Newspeak

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article or section may contain original research or unattributed claims. Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

Newspeak is a fictional language in George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. In the novel, it is described as being "the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year." Orwell included an essay about it in the form of an Appendix (in the past tense)^[1], in which the basic principles of the language are explained. Newspeak is closely based on English but has a greatly reduced and simplified vocabulary and grammar. This suited the totalitarian regime of the Party, whose aim was to make any alternative thinking ("thoughtcrime") or speech impossible by removing any words or possible constructs which describe the ideas of freedom, rebellion and so on.

The Newspeak term for the English language is Oldspeak. Oldspeak was intended to have been completely eclipsed by Newspeak before 2050.

The genesis of Orwell's Newspeak can be seen in his earlier essay, "Politics and the English Language," in which he laments the quality of the English of his day, citing examples of dying metaphors, pretentious diction or rhetoric, and meaningless words — all of which contribute to fuzzy ideas and a lack of logical thinking. Towards the end of this essay, having argued his case, Orwell muses:

“

I said earlier that the decadence of our language is probably curable. Those who deny this would argue, if they produced an argument at all, that language merely reflects existing social conditions, and that we cannot influence its development by any direct tinkering with words or constructions.

”

Thus forcing the use of Newspeak, according to Orwell, describes a deliberate intent to exploit this degeneration with the aim of oppressing its speakers.

Contents 1 Basic principles of Newspeak 1.1 To remove synonyms & antonyms 1.2 To control thought 2 Real-life examples of Newspeak 2.1 Politically correct euphemisms 2.2 Abbreviations and Acronyms 2.3 Cyril Kornbluth and Newspeak 3 See also 4 Notes 5 References 6 Further reading

[edit] Basic principles of Newspeak

[edit] To remove synonyms & antonyms

The basic idea behind Newspeak was to remove all shades of meaning from language, leaving simple dichotomies (pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, good thoughts and thoughtcrimes) which reinforce the total dominance of the State. Similarly, Newspeak root words served as both nouns and verbs, which allowed further reduction in the total number of words; for example, "think" served as both noun and verb, so the word "thought" was unneeded and could be abolished. A staccato rhythm of short syllables was also a goal, further reducing the need for deep thinking about language. (See duckspeak.) Successful Newspeak meant that there would be fewer and fewer words -- dictionaries would get thinner and thinner.

In addition, words with opposite meanings were removed as redundant, so "bad" became "ungood." Words with comparative and superlative meanings were also simplified, so "better" became "gooder", and "best" likewise became "goodest". Intensifiers could be added, so "great" became "plusgood", and "excellent" or "splendid" likewise became "doubleplusgood." Adjectives were formed by adding the suffix "-ful" to a root word (e.g. "goodthinkful", orthodox in thought), and adverbs by adding "-wise" ("goodthinkwise", in an orthodox manner). In this manner, as many words as possible were removed from the language. The ultimate aim of Newspeak was to reduce even the dichotomies to a single word that was a "yes" of some sort: an obedient word with which everyone answered affirmatively to what was asked of them.

Some of the constructions in Newspeak which Orwell derides, such as replacing "bad" with "ungood", are in fact characteristic of agglutinative languages, although foreign to English. It is also possible that Orwell modeled aspects of Newspeak on Esperanto; for example "ungood" is constructed similarly to the Esperanto word "malbona". Orwell had been exposed to Esperanto in 1927 when living in Paris with his aunt Kate Limouzin and her husband Eugène Lanti, a prominent Esperantist. Esperanto was the language of the house, and Orwell was disadvantaged by not speaking it, which may account for some antipathy towards the language^[2]. It can also be observed that some strongly hierarchical groups use these kinds of constructions liberally. For example, the Swedish Military jargon substitutes "unpeace" (Swedish: ofred) for "war", and "ungood" (Swedish: obra) for "bad".

The real life pitfall of the Newspeak is, of course, that there are real-life agglutinative languages which act exactly as Orwell suggests, and the various suffixes, prefixes and derivatives allow almost endless possibilities for neologizising. Instead of shackling the thought, Newspeak actually just enhances the possibilities of expression of its speakers. Certain languages, such as Finnish, Japanese or Hungarian, work almost perfectly on the Newspeak principles - they have very sparse basic vocabularies, but almost all the expressions are derived from the stem words by various prefixes and suffixes.

