The often almost “rampant” abuse, and neglect, of the English Language
from our very own topmost governance and expertise places,
is unsettling and alarming enough –
“Shot In Back By Own Troops” is officially to be formally and legislatively stated as “FRIENDLY fire”;
Likewise “Bad-and-outrightly-Cruelly-Hostile-Neighbourly-Persecution and Genocide” is to be officially termed “ethnic CLEANSING”.
“You’re sacked – fired – employment terminated” is bandied about as “The Company regrets that we have to “LET YOU GO” –
as if it is you the totally-dependent employee who has been itching for years and years to get out the door and never come back.
I, your author and publisher, have long been asking for the English language we “give” to the World, to be “clean” and “clear”.
and since May 2010 have submitted such “warning signs”,
about World-Human-Race-Survival Importance, of keeping, but especially in many places of “making” the English Language “clean and clear”,
to the small group of Westminster House of Lords peers
who created the first-in-the-world “two-way participatory democratic reach-out direct to the Public” – address http://lordsoftheblog.net -.
As I write (and why I now write) I hold in my hand a quite smart little 2016 hardback copy of How English Became English
by a quite young-looking-photographed Professor of English Language and Literature
at the University of Oxford and a Fellow of Magdalen College,
who has “written extensively on the history, structure, and uses of the English language”,.Simon Horobin.
Let us be clear: Simon is a good professor of English – maybe in the depths and academic ranges
of his disciplines, outstanding.
Nonetheless someone should claim that in so writing partly-populisticly, he has ‘unwittingly’, probably unintentionally,
included some “booby-traps” or “hidden pitfalls”:-
enough verbosity from me, however –
the first from the outside front cover where the professor (or his publisher Oxford university Press) has claimed English to be a “Global language”:-
the mere three above instances of corruption-of-this-global-English-language show that not only are our “professional linguists” failing to “keep it clean and clear”
but likewise failing appear to be all the other but “foreign” global authorities and users of it.
The second somewhat different, but to the mind of any honest Cooperatively- Participative Democracy proactivist or supporter, “alarmingly-vital” instance from the end of the book
“… it is clearly incumbent upon professional linguists to accord its proponents due attention and to engage in public DEBATE.” [ this ‘Lifefresh’ publisher’s capitalisation] :-
“Debate” is defined as a spoken verbal contest between two opposing ‘teams’, only one of which can “win”. and the other quite absolutely must “lose”.
In real life, and usually at first at least mentioned in most schools even ‘though very rarely focused-upon and ‘taught’,
“debating” must be preceded chronologically by (1) all-round facts and informations sharing and (2) constructive-discussion; neither being “competitive but rather “cooperative” – for it will be the Debate that must be “winner-takes-all Competitive”.
=========== 1519 Monday 27 March 2017 JSDM author and voluntary unpaid not-for-profit, power nor prestige publisher hereof httyp://lifefresh.net .============