From which of Dante’s nine circles of Hell did bureaucratese spring forth? You know the sort of thing.
Engineers in NASA refer to their astronauts as engaging in “extra-vehicular activity.” They would happily be burned at the stake before admitting that “going outside” works just as well.
CIA spooks talk about “enhanced rendition”, when they really mean “kidnapping.” Likewise “enhanced interrogation” is otherwise known as “torture”.
And what soul-less military soothsayer came up with “unrotated projectile,” when referring to a missile?
So yes, there’s a lot of it around. But what are the reasons for this abuse of language?
There are, I think, several. Some of it has to do with wanting to sound important or better still, erudite.
The academic world is replete with this kind of thing. Consider, for instance, this introduction to a journal article about fungi: “As the third ‘f’ in contemporary biodiversity conservation, languishing behind fauna and flora, fungi occupy a comparably liminal and, possibly, marginal position in literary history and ecocritical studies.” No idea what that means.
Or this: “The work of the text is to literalize the signifiers of the first encounter, dismantling the ideal as an idol. In this literalization, the idolatrous deception of the first moment becomes readable.” No it doesn’t.
Some forms of bureaucratese are intended to avoid uncomfortable admissions. Hence the head of Barclays Bank: “I want to de-layer the organization, creating a closer day-to-day relationship and clearer line of sight for myself into the business.” A.K.A. “I’m firing the suckers.”
And our school system is replete with edubabble, its purpose being to remain politically correct. Some examples, taken from student report cards in Ontario:
“We will give this student more opportunities to be honest about her activities.” Meaning, “She’s a lying troll.”
“This student is able to communicate ideas orally in French using a variety of grade-appropriate language strategies.” Meaning, “She can’t speak a word of French.”
“This student uses planning skills with limited effectiveness.” Meaning, “He’s a disorganized and messy little mutt.”
You might think lawyers, whose job is to untangle and explain sometimes complex matters, would understand the need for clarity. You would be wrong.
Hence this standard piece of boilerplate, “In witness whereof, the parties hereunto have set their hands to these presents as a deed on the day month and year hereinbefore mentioned.” Meaning, it’s a done deal.
Healthcare has its own doublespeak. “Negative patient outcome,” means the patient died. “Morbidity” is another word for illness. “Peripheral oedema” is nothing more than a swollen ankle. “Idiopathic” means we don’t have a clue what caused it.
Politics, of course, is a home away from home for doublespeak. “I’m retiring to spend more time with my family,” means “They’ve got the goods on me.”
And, “I’m running as a centrist candidate,” means precisely nothing.
Lastly, as for myself, if any of this offends you, in the words of Texas congressman Joe Barton: “If anything I have [written] has been misconstrued to the opposite effect, I want to apologize for that misconstrued misconstruction.”
jalmcfarlane@shaw.ca
