Here is your chance to rant or rave (or express indifference) over what you've just analyzed. Is Orwell's essay effective/persuasive? What points will you focus on in your Textual Analysis essay to support your conclusion?
Orwell's essay is effective. I think it is true that our language is decaying. Nowadays, writers use so many fancy words in their writing to try to come across as elegant and knowledgeable individuals, that they actually end up giving the opposite impression. Writing that is meant to convey ideas and/or images to readers just confuse them. Simple ideas are explained with scientific terms that most audiences do not understand. For example, the excerpt from "Ecclesiastes" seems poetic and more understandable than its modern English version, which seems scientific (with words and phrases like “contemporary phenomena” and “commensurate”).
Orwell writes, "instead of being a single word," a verb occasionally "becomes a phrase." This is true. Why? Why do we try to be so sophisticated? I guess it is because it is easier to think about words and phrases that have already been made for us and used in similar circumstances. Resorting to these means, however, relates to another topic that Orwell mentions: orthodoxy. Orthodoxy has to do with conforming to usual beliefs so it makes sense that writers use common, "pre-fabricated" words and phrases in their writing.
Another thing Orwell writes about that I plan to write about in my textual analysis is sugarcoating. Politicians rely on sugarcoating to make things seem better than what they really are. Sugarcoating is a form of deceit and it ultimately ruins language by distorting reality.
I think Orwell wrote the essay to persuade readers to do something about our language's collapse. He wanted readers to realize that it is not too late to take action against all of the destroyers (dying metaphors, operators or verbal false limbs, pretentious diction, and meaningless words) of language.
"Politics and the English language" is my third encounter with George Orwells work. I was quite pleased with "Animal Farm" and how Owell used pigs to describe the axis powers of WWII. I agree with Nicole, this essay is effective. I too agree, to a certain extent, that the english language is decaying. At the same time i see that the english language is morphing. it reminds me of a crab when its in the process of molting. In order for the crab to grow it must shed its old shell, leaving itself in a vulnurable state for days. The end result though is a much larger and stronger crab. I guess what im trying to say is that perhaps the english language has to make istelf vulnerable(decline) in order for it to come back stronger(change into something better.) I agree with Orwells essay and how you should keep things simple. His essay gives a "back to basics" feel; why use big fancy words when small ones are just fine.Get to the point and dont "beat around the bush". Keeping things simple broudens your audience, when you use higher level diction you narrow down your audience.
Orwell did a good job persuading the reader on his points. I have to say i agree with Orwell's opinions about cliches being superfulous and how they shouldn't be used. i liked the fact that he admitted to his audience that although he disagrees with common writing errors, he as fallen victim aswell.
I have to agree with the two comments before that the english language is in a way decaying but i also have to say its trying to accommodate itself into our modern lifestyle just like everything else nowadays. I think the essay effectively expresses how we as writers should try to "keep things simple" instead of just trying to use millions and millions of big complicated words and cliches just to try and sound "smarter" and make our essay seem more professional, when in the end we are just filling up pages with words that don't really make much sense.
After reading and explicating Orwell’s essay, I can relate and agree with the three comments above. The quality and use in our English language are slowly changing into something else quite different from the original product. The incorrect use of words and their transition into other meanings or applications seems unstoppable. I agree with Orwell when he mentions that we need to take the time and responsibility to appreciate and correctly utilize our precious language. I relate this to cultural problems in Native American tribes which fight daily to conserve their language/dialect and culture. However, a great percent of the younger generations are not willing to “sacrifice” their futures because they want to spread their wings and have a modern lifestyle. Something needs to be done! We need to start looking up definitions, roots and using them wisely in our writing, and daily conversations. Its up to us to save the English language.
I believe Orwell makes a valid argument in the downfall of the English language. One of the major points he makes in supporting his argument is the use of pretentious diction. People tend to use higher level vocabulary believing that it will make their writing sophisticated, but as Orwell writes this only causes the context to become unclear and lose its intended message. Writing should be easy for the audience to comprehend instead of the common cryptic text we often encounter. Which leads to another point I strongly agree with is keeping writing simple and concise. Writing shouldn’t be flourished with extra words or excess syllables. I think change is inevitable in the English language. We can’t expect ourselves to go back to the old English but like Orwell I believe it should progress in a more positive to direction. The English language has to grow and expand through originality not through the imitation of what’s been done. I do think Orwell presents his argument effectively and I like that he creates a set of rules as a solution to the problem.
i think Orwell's essay had a lot of meaning to it, and it showed us a lot of things we often do without realizing it in our English language. one of them which caught my attention the most was definetely the expressing of our vocabulary. he says that individuals most of the time try and use "big words" to try and sound more professional, but sometimes they end up corrupting its meaning and that just makes them sound not professional at all. also, In my opinion, I think the english language is growing at all times and it does this to acomodate to our own growing as societies, and big part is due to technology. i found it pretty funny when our professor told us that the word google and text had both officially become verbs, that's just a little demo of how language is always growing.
