Doublespeak, Communication and Society

George Orwell, 1984

Human beings rely on symbols to construct their individual perceptions of the exterior world. Language is a direct product of this construction of reality. Language itself results as the individuals need to communicate with their group their respective realities within the confines of a set code understood by each member of the group.

"Creation seems to come out of imperfection. It seems to come out of a striving and a frustration, and I think this is where language came from. I mean, it came from our desire to transcend our isolation and have some sort of connection with one another."

Waking Life, 2001

In this way language is man's most vital tool. Janet Holmes questions "Can language determine the way we perceive reality?" (Holmes, 331) The concept of linguistic relativity addresses this particular inquiry. Linguistic relativity states that "language influences perceptions, thought, and, at least potentially, behavior." (Holmes, 336) If the concept of linguistic relativity stands true, then can language be used as a weapon to manipulate the perceptions and behaviors of individuals and groups?

Many writers have addressed the topic of languages' grasp over perspective reality but one author in particular stands out as a voice of warning. George Orwell produced a horrific view of a future world in which society is controlled via the manipulative use of language. The novel follows protagonist Winston Smith a citizen of Oceania, which is a nation in which the common language is called "Newspeak". The use of newspeak within this society results in "doublethink" the ability to believe two contradictory ideas at the same time.

"The keyword here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. Doublethink is basically the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them."

- Part II, chapter IX - chapter I of Goldstein's book

Although he did not coin the phrase in his novel 1984, doublespeak was the eventual result of combining these concepts. So why is doublespeak so important? Doublespeak according to Webster is evasive, ambiguous, high-flown language intended to deceive or confuse. Taken in context with linguistic relativity one can easily reach the conclusion stated by William Lutz "It is language designed to alter our perception of reality and corrupt our minds." (Lutz, 5) If the language we receive is corrupt it will corrupt our thought process. For this reason doublespeak is a crucial concept requiring attention and analyzing for it demonstrates the potential to be used as a weapon for control and holds extreme importance, "in a country that depends upon an informed electorate to make decisions in selecting candidates for official office and deciding issues of public policy."(Lutz, 5)

Doublespeak distorts reality by creating false communication based on contradictions, misleading words, phrases and unnecessary complexities. With this understand one can go on to scrutinize language that falls under the definition of doublespeak. Overall there are four categories which represent doublespeak, they are: euphemisms, jargon, gobbledygook (bureaucratese) and inflated language. Each concept represents a method of misusing language although a few do have proper uses within society.

Euphemisms are words or phrases that have been designed to avoid a harsh or distasteful reality. An example would be the tradeoff of the term "lie" with "categorical inaccuracy". Euphemisms while representing doublespeak in certain cases also have their proper function in language when used in the concern of others feelings or out of concern for a cultural taboo. (Lutz 1). The use of euphemisms in this way closely relates to the concept of negative politeness which pays people respect and avoids intruding on them. (Holmes, 281) An example of a proper use of a euphemism would be the use of "senior citizen" instead of "old" or the phrase "passed away" instead of "died. Euphemisms are also used by Holmes in her exploration of Ideology and CDA (Critical Discourse Analysis). A CDA approach attempts to identify methods by which audiences are manipulated through a choice of particular words or phrases to take a certain stance in relation to the topic of discourse. An example would be the generally different reaction to the use of "protesters" or "demonstrators" as a lexical choice in discourse. (Holmes 394 - 5)

Much like euphemisms, jargon has its proper and improper functions in language. Jargon is a specialized language used by a particular professional, trade or hobby and has been used to describe pidgins, languages created as "bridge communication" between people without a shared language. Within a specialized group, jargon allows for speedy and efficient communication between group members; this use of jargon represents its proper use within communication. When jargon is used to communicate with a member outside of a specified group with the foreknowledge that the individual is unable to understand the language, it represents a use of doublespeak. (Lutz, 1) Examples could be drawn from doctors inappropriately conversing with patients or mechanics with customers in order to promote a preferred reaction from the targeted individual.

Unlike euphemisms and jargon both gobbledygook and inflated language are used specifically to mislead or confuse the audience representing blatant doublespeak varying from the humorous to transparently dangerous. Gobbledygook, also called bureaucratese, is the use of many sophisticated words in convoluted sentences intentionally employed to confuse the audience concealing the actual issue of discourse. (Damron 2) Lutz offers a comical example provided by Alan Greenspan as he made this statement when testifying before a Senate committee:

"It is a tricky problem to find the particular calibration in timing that would be appropriate to stem the acceleration in risk premiums created by falling incomes without prematurely aborting the decline in the inflation-generated risk premiums."

The use of such language clearly has one purpose; it is language that generally pretends to communicate but does not. (Lutz 2) It seems clear that most people would have absolutely no clue what he is saying, or would give up listening or reading; the exploitation of language in this fashion usually results in communication bypass.

The fourth and final category of doublespeak is inflated language. Inflated language can resemble jargon except inflated language is used to make the ordinary seem extraordinary, the simple complex. It is common to find inflated language used by corporate or military spokesmen and politicians. For this reason inflated language can indeed be quite dangerous in its implications. By using "preemptive strike/attack/ counterattack" to describe an attack or invasion by American forces, or using "engaging the enemies on all sides" as a description of an ambush is a clear misuse of language to distort the truth. (Lutz 2) While there are many examples of inflated language it seems clear that they also range from the mildly humorous in complexity "ballistically induced aperture in the subcutaneous environment" instead of bullet hole, to the blatantly misleading: the Ministry of Peace wages perpetual war within George Orwell's 1984, and in 1947 within the United States the name of the Department of War was changed to the Department of Defense.

