Monday, November 14, 2011

I Was Present at the Creation of "Impactful"

DGLETTER2
I knew it would not end well.



It was, as I recall, a senior manager at the Very Large Insurance Company for which I was hacking code in the 1980s.

He was an up-and-comer, very aggressive and barely literate outside of the mandatory 500-word corporate buzzspeak vocabulary. He could not wrap his head around the difference between "affect" and "effect" and so gave up altogether and went with "impact, "impactful", "impactfulness".


h/t to reader "Liam" for the reminder that none of our contemporary concerns about the debased, denuded, deflective language with which we are daily strafed are especially new:

George Orwell, "Politics and the English Language," 1946

Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language -- so the argument runs -- must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hansom cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half-conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes.

Now, it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified form, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step toward political regeneration: so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers. I will come back to this presently, and I hope that by that time the meaning of what I have said here will have become clearer. Meanwhile, here are five specimens of the English language as it is now habitually written.
...

Continued here.

7 comments:

mr_subjunctive said...

I don't know what you have against impactfulnessing.

blader said...

thanks....I just facebooked this to all my friends!

jim said...

Linguistic mistakes were made.

( WV = "numbrace" ... & Nyarlathotep take the hindmost?)

Nangleator said...

At 9 I coined "silent but deadly."

Sorry.

Kathy said...

Nero Wolfe sits before a lit fireplace, dictionary open on his lap. He is tearing out pages and burning

Archie Goodwin ushers in the Beautiful Client du Jour. Wolfe glares at her.

Wolfe: Do you use "infer" and "imply" interchangeably?

Beautiful Client: No.

Archie writes That's when I knew he'd take the case...

mr. roget said...

I fear that Mr. Orwell is not carefully tending to the proper use of "that" and "which."

Batocchio said...

I re-read that essay every year or so.