In my opinion Orwell’s essay is absolutely effective and persuasive. It is well organized, and contains a strong thesis statement that is effectively addressed throughout the essay. This allows his ideas to flow smoothly and clearly, while following a specific organized structure. In addition, he uses specific examples, similes, metaphors, text exerts, lists, among many other techniques, to prove and support the point he is trying to make. This provides the audience with a more approachable way to relate with the topic. He shows rather than tells his ideas, evoking the audience’s emotions and creating mental images in their minds. He also uses a variety of sources, ranging from political to economical, religious, and even psychological texts, making his essay trustworthy and credible. In regards to the topic itself, after reading Orwell’s essay, I believe language is declining due to our generation tendencies. I absolutely agree with his point of view. Lina Garces
After reading Orwell’s essay I agree with the rest of the comments when they say that Orwell is effective in his essay and that our language is decaying. In particular I think he was completely right when he spoke about how people use pretentious words when they are unnecessary and can be said in a simpler way. I think you would only use pretentious words if you want to confuse people because you can say the same thing in a clearer and more concise way. I think that eventually leads to what we have been discussing in class of how words are misused because their true meanings have been changed used over time. That’s one of the ways I think that our language is decaying we have been misusing words without even being aware of it. It’s true that with the technology and our changing world we have developed a new text language or that when we chat we don’t spell out words completely but I think that shouldn’t affect our formal writing, or the completely change the meanings of words. The way we talk and write to our friends and family shouldn’t be the way we write in class, at a job or in a newspaper. Orwell was also right when he called us out on being lazy and just using old worn out metaphors instead of coming up with our own. It’s true that we have become very lazy with our language we just plug in pretentious words and metaphors and throw in commas without using any of them correctly. I think Orwell wants us to care more about our language and his absolutely right we have to stop being lazy and care more because if not it will be lost. Marcela
I must say Orwells Essay is almost dead on. As effective and thorough as anyone who truly dedicates themselves to study and research something as it could be.
Language has deviated from it's original purpose, to simplify communication. It's become a political matter. About who can use the biggest and newest words, words that the majority of the population have either never heard of or are too out there to even try to begin to break it down in context to find a meaning.
Because of that, it gives those people an air of sorts of sophistication. People feel that person is well educated therefore they would know what they are talking about. From there it spread into contracts of "Third, Second , and First Parties," of therefores and due to's, of fine print, and bold faced lies, in the end, it's true purpose has become to take advantage of the common people, a sword of condescendance dressed up as sophisticated friendly insight, misleading the commmon person.
I stongly believe that George Orwell's essay is accurate in its claim that our modern English language is slowly diminishing into oblivion. His point of view is very effective and persuasive with his use of examples comparisons, and descriptions. I really enjoyed reading this essay because it opened my eyes to how we constantly misuse language without even realizing it.
We often use pretentious diction to make ourselves sound more educated and professional. In reality, it has the opposite effect. By using complex terms and phrases, we actually make ourselves sound dumb and ignorant because we tend to use these terms and phrases in the wrong way. He explains that we use these words and phrases out of context with the meaning that modern society has placed on it rather than its actual definition. Unfortunately, we do it so often that it has been engrained in our everyday writing and speech.
I agree that we have become very lazy in the sense that we use old metaphors and cliches instead of coming up with our own. We do this because we may not know what we are truly trying to say or we cannot put our thoughts into clear terms. Maybe we do this because we are trying to cover up or soften what we are saying to make it sound less harsh. Whatever the reason, he explains that we will not be able to break these habits in one day, but we can do things to help improve it.
Our current society has new technology, such as cell phones and Myspace, that have made it easier for us to communicate with one another, and thus have allowed us to be informal and shorten words and sentences. The problem is that by constantly doing this, we confuse ourselves and begin to write the same way in class and formal writing. In this essay, he advises us to begin to pay close attention to these issues so that we can better our language for future generations.
After reading Orwells essay, I believe it is effective in some ways. I agree with the point that he makes about how writers try to make their essays wordy and use words out of context. Also, writers lose the meaning of what they are trying to say because they are trying to use bigger words or Clichés that are inappropriate for their writing. I also think the way he structured his essay was effective. He used valid examples for dying metaphors, operators or verbal false limbs, pretentious diction, and meaningless words. We tend to fill our pages with complicated words and phrases that are overused because we want to impress our audience with our knowledge of words, when in fact we are incorrectly using them. Even Orwell admits he has fallen victim to these errors. In class we discussed how we use the words irony or peruse incorrectly because it is how we were taught the word, but when we took a closer look at it, realized its true meaning.
Although I agree with keeping writing simple and using less words to say more, I think that there is nothing wrong with the evolution of language. What I mean by this is that language is suppose to change and expand. We should not call our language “ugly” and “inaccurate” just because we sometimes put too many words in a sentence or use a phrase in the wrong way. I am not saying we should write “goin, ttyl, or ur“ when writing a college paper, but when we write in our journals or instant message someone we should be allowed to use these terms. The point of creative writing is to be creative, but if we are giving limitations and specific styles of writing, how will we truly find our artistic side?
I do not think that our language is collapsing, I think people are just using words incorrectly. The correct way to use our language will always be there, we are just adding ways to use certain words to the existing language. If we say that our language is decaying then we are saying that everyone is using it incorrectly. We can not expect everyone to use the correct terms in their writing because it is only normal to make mistakes. Orwell does make good point when he says that we are writing in overly used metaphors, but it does not mean that we should not be allowed to use them. Metaphors can add to a better essay if used correctly. Instead of stating that out language is collapsing, we should just say that our language is evolving.
Orwell's essay is a masterpiece. His hate for coughed up metaphors and pompous diction is a feeling that is completely justified. Although language undergoes natural change it is our responsibility to nudge it in the right direction. Language is the tool we use to share our thoughts and feelings, should the English language decay to a tangled mess of cliche phrases and pretentious Latin words will not human interaction follow? Orwell demonstrates how this terrible diction is so alluring; they allow you to skip the though process and talk about something is a way that never truly explains what you are talking about. Governments have already been using this phenomena, much in manner doublethink is used in 1984 Orwell's novel. They use flowery words to deceive and befuddle, for example a slaughtering natives or minorities could be played of as pacification. Truly if we do not act this phenomena will eat our society form the inside out.
