Ideology and the Corruption of Language

I always liked Orwell's essay on that topic:

Now that I have made this catalogue of swindles and perversions, let me give another example of the kind of writing that they lead to. This time it must of its nature be an imaginary one. I am going to translate a passage of good English into modern English of the worst sort. Here is a well-known verse from ECCLESIASTES:

I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth.

Here it is in modern English:

Objective consideration of contemporary phenomena compels the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account.

---From "Politics and the English Language," 1946.

http://wikilivres.ca/wiki/Politics_and_the_English_Language

 

Good read. Thanks, Squire.

 

Based on the knowledge of the truth presented in the OP link, does anyone expect the ideologues who post on this board to upgrade their posts?

 

#2 reminds me of a translation story involving Matt. 26:41b (with "indeed" omitted, as is common in colloquial use.) The verse was set into Russian by a Soviet (which dates the story) translator unfamiliar with scripture, then set back into English by a 2nd similar Soviet.
Thus, "The Spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" became "The ghost is happy, but the meat is spoiled."

 

You mean the Calvinists?

 

Having ploughed through quite a few of Socrates' dialogues (actually written by Plato) as a student many moons ago, one thing I noticed was that Socrates never ever changed his mind. He always persuaded (bullied?) others into changing theirs.

Just sayin'

 

Spot on!!!