Semantics

It is an observable fact of life that Semantics, along with spelling and grammar, seems, of recent years, to have become a dirty word - since they stopped teaching English in schools, in fact. Spelling appears to be making something of a recovery and so, but to a markedly lesser extent, does grammar but we are still left with a vast semi-literate population consequent upon the teaching that all you had to do was get the ideas down on paper regardless of whether the result actually communicated anything intelligible to anyone else. However, any question involving semantics, in particular, is usually still written off as a necessary consequence of our using a ‘living’ language. The use of the ‘living language’ excuse for mistakes in, and inconsistent use of, semantics, spelling and grammar within our language, however, signally fails to take account of two factors, the second of which has given, and continues increasingly to give, a considerable amount of grief.

The first of these two factors concerns the reasons why our language is ‘living’ quite as much as it is. Allowing that a language in continuous use will necessarily evolve to meet new circumstances, needs and knowledge it is also apparent that much of the ‘living’ devolves not so much from these causes as from wanton, bloody minded stupidity on the one hand and bone idleness on the other. Both of these causes will lead to the illiteracy widely prevalent in all levels of our society today. When coupled with a not inconsiderable amount of meddling by certain persons within the B.B.C., in pursuit of standardisation, whose standard of literacy is itself not above reproach the end result is a certainty. We are far too lazy to learn to properly use our own language. We are far too busy watching television, getting drunk, beating up old ladies, robbing banks and the 101 much more important things that we have to do. I will not elaborate at this time on any of those topics. After some thought, if you can be bothered, and a look at a few current newspapers, if you can bear it, you will either agree with me or not and, since we are here dealing with the basics of human nature, which we are most unlikely to change, any argument will become pointless.

The second of my two factors, however, is much more fundamental.The sole raison d’être of language is to facilitate communication – it has no other purpose. It matters not whether we are considering written, spoken, musical, mathematical or any other form of language, this still holds true. It will be apparent to the great majority, without further demonstration, that in mathematics if we do not all stick to the same set of rules for manipulating figures then we will all arrive at different answers to a problem.  It is a fact that some 50% - give or take 10% - of  ‘pop’ tunes are ‘nicked’ in some part from the classics. This is frequently achieved merely by applying to the same notes a different set of rules to those laid down by the composer.  This, of course, yields a different ‘answer’ in the sense that the music sounds completely different and leads the pop aficionados who all “hate classical music” to believe that they are listening to something new ! What is consistently overlooked is that the same reasoning applies to written or spoken words. Quite simply, if we do not all use our language to the same set of rules then we will fail to communicate accurately or, on occasion, at all.

This is not a theoretical concept or a forecast for the future – it is actually happening now. The garbage on which our legislature wastes so much of its time, and so much of our money, putting into law is shot full of holes almost before the ink is dry largely because of the ineptitude with which it is written. I do tend to the view that a lot of this is deliberate as it keeps the legal profession in profitable work (a) drafting it, (b) shooting it full of holes and (c) fighting it out in court. All ‘jobs for the boys’, of course. Quite apart from the rubbish which they legislate politicians, in their day to day dealings with the proletariat (us) are not averse to the calculated (I suspect) misuse of words to achieve a desired effect. The current use and abuse of the words ‘terror, terrorism and terrorist’ is a classic example of this. If you don’t believe me then go and look up the actual meanings of these words. There are many classic howlers on the ever increasing deluge of forms that cascades down upon us. These howlers are publicised as humour and like the fools that we are we laugh. They would, indeed, be funny if acknowledged and corrected, but they aren’t corrected and, again like the fools that we are, instead of rejecting them we accept them and they persist – living language indeed !!

Words have an, often very precise, meaning – which is why we have dictionaries. If you use your meaning and I use mine then we do not communicate. Two different spellings of a word which result in identical phonetics usually transmit non-identical meanings – which can be disastrous when written down if we spell incorrectly. Two different sets of punctuation in an identical sequence of words will, sometimes dramatically, completely alter the meaning of a sentence. Semantics matter, spelling matters, grammar matters; of course a language in constant use is allowed to ‘live’ but it is at our peril that we continue to subject it to the constant abuse and contempt that we do.

Listening to news bulletins on radio and / or television these days can be a very painful experience. The anthropomorphisms, the split infinitives, the prepositions at the ends of sentences – the list is almost endless. Buckingham Palace is quoted endlessly. Now I have spent many hours outside of Buckingham Palace and I have never heard it say a word !!  What is more, I have never yet met anyone who has. However, if I am to keep up with the news at all I have to sit and listen to this drivel. If Stuart Hibberd was alive now he’d turn in his grave !!!

The situation is not improved, in fact it is greatly exacerbated, by the advent, and growing use, of ‘Texting’ and computer ‘Messenger’ services. I have to try and keep pace with these gross affronts to the English language in order to understand the messages I receive from my grandchildren. What I find particularly puzzling, however, is that, on the whole, typing in good English takes no longer than the gibberish they send me. What it does require is discipline – another dirty word.

Like Hoola Hoops, Clackers and CB Radios this will all run its course, I suppose. The problem is that whereas Hoola Hoops, Clackers and CB Radio were merely addenda to our lives the current abuse of our language is fundamentally altering its structure and usage. We currently have the most varied and versatile language on the planet. When we’ve lost it we will all be wondering how we allowed it to happen. Semantics, grammar and spelling matter and the time to realise this is NOW.