I have to agree with the majority of Orwell's points, however I believe that language is simply evolving into new forms at the same time we are as a society and is not necessarily being destroyed. I feel that we are just critical because it is simply newer form, one we are not accustomed to. I'm sure the type of language Orwell idealizes was criticized the same by those before it. Also, I feel that his "solution" to the problem of our decaying language is impractical. He says that this cycle of foolish thought from foolish language and vice-versa is reversible, but I feel that what's done is done and to change a whole way of thought and speech for a massive group of people is nearly impossible. I do agree with his points on Verbal Falses Limbs, Meaningless Words, Pretentious Diction, and Dying Metaphors. Language is meant to be simple but when given a simple written work we've been trained to see it on a lower standard to another work with pretentious and multi-syllabic words. I feel that Orwell's essay was effective but it had some general flaws.
Orwell's "Politics and the English language" is a very argumentative essay that tries to prove the author's point of view on the changes that English is undergoing, blaming it on politics and human stupidity. At first, I was convinced that he was right. But, after putting a lot of thought into it, I noticed a flaw that made me disagree completely with this thesis.
The official definition of language is "Communication of thoughts and feelings through a system of arbitrary signals, such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols". The language is a tool we utilize to communicate ideas. It has no origin but the need to have others listen to our ideas.
Now, I do not think that language itself can decay; I believe it changes. And why is that? Because, by definition, to decay is to decompose or to fall into ruin. Etymologically, it came from a latin word (decidere) that means to put an end or a conclusion to something. And this is not what is happening to the English language. We are not putting an end to it; it is just morphing into something new. It's evolving into a new way of communicating our feelings, thoughts and needs. And, just like any other language, English has been evolving ever since it was created. If it hadn't evolved at all throughout the years, we would still be talking like they did in the Old English versions of Beowulf, or like in the Old Spanish versions of El Cantar del Mio Cid, etc.
Also, I kind of disagree with his opinion that "more syllables = pretentious latinized style". Yes, there are people who (again) misuse words, or who use long words to seem smart. However, with a language that has been called a "Germanic language with a Romance vocabulary", I think it's crucial to know how and when to use Latinate words without being pretentious.
Orwell's essay is an example of his unparalleled persuasive strength. By using a very structured essay, with lots of examples and definitions, he makes it seem as if language is decaying. He shows examples, like his "translation" of the Ecclesiastes, that demonstrate sheer misuse of the English language. But misuse is not a synonym of decay, and this is where, I believe, Orwell failed in this essay. He misused a word in order to give his argument more credibility. And isn't this one of the "capital sins" that he accused modern English writters of?
Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" was a very persuasive piece. I agree with his point of views, but to a certain extent. Yes, it is true that language has deteriorated over the years and that more and more people are misusing words, but language has aslo evolved exponentially over the decades. There are always new words being added to the english language each year. An example of this is seen in the dictionary.
Although, his point of view seemed very clear, I would like for someoe to write an essay in rebuttal to his. Therefor, people can also be aware of the advantages language, especially the english language has offered us over the years.
I don’t think anyone can deny that Orwell’s essay is persuading. He sets up a valid argument through his use of examples. He takes texts from an array of authors who are all writing for different purposes (be it to convince someone to join a group or just expressing one’s thoughts) and he shows that they all fall victim to what he considers to be bad writing. Although his argument is presented with precise structure, it seems to be a bit one-sided. He never takes into account another perspective; one such as language is adapting to a new generation of writers. In my essay, I will attempt to show readers that even though Orwell’s argument is one-sided, it is still an effective argument. I will touch on Orwell’s explanations of our “collapsing” language exemplifying “dying metaphors”, pretentious diction, and meaningless work.
Whether you completely agree with Orwell or not, it is near impossible to deny that the man has presented a decent argument. From the “Staleness of imagery” to the “lack of precision” pointed out in five different passages exemplifying where the English language has left us, Orwell has certainly taught us a thing or two about politics and the English language. While there were many well presented and orderly sections and topics specifically critiqued, the most enlightening portions of the essay were on “Pretentious Diction” and “Meaningless Words”. After listing dozens of adjectives and words commonly used today to “dignify the sordid process of international politics” and “long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning”, he goes on to point out a habit that has stripped many words of their original meaning and power. This was a problem that I was completely unaware existed until reading this article. Not only did Orwell leave me questioning the current integrity of our language, he also managed to point out how we can go about fixing it. Simply being aware that “the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts” and listing questions that one should ask before writing, practical questions that seem so simple yet would likely solve the problem. Questions like “could I put it more shortly?” or “What am I trying to say?” Which leaves me wondering…what exactly am I trying to say? Nothing pretentious, I promise. Orwell wouldn’t have it.
I agree when George Orwell says that our language has been decaying. Today, many public figures such as politicians try to use big words to make themselves sound smarter. In my opinion, this is ineffective. Sometimes people think that when they don't understand something a politician says, it's because the politician is more intelligent than they are. Often, public figures make a fool out of themselves trying to sound smart. If they would use simple language there speeches would be clearer. Today, the meaning of certain words have been twisted and used in the wrong sense. My favorite part about Orwell's essay is when he explains that society has placed a new meaning on words. This causes the original point to be forgotten. I also feel like I can trust Orwell. He has many credible sources that he uses such as religious and psychological ones. I agree with Orwell when he says that we can not fix the English language in one night. Many great things take time and do not occur overnight. However, if we all learn something from Orwell we can work towards fixing our language. Although I believe that the English language is falling apart, there are some benefits. The point of technology is to make our lives simpler. I think using abbreviations in text messages, emails and instant messages is a part of technology. Typing this way helps us communicate faster and still understand each other. I believe that these abbreviations that we use help us. Though it is inappropriate to use them outside of the text message world, they are very effective when communicating with peers.
