You say 'tomato', I say 'massacre', let's call the whole thing off
This blog post might be a little off-topic, and - perhaps - more appropriate for my research blog - but I think it gives an interesting insight into the role of language in the interpretative process.
(Apologies to anyone who finds the topic distressing.)
(Apologies to anyone who finds the topic distressing.)
Comments
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/3356/
I think in terms of the article there have been similar concerns over the use of words such as 'genocide' which are applied to many circumstances which are not felt to warrant them. Again its a matter of interpretation (and I cannot remember any specific examples to make this point more helpful)
The classic example of 'sanitised' language has to be 'ethnic cleansing', which - I think - the orginal blog post makes reference to. And how about the 'final solution'? The spiked writer is completely right in his allusion to '1984', I think. Society has become very adept at removing the emotive and the partisan from language, especially in 'official' contexts. It's kind of disturbing if you think too much about it. :S