Trash the EP Pamphlet on "Gender-Neutral" Language
A Message to the new Secretary-General of the European Parliament, Klaus Welle
I must inform you that I have no intention whatsoever of observing the European Parliament's guidelines on what your predecessor Harald Romer unwisely chose to call "gender-neutral" language. My staff have been instructed to ignore them completely.
Such utter nonsense belongs in the dustbin of political correctness.
As a former journalist, now columnist and author, I am appalled by such ignorance and wilful misunderstanding of the English language, its lexicology, evolution, dictionary authorities, definitions of words, and modern grammar. Whoever was foolish enough to write this new pamphlet should return to school and complete his (or her) basic education as a matter of urgency.
I quite understand that there may be contextual problems with other languages used in the EU. But this publication is in English and specifically attempts to tear the English language apart. It is a disgrace.
The pamphlet's total lack of intellectual and linguistic rigour brings ridicule on the European Parliament. But perhaps that was what was intended?
On the first page, the author writes "It is essential that authors in the European Parliament take account of (such) cultural and linguistic differences." The rest of the pamphlet then proceeds to do precisely the opposite, and treat such differences as if they did not exist.
Except on the last couple of pages. There, finally, are two admissions that there is no logic, consistency or merit in the preceding rubbish. First, "...it may not always be possible to avoid the occasional generic use of 'he' or 'his' ". Secondly, the word "midwife" totally defeats the author. Now there's a surprise.
Later, there are references to "sexist language" and the need to avoid "discriminating against women", both comments underlining the author's appalling ignorance of the English language. He or she makes a deliberate choice to read into certain words meanings that simply are not there to anyone with any understanding of English. Pandering to such ignorance is pathetic as well as insulting.
The author also ignores dictionary definitions of the word "man" which go back to Dr Johnson, and can be found readily in the definitive Oxford English Dictionary and every humble dictionary based on it.
How dare he or she assume the right to mangle the language of Chaucer, Shakespeare, Dickens, Keats, Byron and many hundreds of other distinguished authors, poets and dramatists over the centuries, including more recently the Nobel Laureate Doris Lessing. Then we come to authors of calibre from elsewhere, such as Joseph Conrad and Max Dimont, who chose to write in English rather than their mother tongue. Both referred to the flexibility, beauty and subtlety of the language, qualities your author obviously does not begin to comprehend.
Such a pantheon, and their accumulated credentials in the use of English, cannot be overturned by a mere junior official in the passing political phenomenon that is the EU.
Sir, I shall continue to use the English language to the best of my professional ability. I shall continue to use words with the meaning intended and which are hopefully as clear as I can make them from the context in which they are used. And I shall correctly continue to use the courtesy title "madam chairman" when addressing the chairman of any gathering when it is appropriate. My staff have been asked to do the same.
Meanwhile I urge you to withdraw your pamphlet for the embarrassment it is to the European Parliament and pulp it without delay. I am convinced not even British taxpayers will object on this occasion.
I must inform you that I have no intention whatsoever of observing the European Parliament's guidelines on what your predecessor Harald Romer unwisely chose to call "gender-neutral" language. My staff have been instructed to ignore them completely.
Such utter nonsense belongs in the dustbin of political correctness.
As a former journalist, now columnist and author, I am appalled by such ignorance and wilful misunderstanding of the English language, its lexicology, evolution, dictionary authorities, definitions of words, and modern grammar. Whoever was foolish enough to write this new pamphlet should return to school and complete his (or her) basic education as a matter of urgency.
I quite understand that there may be contextual problems with other languages used in the EU. But this publication is in English and specifically attempts to tear the English language apart. It is a disgrace.
The pamphlet's total lack of intellectual and linguistic rigour brings ridicule on the European Parliament. But perhaps that was what was intended?
On the first page, the author writes "It is essential that authors in the European Parliament take account of (such) cultural and linguistic differences." The rest of the pamphlet then proceeds to do precisely the opposite, and treat such differences as if they did not exist.
Except on the last couple of pages. There, finally, are two admissions that there is no logic, consistency or merit in the preceding rubbish. First, "...it may not always be possible to avoid the occasional generic use of 'he' or 'his' ". Secondly, the word "midwife" totally defeats the author. Now there's a surprise.
Later, there are references to "sexist language" and the need to avoid "discriminating against women", both comments underlining the author's appalling ignorance of the English language. He or she makes a deliberate choice to read into certain words meanings that simply are not there to anyone with any understanding of English. Pandering to such ignorance is pathetic as well as insulting.
The author also ignores dictionary definitions of the word "man" which go back to Dr Johnson, and can be found readily in the definitive Oxford English Dictionary and every humble dictionary based on it.
How dare he or she assume the right to mangle the language of Chaucer, Shakespeare, Dickens, Keats, Byron and many hundreds of other distinguished authors, poets and dramatists over the centuries, including more recently the Nobel Laureate Doris Lessing. Then we come to authors of calibre from elsewhere, such as Joseph Conrad and Max Dimont, who chose to write in English rather than their mother tongue. Both referred to the flexibility, beauty and subtlety of the language, qualities your author obviously does not begin to comprehend.
Such a pantheon, and their accumulated credentials in the use of English, cannot be overturned by a mere junior official in the passing political phenomenon that is the EU.
Sir, I shall continue to use the English language to the best of my professional ability. I shall continue to use words with the meaning intended and which are hopefully as clear as I can make them from the context in which they are used. And I shall correctly continue to use the courtesy title "madam chairman" when addressing the chairman of any gathering when it is appropriate. My staff have been asked to do the same.
Meanwhile I urge you to withdraw your pamphlet for the embarrassment it is to the European Parliament and pulp it without delay. I am convinced not even British taxpayers will object on this occasion.
If you would like to unsubscribe, visit the url below:
http://www.ashleymote.co.uk/includes/unsubscribe.php?unsubscribe=info@britanniaradio.co.uk
Posts