It seems clear that doublespeak in its four forms represents a destructive force in communication. In order to properly communicate it is essential to use a language that is commonly agreed on. Using doublespeak is an action taken to deliberately hide the truth or mislead the receivers of the message. By doing this open and honest discussion is denied. (Damron 5). While dissolving communication doublespeak also succeeds in eroding trust. Once we have realized how doublespeak can influence our perceptions, it follows that we should analysis how pervasive doublespeak is in our society, exactly how dangerous it can prove in distorting reality, and how one can go about identifying it.

Following the terror attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent declaration of the War on Terror the American public has become subject to increasingly Orwellian form of language that allows those who hold power to fool others about their activities and evade responsibility and accountability. (Lynch 2) Following 9/11 politicians and lobbyists found it increasingly easy to approve a spending proposal by placing it under the guise of a "homeland security measure" even if the spending had nothing to do with national defense. This is a clear example of an express lane to reckless pork barrel spending. One may also remember Rep. Steven LaTourette's dismay over the reasonably recent bailout bill that was returned to the House from the Senate with increased pork-barrel spending.

"And would you think that they just were happy sending it back to us at $700 billion? No. They sent it back to us at $850 billion, and they added such wonderful things like $192 million for rum. Now, listen, I like rum, and it may be some of the Senators were nervous that they were losing the pirate vote. I don't know. But there's $192 million for rum. A hundred million for NASCAR. I like NASCAR, but what's it doing in this bill saving the Treasury? Eighty one billion dollars [sic] to Hollywood and $2 million for wooden arrows for children. Now, listen, all of these projects might be okay; they don't belong in a bill when the administration is saying that we need to act now or else the economy's going to melt down."

- Rep. Steven LaTourette on the bailout

A further example of doublespeak creeping into society relates to conscription. While the 1980 re-installment of the Selective Service System does come to mind, the program is fairly loosely regulated. More recent and alarming examples are "stop-loss" orders and "Try One" Program. Following 9/11 President Bush declared a "national emergency" and gave the Pentagon the ability to issue stop-loss orders; orders that keep military men enlisted even after their duties have been fulfilled. The Try One Program is advertised as a chance to try the Guard or Reserve for a year before deciding whether or not to fully enlist. Unfortunately in realty recruits could find themselves facing many years in the military instead of one. (Lynch 3)

With America's booming Military Industrial Complex it is only logical to realize officials must use doublespeak in order to maintain control over populations, especially in times of war. William Lutz even points out the use of the term "pacification" by Julius Caesar in his war against Gaul showing doublespeak's span throughout history. Politicians must use doublespeak just as well though for their job revolves around dealing with policies that directly affect the population and speak directly to the public. Examples such as the Healthy Forrest Initiative and Clear Skies Initiative proposed by the Bush administration which allow for increased logging of protected wilderness and increased industrial air pollution respectively demonstrate the political use of doublespeak to mislead the population. (Rosen 1) Negative growth or negative economic growth should be a term everyone has heard although they may not have realized at this point to describe a recession which Washington has finally admitted has been taking place since 2007.

With the knowledge of doublespeak forms, dangers, and common places of use one may begin detection of doublespeak which can many times be quite difficult work, and other times can be quite obvious. Lutz gives instructions to view and analyze the context of the discourse in full to understand the semantic environment. To examine any discourse one should address both speakers and receivers and their respective purposes. Take note of language that is commonly used in such situations and language that is actually being used. Questions audiences should keep in mind while detecting doublespeak are: Who is saying what to whom? Under what conditions/circumstances? With what intent? With what results? (Damron)

Throughout time language has progressively evolved and so has the language and methods used by individuals with power to manipulate the views of the people and sway thought and behavior. Doublespeak represents a very real danger to society that already holds influences over our actions and thoughts. From the slightly comical term "vertical transportation corps" used to describe elevator operators to the more sinister use of "collateral damage" for civilian casualties and "eliminate with extreme prejudice" to replace the more direct verb kill. Doublespeak in its four forms is used by politicians the military, advertisement companies and corporations in order to distort perception and confuse the public presenting itself only as a destructive force within a healthy democracy. Doublespeak does not provide us with tools required to develop and preserve civilization; such language will only breed suspicion, cynicism, and, ultimately, hostility. (Lutz 5) For this reason doublespeak is an extremely important concept within sociolinguistics that should be openly discussed and understood in order to fight its eroding force and reestablish proper communication channels between people.

Bibliography:

Printed:

Holmes, Janet. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 3rd. Harlow : Pearson Education Limited, 2008.

Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Penguin Group Inc., 1950.

Film:

Kim Krizan. Waking Life. DVD. Fox Searchlight Pictures, 2001.

Online:

Damron, Michele . "Doublespeak." Damronplanet . 4/30/98. 24 Nov 2008 .

Giroux, Henry. "Double Speak and the Politics of Dissent." Dissident Voice 20 Aug 2004 1-7. 24 Nov 2008 .

Lutz, William. "Language, Appearance and Reality: Doublespeak in 1984." Et Cetera (1987) 1-5. 24 Nov 2008 .

Lynch, Timothy. "Doublespeak and the War on Terrorism." Briefing Papers 06 Sep 2006 1-11. 24 Nov 2008 .

Rosen, Ruth. "Bush Doublespeak." San Francisco Chronicle 14 Jul 2003 1-2. 24 Nov 2008 .

Tauberer, Joshua . "The Majority Party." GovTrack. 03 Oct 2008. 9 Dec 2008 .