Technology has become a
big part of our lives in today’s world and as a result, it has affected the way
we speak and communicate. For example, teens and even some adults nowadays use
shorthand methods and words such as “brb” or “gtg, ill ttyl”. From looking at
this example and the warnings from authors, the conclusion can be made that
language is devolving.
George
Orwell, in Politics and the English
Language, explains how, “…the writer either has a meaning and cannot
express it, or he inadvertently says something else, or he is almost indifferent
as to whether his words mean anything or not” (Orwell 2). Often times, writers
may have and even students may have concepts that they want to portray but
cannot get their word across. They just speak the language and don’t think
about what they are actually speaking or what meaning the words have. Orwell
also explains how many metaphors have been twisted out of their original
meaning, often for us to understand (Orwell 3). Neil Postman, author of Amusing
Ourselves to Death, described how when Lincoln and Douglas would debate for
hours upon hours, the audience would not be lost but instead would respond to
the debates with applause. On the other hand, not that many people would be as
engaged into the debates as they were while Lincoln and Douglas were debating.
According
to Orwell, language has become very vague so others can understand. Language
has devolved to fit our needs in the 21st century, where almost
everything is done in the form of technology. Shorthand versions are being used
to quickly communicate and while communication is still going on, what is being
said isn’t really being thought about. The telegraph had allowed more people to
communicate. Neil Postman describes how people had started to write about
irrelevant public events that were happening all around the world. Photography
has also become a language, according to Postman. He describes photography as, “…a
language that speaks only in particularities…unlike words and sentences, the
photograph does not present to us an idea or concept about the world” (Postman
72). Photos created another way to communicate instead of communicating with
words. Words weren’t required to describe pictures since the image had a set
meaning to what it was trying to represent. Television has also led to the
devolving of language. Advertisements try and use fewer words and more pictures
so it is appealing to the public. As time went on, more shorthand versions of
communication were developed so the public would often get stuck while talking
to someone in person and would have to think about what they were saying.
Works
Cited
Postman,
Neil. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show
Business. New York: Viking, 1985. Print.
Orwell, George. Politics and the English Language.
N.p.: n.p., 1946. Web. 27 Aug. 2015.
Gr8 job Kulsoom! I really like how you brought up the debates because I also found that those brought up a great point that people now do not, and can not, comprehend complex speeches. Even when the news spurts out facts that may be as sophisticated as in those debates, people just blur it out while they view the pictures because they do not register the information as important, because it is supposed to be entertainment (since it is through the TV). Like you said, images have taken over language but they still do not get meaning across. Images are just representations of reality, there is no analysis, no discussion. Language is devolving constantly every time we turn on the TV, open up youtube, or text each other "lol ok".
ReplyDeleteI agree with you (and Nina) about the debates. I was just over at Harvey's blog and he was using language in Shakespeare's time as a comparison. Think how few people today can (or even try to) understand those plays, and yet everyone in London could follow them. Some of the issue is dated allusions, of course, but I'm also thinking about how many more language errors I see in ads, on the news, etc. than when I was younger. Maybe it's education that's changed...?
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with you about how few people can understand Shakespeare's plays and how it has changed from everyone understanding the plays and debates to people barely understanding them. Maybe it is the education that has changed to fit our needs in the 21st century and not the actual language.
Delete