[edit] To control thought

“

By 2050—earlier, probably—all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron—they'll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of the Party will change. Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like "freedom is slavery" when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.[3]

”

The underlying theory of Newspeak is that if something can't be said, then it can't be thought. One question raised in response to this is whether we are defined by our language, or whether we actively define it. For instance, can we communicate the need for freedom, or organise an uprising, if we do not have the words for either? This is related to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, and Ludwig Wittgenstein's proposition, "The limits of my language mean the limits to my world." However, this view is disputed by authors like Gene Wolfe (see the article on his Ascian language); Ayn Rand's novel Anthem details, among other things, the attempts of two refugees from a repressively collectivist society to comprehend the concept of the first-person singular, the words for which have fallen into disuse.

But again the real-life pitfall of the agglutinative languages looms here: agglutinative languages, like Finnish language, offer almost endless possibilities to neologize an expression or a word by using just basic vocabulary and the various prefixes and suffixes. A concept which is not assumed to exist is easy to conceive by using a word root and derivative prefixes or suffixes. The concept of "freedom" (Finnish vapaus) would be easy to conceive by using expression omaehtoepäestoisuus ("own-condition-un-hinder-ity") where the only word roots needed would be "ehto" (condition) and "esto" (hinder), and the word still would be perfectly understandable Finnish, albeit clumsy. In Newspeak this would be avoided by removing, for example, the word own (and possible hinder) from the language, since in a world where no personal possession or even private thought is possible, there would be no need for a word like own. Similarly, Oldspeak words may be stripped of certain meanings while retaining others, such that though it would be possible to say the weather is good, the phrase the Party is ungood would be meaningless. Even so, it is unlikely that such complete control would be technically possible; even if the expression "the Party is ungood" does not normally make sense, groups of rebels could slightly alter their language to make it make sense. Even if the word "own" is removed, then a word could be formulated that meant "condition-of-person-not-hindered-by-other-people". "Uprising" could be represented by "people-making-attack-on-Party". To fully remove this possibility would be impossible; as long as the words "Party", "people" and "attack" exist, they could be made to say "People-attack-party". To remove thoughtcrime, practically all words would have to be eliminated. In any case, languages evolve over time and would undermine attempts to maintain control. People today often invent their own words and terms for things and events that do not extend to the main community. Also, thought cannot necessarily be controlled by words; even today, not all thoughts can be written down or described. Qualia would also serve as an obstacle. (A further possible complication would be that if someone did commit thoughtcrime, then it would be impossible for authorities to work out what it was they did).

Examples of Newspeak, from the novel, include: "crimethink"; "doubleplusungood"; and "Ingsoc." They mean, respectively: "thought-crime"; "extremely bad"; and "English Socialism," the official political philosophy of the Party. The word "Newspeak" itself also comes from the language. Note that all of these words would be obsolete and should be removed in the "final" version of Newspeak, except for "doubleplusungood" in certain contexts, such as as illustrated in the preceding paragraph.

Generically, Newspeak has come to mean any attempt to restrict disapproved language by a government or other powerful entity.

[edit] Real-life examples of Newspeak

A comparison to Newspeak may arguably be seen in political rhetoric, where two opposing sides string together phrases so empty of meaning that they may be compared to the taunts young children toss back and forth. The arguments of either side ultimately reduce to "I'm good; he's bad."

[edit] Politically correct euphemisms

Charges of Newspeak are sometimes advanced when a group tries to replace a word/phrase that is politically unsuitable (e.g. "civilian casualties") or offensive (e.g. "murder") with an alternative, inoffensive euphemism (e.g. "collateral damage"), or falsely innocuous (as in "liquidate the kulaks" or "resettle the Jews", as used by the Soviets and Nazis, respectively, to conceal their democides).

Some people maintain that to make certain words or phrases "unspeakable" (thoughtcrime) through the attempt to make language politically correct restricts what ideas may be held (Newspeak) and is therefore tantamount to censorship. Others believe that expunging terms that have fallen out of favor or become insulting will make people less likely to hold "outdated" or offensive views.

Either way, there is a resemblance between political correctness and Newspeak, although some may feel that they differ in their intentions: in Nineteen Eighty-Four, Newspeak is instituted to enhance the power of the state over the individual; politically correct language, on the other hand, is said by supporters to free individuals from stereotypical preconceptions caused by the use of prejudicial terminology. It is this attempt to change thought through changing (or eliminating) words that earns political correctness the connection to Newspeak.

For many, there exist striking instances where Orwell's speculations have matched with reality. Orwell suggested that all philosophies prior to Ingsoc (English Socialism) would be covered under the term "oldthink", bearing with it none of the nuances of these ideologies, but simply a connotation of badness. It is argued that since the end of the Second World War and the Cold War, a similar effect has been wrought on the words "fascism" and "communism"; that communism no longer bears with it the doctrines of Marx, Engels, or Lenin, but rather a general bad connotation. Likewise, they contend that few people are aware of the differences between the theories of government of Mussolini, Dollfuß, Franco, and Hitler; all are placed under the blanket term "fascism" or "nazism" with only a general denotation of badness.

