere close to understanding that term. Again, I ask, what is wrong with “being rebuked?”
Now we have arrived at a term that causes me great confusion. It is called “conflating.” Does it mean confusion or exaggeration? Conflation baffles me, particularly in light of the fact that there are several other words that are time-tested that would do the job more than adequately. But youngsters, in an attempt to make a mark, tend to use the word of conflating. If a young person came into my office when I worked for AT&T and used the word conflating, I would ask him what the hell that meant. He had better give me a pretty good answer in English, not Chinese, or he would be shown the door.
There are two final thoughts on the English language. The first is that we are using a drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico to intercept the gusher in an attempt to kill it. Rig has other meanings as well. For example, the Millburn Rescue Squad refers to their truck or ambulance as a “rig”. I suppose that rig is a universal term.
The second thought has to do with corn that has been roasted or boiled. My memory tells me that when the ears of corn were boiled, the resultant dish was called “roaseneers.” That was the Missouri term. In Pennsylvania, the same dish would have been called “roasteneers.” And all I can say is that either term merely means eating corn on the cob.
These are the additions and refinements to the English language which I have observed with my ears in the last few months. Taken on balance, they do not represent an improvement in the language, in my estimation. The English language, which has existed for a good number of years, is wide enough and broad enough to cover almost every situation. On the other hand, I have no trouble with people who attempt to improve the lingua franca of the world. But I reserve the right to “call them out” when they miss the mark.
One of my readers is Howard Davis, a gentleman who has always identified himself as a writer. When Howard Davis reads this little essay, I will be greatly interested in his comments, not upon the quality of the essay but upon the new terms which are included herein. He will comment upon the quality of the essay in any case, but I will remind him that the new terms are the ones that we wish to concentrate on. So that is my say on the state of the lingua franca of the English language.
In the final analysis, it appears to me that the language keeps on growing and is modified from time to time. Perhaps that is a good thing, because no one speaks of new phrases or words in the Latin language these days. When some new words or revisions or additions appear on the screen and make their way into my mind, I suppose I will be back again with another comment upon the English language, which actually is a derivation of a Saxon tongue. So until that new comment comes around, you are stuck with the current state of the language as I have described it.
E. E. CARR
August 2, 2010
Essay 481
~~
Kevin’s commentary: I wonder how far back these language essays go. I am still holding strong in my resolve to create a dictionary at the end of Ezra’s Essays to capture all the words and phrases that Pop dislikes. I’d add another section to address all the ones that he’s fond of, but those particular essays have never been nearly as abundant. If he’s reading this, he can consider this a formal request for some.
On another note, it’s always a pleasure to find myself mentioned in one of Pop’s essays. In this case it was particularly flattering because he mentions Spanish and Chinese which are the two languages I’ve studied in my life. Unfortunately, neither one is up to snuff at time of press, though I have been working to improve my Spanish by trying to chat slowly with the immigrant family with whom I am living. I attempted to do the same thing with the Chinese family I lived with for the last six months, but they didn’t particularly like me. Hell, they didn’t particularly like people in general.