I believe that Orwell's essay has some points in it that may lead to the fact that the english language of today is in fact decaying. Different writers are trying to use such extravagant vocabulary but are not getting their point across. The strive for "excellence", as some would put it, doesnt consist of multi-syllabic words that are misused in the paragraph. What Orwell is also saying is that the english language is already completely destroyed. I dont agree with him in that case because it isnt destroyed yet. I think that the english language is indeed going downhill but may stil be saved.
Change is eminent. To me, George Orwell’s essay was a representative sample of how one way in which people deal with change. In my 9th grade biology class I learned that when faced with change, species have three options: they can flee, they can adapt, or they can die. Language is a sort of specie in itself, it changes with time depending on how people change and their ability to communicate evolves. Orwell seems to frown on the turn that language is taking this time around, he is negative in the respect that he sees much fault in modern writing, and I believe that he is skeptical to the idea that language could very much transform back into a more archaic style—to his liking. Orwell had many valid points, and a lot of evidence and thought behind each conclusion, but I disagree with him in that language is decadent. I believe that language is neither decadent nor taking positive changes, it just believe it is flowing in the way that people flow. Our language could sprout and blossom, or wither and be reborn in a different shape. Language will never change into what we expect, it might as well be thought of as a phoenix who changes color every time he is radiantly reborn from his cinders. Orwell should not aim to convince the reader that language is decaying, he should rather, express how he believes language is changing.
After analyzing Orwell’s essay, I find that he presents his argument in a very persuasive and impacting manner. I completely agree with his claim that language has become “ugly and inaccurate because of our foolish thoughts.” Therefore, I am convinced that we have forgotten how to think! Nowadays, it is much easier to resort to clichés or ready-made phrases, then to think of fresh new ways to express our own opinions. We have turned away from original thought and have given way to stale language. Instead of simply expressing our own ideas in basic and concrete terms, we have blindly chosen to imitate what we hear on a daily basis. We should try to break this awful habit by incorporating Orwell’s six main rules into our writing and by asking ourselves: “What am I trying to say?” Although it is difficult to stray away from “pretentious diction” or “dying metaphors”, we must remember that language was created as “an instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought.” Old habits are hard to break, but for the sake of the English language we should try to restore meaning back into our words. -Yaray Agosto
I feel that Orwell's essay is one of the best and most effective pieces of literature read throughout ENC 1101 and ENC 1102. Like other posts, I feel that Orwell makes a valid argument in the downfall of the English language. Also in accordance with other posts, I feel that the downfall of the English language is more so the language itself trying to evolve as our society evolves as a whole.
I also understand and appreciate Orwell's "keep it simple, stupid" tone. I feel that the essay tries to convey a certain aspect of quality over quantity that in my opinion, students these days have lost touch with.
I believe George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" is effective because I do agree with the fact that the English language has deteriorated over time. Words are losing their true meaning and being misued, because of our generations' interpretation of what the word may mean. Also, he points out "dying metaphors" and it is true. We commonly use metaphors that no longer are used just to take up space. I am thinking of writing how his paper was effective and persuasive and use my personal experience with misusing words as back up.
George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" is adequate. I agree with him believing in the gradual deterioration of the english language. I believe there is always room for progression. I, personally, do not have as much of a negative view on "cliches," but other than that I do agree with his negative views toward pretentious diction and meaningless words. In high school many of us are taught to "fluff" up words to sound more educated. Your own voice is what really matters and is what will distinguish you from any other writer, hands down.
I'm a little unsure on what to write my paper about; however, I like what was mentioned in class with the misuse of words (such as peruse). Another interesting topic that was mentioned in class that I liked was the more "modern" language of texting mixed with "normal" english. I don't condone the use of "text talk" but I still don't believe it should be used professionally. I do consider it part of the downslide of our language, but at the same time I consider it another branch of progression.
Overall I agree with his essay. Orwell presents many strong points with many instances as evidence. He's an excellent writer, in my point of view. The essay was just.. really long :/
ugh... second time trying to post this. I think that Geaorge Orwells is a great writer but with this essay he wasnt as effective as i thought he would be. This essay is lengthy. It begins to get boring by the 5th page. Many of the things he writes like "cliches" and lengthy words has been commited by everyone. I think that cliches are sometimes necessary to familiarize the person and kind of let them see the connection with your subject and that cliche. Also, i think every generation has a "slang" or their own english way of speaking. I think that english has progressed by the fact that we have many novels from all types of writing. I think if everyone went by what these rules saud then writing would be boring and not unique whatsoever. Also, i think that the fact that people use all these wrong ways of english writing it creates their own styles, well creative writing.
I do not know in what position im going to be in. Either i am going to say that i think his essay is completly not effective or think in some points he is right and in others wrong. But i will not agree with him 100 percent. By the way, his politics aspect is very very very bias and has no support for his ideals. -_- very dissapointed. (im a political science major)
Orwell's essay is effective. I think it is true that our language is decaying. Nowadays, writers use so many fancy words in their writing to try to come across as elegant and knowledgeable individuals, that they actually end up giving the opposite impression. Writing that is meant to convey ideas and/or images to readers just confuse them. Simple ideas are explained with scientific terms that most audiences do not understand. For example, the excerpt from "Ecclesiastes" seems poetic and more understandable than its modern English version, which seems scientific (with words and phrases like “contemporary phenomena” and “commensurate”).
