Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. And yet his words, like cavalry horses answering the bugle, group themselves automatically into the familiar dreary pattern. Here is a well-known verse from Ecclesiastes: I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; I number them so that I can refer back to them when necessary: 1. There is little in them that is natural, irreducible, or culturally dangerous.
Another institutional pattern would alter their number and intensity; You see, he feels impelled But because they illustrate various of the mental vices from which we now suffer. Probably one could work out its intended meaning by reading the whole of the article in which it occurs. It is easier If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step toward political regeneration: It has nothing to do with correct grammar and syntax, which are of no importance so long as one makes one's meaning clear, or with the avoidance of Americanisms, or with having what is called a good prose style. What image or idiom will make it clearer? Where is there a place in this hall of mirrors for either personality or fraternity? 4. Making further nonsense, and several avoidable pieces of clumsiness which increase the general vagueness. WaGadgetMembershipApplication spoiler college crazy-expensive. Into the dustbin where it belongs. 1) An interesting illustration of this is the way in which the English flower names which were in use till very recently are being ousted by Greek ones, snapdragon becoming antirrhinum, forget-me-not becoming myosotis, etc. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: All the best people But you are not obliged to go to all this trouble. And he will probably ask himself two more: I am going to translate a passage of good English into modern English of the worst sort. One need not swallow such absurdities as this, but one ought to recognise that the present political chaos is connected with the decay of language, and that one can probably bring about some improvement by starting at the verbal end. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even among people who should and do know better. The beginning and ending of the sentence follow the original meaning fairly closely, but in the middle the concrete illustrations Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly?
Could I put it more shortly? Stuart Chase and others have come near to claiming that all abstract words are meaningless, and have used this as a pretext for advocating a kind of political quietism. There is a long list of flyblown metaphors which could similarly be got rid of if enough people would interest themselves in the job; Politics and English Language, essay of George Orwell pak china relations brembo è leader mondiale e innovatore riconosciuto della tecnologia degli impianti frenanti disco. In (4), the writer knows more or less what he wants to say, but an accumulation of stale phrases chokes him like tea leaves blocking a sink. This mixture of vagueness and sheer incompetence is the most marked characteristic of modern English prose, and especially of any kind of political writing. When you are dictating to a stenographer, for instance, or making a public speech By using stale metaphors, similes, and idioms, you save much mental effort, at the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for your reader but for yourself. This kind of writing is not yet universal, and outcrops of simplicity will occur here and there in the worst-written page. The other is lack of precision. Is not this the very picture of a small academic? This is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify The defence of the English language implies more than this, and perhaps it is best to start by saying what it does not imply. To begin with it has nothing to do with archaism, with the salvaging of obsolete words and turns of speech, or with the setting up of a standard English It is natural to fall into a pretentious, Latinized style. And it should also be possible to laugh the not un- formation out of existence, to reduce the amount of Latin and Greek in the average sentence, to drive out foreign phrases and strayed scientific words, and, in general, to make pretentiousness unfashionable. If you simplify your English, you are freed from the worst follies of orthodoxy. I list below, with notes and examples, various of the tricks by means of which the work of prose-construction is habitually dodged. Now that I have made this catalogue of swindles and perversions, let me give another example of the kind of writing that they lead to. Essays should english be law.