I want nothing of the sort of course, but the engine of
linguistic change has always been ignorance — I challenge readers to find a
counter-example; a change in usage or meaning not so caused — and, always,
something is lost. What happens is that some semi-literate person such as a BBC
presenter can’t be bothered to understand the established meaning of, say, the
phrase ‘Begs the question’ — it is, or was, admittedly a touch tricky — but
thinks it sounds good, and would like to impress people by using it. It sounds
to his simple mind as if it means ‘Invites the question’, and so he uses it
like that, and thousands hear him, and — because the BBC is, or was, the
touchstone for good English — use it themselves like that. And because majority
usage is now the sole determinant of meaning, that becomes what the phrase now
means.
All I want to do really is draw attention to what is
happening; the furthest I might go is to declare it regrettable and ugly, but I
know it’s inevitable. To take another example, which, again, I heard on the
BBC: one of those air-heads they now like to employ said ‘I was literally
decimated.’ She meant ‘I was a little disturbed’. Is it wrong of me to point
out what ‘literally’ and ‘decimated’ used to mean? Granted, it is perhaps a
touch mean of me to suggest exactly which
tenth part of her had been destroyed.
No comments:
Post a Comment