ReplyDeleteOrwell writes, "instead of being a single word," a verb occasionally "becomes a phrase." This is true. Why? Why do we try to be so sophisticated? I guess it is because it is easier to think about words and phrases that have already been made for us and used in similar circumstances. Resorting to these means, however, relates to another topic that Orwell mentions: orthodoxy. Orthodoxy has to do with conforming to usual beliefs so it makes sense that writers use common, "pre-fabricated" words and phrases in their writing.
Another thing Orwell writes about that I plan to write about in my textual analysis is sugarcoating. Politicians rely on sugarcoating to make things seem better than what they really are. Sugarcoating is a form of deceit and it ultimately ruins language by distorting reality.
I think Orwell wrote the essay to persuade readers to do something about our language's collapse. He wanted readers to realize that it is not too late to take action against all of the destroyers (dying metaphors, operators or verbal false limbs, pretentious diction, and meaningless words) of language.
--Nicole del Calvo
"Politics and the English language" is my third encounter with George Orwells work. I was quite pleased with "Animal Farm" and how Owell used pigs to describe the axis powers of WWII. I agree with Nicole, this essay is effective. I too agree, to a certain extent, that the english language is decaying. At the same time i see that the english language is morphing. it reminds me of a crab when its in the process of molting. In order for the crab to grow it must shed its old shell, leaving itself in a vulnurable state for days. The end result though is a much larger and stronger crab. I guess what im trying to say is that perhaps the english language has to make istelf vulnerable(decline) in order for it to come back stronger(change into something better.)
ReplyDeleteI agree with Orwells essay and how you should keep things simple. His essay gives a "back to basics" feel; why use big fancy words when small ones are just fine.Get to the point and dont "beat around the bush". Keeping things simple broudens your audience, when you use higher level diction you narrow down your audience.
Orwell did a good job persuading the reader on his points. I have to say i agree with Orwell's opinions about cliches being superfulous and how they shouldn't be used. i liked the fact that he admitted to his audience that although he disagrees with common writing errors, he as fallen victim aswell.
I have to agree with the two comments before that the english language is in a way decaying but i also have to say its trying to accommodate itself into our modern lifestyle just like everything else nowadays. I think the essay effectively expresses how we as writers should try to "keep things simple" instead of just trying to use millions and millions of big complicated words and cliches just to try and sound "smarter" and make our essay seem more professional, when in the end we are just filling up pages with words that don't really make much sense.
ReplyDeleteElisa jimenez
After reading and explicating Orwell’s essay, I can relate and agree with the three comments above. The quality and use in our English language are slowly changing into something else quite different from the original product. The incorrect use of words and their transition into other meanings or applications seems unstoppable. I agree with Orwell when he mentions that we need to take the time and responsibility to appreciate and correctly utilize our precious language. I relate this to cultural problems in Native American tribes which fight daily to conserve their language/dialect and culture. However, a great percent of the younger generations are not willing to “sacrifice” their futures because they want to spread their wings and have a modern lifestyle. Something needs to be done! We need to start looking up definitions, roots and using them wisely in our writing, and daily conversations. Its up to us to save the English language.
ReplyDeleteLorena Hernandez
I believe Orwell makes a valid argument in the downfall of the English language. One of the major points he makes in supporting his argument is the use of pretentious diction. People tend to use higher level vocabulary believing that it will make their writing sophisticated, but as Orwell writes this only causes the context to become unclear and lose its intended message. Writing should be easy for the audience to comprehend instead of the common cryptic text we often encounter. Which leads to another point I strongly agree with is keeping writing simple and concise. Writing shouldn’t be flourished with extra words or excess syllables.
ReplyDeleteI think change is inevitable in the English language. We can’t expect ourselves to go back to the old English but like Orwell I believe it should progress in a more positive to direction. The English language has to grow and expand through originality not through the imitation of what’s been done. I do think Orwell presents his argument effectively and I like that he creates a set of rules as a solution to the problem.
Katherine
i think Orwell's essay had a lot of meaning to it, and it showed us a lot of things we often do without realizing it in our English language. one of them which caught my attention the most was definetely the expressing of our vocabulary. he says that individuals most of the time try and use "big words" to try and sound more professional, but sometimes they end up corrupting its meaning and that just makes them sound not professional at all. also, In my opinion, I think the english language is growing at all times and it does this to acomodate to our own growing as societies, and big part is due to technology. i found it pretty funny when our professor told us that the word google and text had both officially become verbs, that's just a little demo of how language is always growing.
ReplyDeleteMateo
In my opinion Orwell’s essay is absolutely effective and persuasive. It is well organized, and contains a strong thesis statement that is effectively addressed throughout the essay. This allows his ideas to flow smoothly and clearly, while following a specific organized structure.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, he uses specific examples, similes, metaphors, text exerts, lists, among many other techniques, to prove and support the point he is trying to make. This provides the audience with a more approachable way to relate with the topic. He shows rather than tells his ideas, evoking the audience’s emotions and creating mental images in their minds. He also uses a variety of sources, ranging from political to economical, religious, and even psychological texts, making his essay trustworthy and credible. In regards to the topic itself, after reading Orwell’s essay, I believe language is declining due to our generation tendencies. I absolutely agree with his point of view.
