Ritricia Teemal
Eng. 125 CD2-Fall 5015
October 7, 2015
Language as a Political Instrument
Both James Baldwin and George Orwell (Politics and the English Language, pg. 313) are interested in understanding language as a political instrument. Write an essay in which you examine their views on the politics’ of language, pointing out their similarities and differences.
According to both George Orwell and James Baldwin, language is a means of communication and across time, language has altered in political talk. However, both authors do not have the same perspectives on how language progressed. In “Politics and The English Language,” Orwell discusses the loss of meaning in political language; Baldwin, on the other hand, speaks about the different …show more content…
Orwell main point is, “Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes,” (Orwell 1946). Orwell lectures on about how politicians use political language to make everything sound successful; later on, when the audience discovers the real definition as to what the politicians says it’s the complete opposite. Politicians use big meaningless words to get their message across, and it’s bizarre. Orwell claims, “Political language -- and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservative to Anarchists -- is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind” (Orwell 1946). Even though we might think we know what politicians are talking about, we actually sometimes …show more content…
Orwell (1946) discloses that, “A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even among people who should and do know better.” Baldwin, similarly, says, “There have been, and are, times, and places, when to speak a certain language could be dangerous, even fatal “(Baldwin 1979). Immediately, we can observe that both authors are saying there can sometimes be miscommunication and confusion between individuals. The approach in which politicians speak can be puzzling. Even though one may voice the same language as the other, that individual may not comprehend what the other is uttering due to the different dialects. Both authors depict that language expresses an individual for whom he or she is and their identity. Language has made the world a smaller world. Without language, we would have more complications and misinterpretations towards each other. The words we voice are the words that show us who we are and it shapes our personality. Orwell conveys to us how to use proper English and excellent literature distancing from the debased modern English we use today. Baldwin exhibits how Black English came to be and how it has changed society, making communication straightforward. As the year progresses, the English language will continue to change, creating more slang and less meaning, resulting in
Eng. 125 CD2-Fall 5015
October 7, 2015
Language as a Political Instrument
Both James Baldwin and George Orwell (Politics and the English Language, pg. 313) are interested in understanding language as a political instrument. Write an essay in which you examine their views on the politics’ of language, pointing out their similarities and differences.
According to both George Orwell and James Baldwin, language is a means of communication and across time, language has altered in political talk. However, both authors do not have the same perspectives on how language progressed. In “Politics and The English Language,” Orwell discusses the loss of meaning in political language; Baldwin, on the other hand, speaks about the different …show more content…
Orwell main point is, “Now it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes,” (Orwell 1946). Orwell lectures on about how politicians use political language to make everything sound successful; later on, when the audience discovers the real definition as to what the politicians says it’s the complete opposite. Politicians use big meaningless words to get their message across, and it’s bizarre. Orwell claims, “Political language -- and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservative to Anarchists -- is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind” (Orwell 1946). Even though we might think we know what politicians are talking about, we actually sometimes …show more content…
Orwell (1946) discloses that, “A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even among people who should and do know better.” Baldwin, similarly, says, “There have been, and are, times, and places, when to speak a certain language could be dangerous, even fatal “(Baldwin 1979). Immediately, we can observe that both authors are saying there can sometimes be miscommunication and confusion between individuals. The approach in which politicians speak can be puzzling. Even though one may voice the same language as the other, that individual may not comprehend what the other is uttering due to the different dialects. Both authors depict that language expresses an individual for whom he or she is and their identity. Language has made the world a smaller world. Without language, we would have more complications and misinterpretations towards each other. The words we voice are the words that show us who we are and it shapes our personality. Orwell conveys to us how to use proper English and excellent literature distancing from the debased modern English we use today. Baldwin exhibits how Black English came to be and how it has changed society, making communication straightforward. As the year progresses, the English language will continue to change, creating more slang and less meaning, resulting in