Lina Garces
After reading Orwell’s essay I agree with the rest of the comments when they say that Orwell is effective in his essay and that our language is decaying. In particular I think he was completely right when he spoke about how people use pretentious words when they are unnecessary and can be said in a simpler way. I think you would only use pretentious words if you want to confuse people because you can say the same thing in a clearer and more concise way. I think that eventually leads to what we have been discussing in class of how words are misused because their true meanings have been changed used over time. That’s one of the ways I think that our language is decaying we have been misusing words without even being aware of it. It’s true that with the technology and our changing world we have developed a new text language or that when we chat we don’t spell out words completely but I think that shouldn’t affect our formal writing, or the completely change the meanings of words. The way we talk and write to our friends and family shouldn’t be the way we write in class, at a job or in a newspaper. Orwell was also right when he called us out on being lazy and just using old worn out metaphors instead of coming up with our own. It’s true that we have become very lazy with our language we just plug in pretentious words and metaphors and throw in commas without using any of them correctly. I think Orwell wants us to care more about our language and his absolutely right we have to stop being lazy and care more because if not it will be lost.
ReplyDeleteMarcela
I must say Orwells Essay is almost dead on. As effective and thorough as anyone who truly dedicates themselves to study and research something as it could be.
ReplyDeleteLanguage has deviated from it's original purpose, to simplify communication. It's become a political matter. About who can use the biggest and newest words, words that the majority of the population have either never heard of or are too out there to even try to begin to break it down in context to find a meaning.
Because of that, it gives those people an air of sorts of sophistication. People feel that person is well educated therefore they would know what they are talking about. From there it spread into contracts of "Third, Second , and First Parties," of therefores and due to's, of fine print, and bold faced lies, in the end, it's true purpose has become to take advantage of the common people, a sword of condescendance dressed up as sophisticated friendly insight, misleading the commmon person.
-Henry Sabio
I stongly believe that George Orwell's essay is accurate in its claim that our modern English language is slowly diminishing into oblivion. His point of view is very effective and persuasive with his use of examples comparisons, and descriptions. I really enjoyed reading this essay because it opened my eyes to how we constantly misuse language without even realizing it.
ReplyDeleteWe often use pretentious diction to make ourselves sound more educated and professional. In reality, it has the opposite effect. By using complex terms and phrases, we actually make ourselves sound dumb and ignorant because we tend to use these terms and phrases in the wrong way. He explains that we use these words and phrases out of context with the meaning that modern society has placed on it rather than its actual definition. Unfortunately, we do it so often that it has been engrained in our everyday writing and speech.
I agree that we have become very lazy in the sense that we use old metaphors and cliches instead of coming up with our own. We do this because we may not know what we are truly trying to say or we cannot put our thoughts into clear terms. Maybe we do this because we are trying to cover up or soften what we are saying to make it sound less harsh. Whatever the reason, he explains that we will not be able to break these habits in one day, but we can do things to help improve it.
Our current society has new technology, such as cell phones and Myspace, that have made it easier for us to communicate with one another, and thus have allowed us to be informal and shorten words and sentences. The problem is that by constantly doing this, we confuse ourselves and begin to write the same way in class and formal writing. In this essay, he advises us to begin to pay close attention to these issues so that we can better our language for future generations.
After reading Orwells essay, I believe it is effective in some ways. I agree with the point that he makes about how writers try to make their essays wordy and use words out of context. Also, writers lose the meaning of what they are trying to say because they are trying to use bigger words or Clichés that are inappropriate for their writing. I also think the way he structured his essay was effective. He used valid examples for dying metaphors, operators or verbal false limbs, pretentious diction, and meaningless words. We tend to fill our pages with complicated words and phrases that are overused because we want to impress our audience with our knowledge of words, when in fact we are incorrectly using them. Even Orwell admits he has fallen victim to these errors. In class we discussed how we use the words irony or peruse incorrectly because it is how we were taught the word, but when we took a closer look at it, realized its true meaning.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I agree with keeping writing simple and using less words to say more, I think that there is nothing wrong with the evolution of language. What I mean by this is that language is suppose to change and expand. We should not call our language “ugly” and “inaccurate” just because we sometimes put too many words in a sentence or use a phrase in the wrong way. I am not saying we should write “goin, ttyl, or ur“ when writing a college paper, but when we write in our journals or instant message someone we should be allowed to use these terms. The point of creative writing is to be creative, but if we are giving limitations and specific styles of writing, how will we truly find our artistic side?
I do not think that our language is collapsing, I think people are just using words incorrectly. The correct way to use our language will always be there, we are just adding ways to use certain words to the existing language. If we say that our language is decaying then we are saying that everyone is using it incorrectly. We can not expect everyone to use the correct terms in their writing because it is only normal to make mistakes. Orwell does make good point when he says that we are writing in overly used metaphors, but it does not mean that we should not be allowed to use them. Metaphors can add to a better essay if used correctly. Instead of stating that out language is collapsing, we should just say that our language is evolving.
Skarlet Raudal
Orwell's essay is a masterpiece. His hate for coughed up metaphors and pompous diction is a feeling that is completely justified. Although language undergoes natural change it is our responsibility to nudge it in the right direction. Language is the tool we use to share our thoughts and feelings, should the English language decay to a tangled mess of cliche phrases and pretentious Latin words will not human interaction follow? Orwell demonstrates how this terrible diction is so alluring; they allow you to skip the though process and talk about something is a way that never truly explains what you are talking about. Governments have already been using this phenomena, much in manner doublethink is used in 1984 Orwell's novel. They use flowery words to deceive and befuddle, for example a slaughtering natives or minorities could be played of as pacification. Truly if we do not act this phenomena will eat our society form the inside out.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with the majority of Orwell's points, however I believe that language is simply evolving into new forms at the same time we are as a society and is not necessarily being destroyed. I feel that we are just critical because it is simply newer form, one we are not accustomed to. I'm sure the type of language Orwell idealizes was criticized the same by those before it. Also, I feel that his "solution" to the problem of our decaying language is impractical. He says that this cycle of foolish thought from foolish language and vice-versa is reversible, but I feel that what's done is done and to change a whole way of thought and speech for a massive group of people is nearly impossible. I do agree with his points on Verbal Falses Limbs, Meaningless Words, Pretentious Diction, and Dying Metaphors. Language is meant to be simple but when given a simple written work we've been trained to see it on a lower standard to another work with pretentious and multi-syllabic words. I feel that Orwell's essay was effective but it had some general flaws.
ReplyDeleteOrwell's "Politics and the English language" is a very argumentative essay that tries to prove the author's point of view on the changes that English is undergoing, blaming it on politics and human stupidity. At first, I was convinced that he was right. But, after putting a lot of thought into it, I noticed a flaw that made me disagree completely with this thesis.
ReplyDeleteThe official definition of language is "Communication of thoughts and feelings through a system of arbitrary signals, such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols". The language is a tool we utilize to communicate ideas. It has no origin but the need to have others listen to our ideas.
Now, I do not think that language itself can decay; I believe it changes. And why is that? Because, by definition, to decay is to decompose or to fall into ruin. Etymologically, it came from a latin word (decidere) that means to put an end or a conclusion to something. And this is not what is happening to the English language. We are not putting an end to it; it is just morphing into something new. It's evolving into a new way of communicating our feelings, thoughts and needs. And, just like any other language, English has been evolving ever since it was created. If it hadn't evolved at all throughout the years, we would still be talking like they did in the Old English versions of Beowulf, or like in the Old Spanish versions of El Cantar del Mio Cid, etc.
Also, I kind of disagree with his opinion that "more syllables = pretentious latinized style". Yes, there are people who (again) misuse words, or who use long words to seem smart. However, with a language that has been called a "Germanic language with a Romance vocabulary", I think it's crucial to know how and when to use Latinate words without being pretentious.
Orwell's essay is an example of his unparalleled persuasive strength. By using a very structured essay, with lots of examples and definitions, he makes it seem as if language is decaying. He shows examples, like his "translation" of the Ecclesiastes, that demonstrate sheer misuse of the English language. But misuse is not a synonym of decay, and this is where, I believe, Orwell failed in this essay. He misused a word in order to give his argument more credibility. And isn't this one of the "capital sins" that he accused modern English writters of?
Emily Bello-Pardo
Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" was a very persuasive piece. I agree with his point of views, but to a certain extent. Yes, it is true that language has deteriorated over the years and that more and more people are misusing words, but language has aslo evolved exponentially over the decades. There are always new words being added to the english language each year. An example of this is seen in the dictionary.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, his point of view seemed very clear, I would like for someoe to write an essay in rebuttal to his. Therefor, people can also be aware of the advantages language, especially the english language has offered us over the years.
-Stephanie Hurtado
I don’t think anyone can deny that Orwell’s essay is persuading. He sets up a valid argument through his use of examples. He takes texts from an array of authors who are all writing for different purposes (be it to convince someone to join a group or just expressing one’s thoughts) and he shows that they all fall victim to what he considers to be bad writing. Although his argument is presented with precise structure, it seems to be a bit one-sided. He never takes into account another perspective; one such as language is adapting to a new generation of writers.
ReplyDeleteIn my essay, I will attempt to show readers that even though Orwell’s argument is one-sided, it is still an effective argument. I will touch on Orwell’s explanations of our “collapsing” language exemplifying “dying metaphors”, pretentious diction, and meaningless work.
- David Gauzens
Whether you completely agree with Orwell or not, it is near impossible to deny that the man has presented a decent argument. From the “Staleness of imagery” to the “lack of precision” pointed out in five different passages exemplifying where the English language has left us, Orwell has certainly taught us a thing or two about politics and the English language. While there were many well presented and orderly sections and topics specifically critiqued, the most enlightening portions of the essay were on “Pretentious Diction” and “Meaningless Words”. After listing dozens of adjectives and words commonly used today to “dignify the sordid process of international politics” and “long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning”, he goes on to point out a habit that has stripped many words of their original meaning and power. This was a problem that I was completely unaware existed until reading this article.
ReplyDeleteNot only did Orwell leave me questioning the current integrity of our language, he also managed to point out how we can go about fixing it. Simply being aware that “the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts” and listing questions that one should ask before writing, practical questions that seem so simple yet would likely solve the problem. Questions like “could I put it more shortly?” or “What am I trying to say?” Which leaves me wondering…what exactly am I trying to say? Nothing pretentious, I promise. Orwell wouldn’t have it.
-Krista Lopez
I agree when George Orwell says that our language has been decaying. Today, many public figures such as politicians try to use big words to make themselves sound smarter. In my opinion, this is ineffective. Sometimes people think that when they don't understand something a politician says, it's because the politician is more intelligent than they are. Often, public figures make a fool out of themselves trying to sound smart. If they would use simple language there speeches would be clearer. Today, the meaning of certain words have been twisted and used in the wrong sense. My favorite part about Orwell's essay is when he explains that society has placed a new meaning on words. This causes the original point to be forgotten. I also feel like I can trust Orwell. He has many credible sources that he uses such as religious and psychological ones. I agree with Orwell when he says that we can not fix the English language in one night. Many great things take time and do not occur overnight. However, if we all learn something from Orwell we can work towards fixing our language.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I believe that the English language is falling apart, there are some benefits. The point of technology is to make our lives simpler. I think using abbreviations in text messages, emails and instant messages is a part of technology. Typing this way helps us communicate faster and still understand each other. I believe that these abbreviations that we use help us. Though it is inappropriate to use them outside of the text message world, they are very effective when communicating with peers.
I believe that Orwell's essay has some points in it that may lead to the fact that the english language of today is in fact decaying. Different writers are trying to use such extravagant vocabulary but are not getting their point across. The strive for "excellence", as some would put it, doesnt consist of multi-syllabic words that are misused in the paragraph. What Orwell is also saying is that the english language is already completely destroyed. I dont agree with him in that case because it isnt destroyed yet. I think that the english language is indeed going downhill but may stil be saved.
ReplyDelete-Mariela Cano
Change is eminent. To me, George Orwell’s essay was a representative sample of how one way in which people deal with change. In my 9th grade biology class I learned that when faced with change, species have three options: they can flee, they can adapt, or they can die. Language is a sort of specie in itself, it changes with time depending on how people change and their ability to communicate evolves. Orwell seems to frown on the turn that language is taking this time around, he is negative in the respect that he sees much fault in modern writing, and I believe that he is skeptical to the idea that language could very much transform back into a more archaic style—to his liking. Orwell had many valid points, and a lot of evidence and thought behind each conclusion, but I disagree with him in that language is decadent. I believe that language is neither decadent nor taking positive changes, it just believe it is flowing in the way that people flow. Our language could sprout and blossom, or wither and be reborn in a different shape. Language will never change into what we expect, it might as well be thought of as a phoenix who changes color every time he is radiantly reborn from his cinders. Orwell should not aim to convince the reader that language is decaying, he should rather, express how he believes language is changing.
ReplyDelete-Pablo Kropilnicki
After analyzing Orwell’s essay, I find that he presents his argument in a very persuasive and impacting manner. I completely agree with his claim that language has become “ugly and inaccurate because of our foolish thoughts.” Therefore, I am convinced that we have forgotten how to think! Nowadays, it is much easier to resort to clichés or ready-made phrases, then to think of fresh new ways to express our own opinions. We have turned away from original thought and have given way to stale language. Instead of simply expressing our own ideas in basic and concrete terms, we have blindly chosen to imitate what we hear on a daily basis. We should try to break this awful habit by incorporating Orwell’s six main rules into our writing and by asking ourselves: “What am I trying to say?” Although it is difficult to stray away from “pretentious diction” or “dying metaphors”, we must remember that language was created as “an instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought.” Old habits are hard to break, but for the sake of the English language we should try to restore meaning back into our words.
ReplyDelete-Yaray Agosto
I feel that Orwell's essay is one of the best and most effective pieces of literature read throughout ENC 1101 and ENC 1102. Like other posts, I feel that Orwell makes a valid argument in the downfall of the English language. Also in accordance with other posts, I feel that the downfall of the English language is more so the language itself trying to evolve as our society evolves as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI also understand and appreciate Orwell's "keep it simple, stupid" tone. I feel that the essay tries to convey a certain aspect of quality over quantity that in my opinion, students these days have lost touch with.
-Ryan Aguilera
I believe George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" is effective because I do agree with the fact that the English language has deteriorated over time. Words are losing their true meaning and being misued, because of our generations' interpretation of what the word may mean. Also, he points out "dying metaphors" and it is true. We commonly use metaphors that no longer are used just to take up space. I am thinking of writing how his paper was effective and persuasive and use my personal experience with misusing words as back up.
ReplyDelete--Marilyn Robleto.
George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" is adequate. I agree with him believing in the gradual deterioration of the english language. I believe there is always room for progression. I, personally, do not have as much of a negative view on "cliches," but other than that I do agree with his negative views toward pretentious diction and meaningless words. In high school many of us are taught to "fluff" up words to sound more educated. Your own voice is what really matters and is what will distinguish you from any other writer, hands down.
ReplyDeleteI'm a little unsure on what to write my paper about; however, I like what was mentioned in class with the misuse of words (such as peruse). Another interesting topic that was mentioned in class that I liked was the more "modern" language of texting mixed with "normal" english. I don't condone the use of "text talk" but I still don't believe it should be used professionally. I do consider it part of the downslide of our language, but at the same time I consider it another branch of progression.
Overall I agree with his essay. Orwell presents many strong points with many instances as evidence. He's an excellent writer, in my point of view. The essay was just.. really long :/
--Mya McKenzie
ugh... second time trying to post this.
ReplyDeleteI think that Geaorge Orwells is a great writer but with this essay he wasnt as effective as i thought he would be. This essay is lengthy. It begins to get boring by the 5th page. Many of the things he writes like "cliches" and lengthy words has been commited by everyone. I think that cliches are sometimes necessary to familiarize the person and kind of let them see the connection with your subject and that cliche. Also, i think every generation has a "slang" or their own english way of speaking. I think that english has progressed by the fact that we have many novels from all types of writing. I think if everyone went by what these rules saud then writing would be boring and not unique whatsoever. Also, i think that the fact that people use all these wrong ways of english writing it creates their own styles, well creative writing.
I do not know in what position im going to be in. Either i am going to say that i think his essay is completly not effective or think in some points he is right and in others wrong. But i will not agree with him 100 percent. By the way, his politics aspect is very very very bias and has no support for his ideals. -_- very dissapointed. (im a political science major)
--finally! jessica r