In the Spanish Civil War, the both parties called each other with dysphemistical names. Perhaps the best description is it began as a conflict of Republicans and Nationalists, and ended up as a war of Communists and Fascists.

Political groups often use neologisms to frame their views positively and to discredit their opponents' views.[1] In the U.S. abortion debates, those advocating restrictions on abortion label themselves "pro-life," leaving their opponents presumably "anti-life" or "pro-death." Conversely, those advocating greater availability of abortion call themselves "pro-choice," leaving their opponents "anti-choice".

In modern business, it is often frowned upon to use words with a negative connotation, such as "problem" and instead problems are referred to as "challenges", "obstacles", or even "opportunities".

Two examples unrelated to political correctness are Basic English, a language which takes pride in reducing the number of English words, and E-Prime, another simplified version of English.

[edit] Abbreviations and Acronyms

Another common use of Newspeak today is the overuse of abbreviations. To quote from the 1984 Appendix "It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it." Attention is also drawn to the use of such abbreviations by totalitarian regimes prior to World War II (see Gestapo, Comintern, Agitprop, Minculpop).

Even more powerful are acronyms like "Ofcom", "OPEC","NAMbLA", "PETA", "NAFTA", "NICE", and the "USA PATRIOT Act" which can be pronounced as if they were proper words. This is most vividly seen in acronyms like "laser," "scuba," and "radar," which are in widespread use today and are nearly always written in lowercase.

On July 5, 1959 President Sukarno of Indonesia abolished parliamentary democracy and established a system of government-by-decree called Manifesto Politik or in short Manipol - an abbreviation greatly reminiscent of those in Orwell's book, though there is no evidence that Sukarno read the book or was directly influenced by it. In a similar way, the Indonesian term "Tapol" (political prisoner) - first used as a derogatory word by the authorities, later adopted as a term of pride by the "tapols" themselves - was created from the first syllables of "prisoner" and "political".

[edit] Cyril Kornbluth and Newspeak

The 1950 short story "The Silly Season" by science fiction writer Cyril M. Kornbluth contained a text resembling Newspeak, though in a completely different context - not the artificial tongue of a tyrannical regime, but simply a kind of journalists' shorthand.

The protagonist, a news editor, gets a news item about the appearance of "shining domes" in the Ozark hamlet of Rush City and the death of a visiting lawman Pinkney Crawles who touched them. The original text includes "Rushers untouched, unapproached. Crawles warned but touched and died burns". This is later rendered into: "The inhabitants of Rush City did not dare approach the domes. They warned the visiting Marshall Crawles - but, not heeding their warning, he walked up to one of the domes and put his hand on it. There was a big flash and he was burned to death".

The story was written shortly after Nineteen Eighty Four was published, simultaneously in Britain and the US, and Kornbluth may have read it. Moreover, the appearance of an incomprehensible text followed by its translation into standard English (or Oldspeak) is similar to what appears in Part 1, Chapter 4 of Orwell's book.

Moreover, while the story takes place in a recognisable United States and not in any totalitarian society, at the end the hero realizes that in helping to spread panic about the "shining domes" he had been the unwitting dupe of Martian invaders, helping them draw attention away from their real conquest of Earth.

[edit] See also

• List of Newspeak words
• Buzzword
• Code word (figure of speech)
• Framing (communication theory)
• Language and thought
• Neologism
• Nineteen Eighty-Four, further discussion and resources specific to Newspeak
• Thought-terminating cliché
• Toki Pona
• Political Correctness
• Two plus two make five
• LTI - Lingua Tertii Imperii
• Sapir–Whorf hypothesis
• FNORD

[edit] Notes

1. ^ Orwell, George (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four, "Appendix: The Principles of Newspeak", pp. 309–323. New York: Plume, 2003.
   Pynchon, Thomas (2003). "Foreword to the Centennial Edition" to Nineteen Eighty-Four, pp. vii–xxvi . New York: Plume, 2003.
   Fromm, Erich (1961). "Afterword" to Nineteen Eighty-Four, pp. 324–337. New York: Plume, 2003.
   Orwell's text has a "Selected Bibliography", pp. 338–9; the foreword and the afterword each contain further references.
   Copyright is explicitly extended to digital and any other means.
   Plume edition is a reprint of a hardcover by Harcourt. Plume edition is also in a Signet edition.
2. ^ Orwell, George (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four, "Appendix: The Principles of Newspeak", pp. 309–323. New York: Plume, 2003.
   Pynchon, Thomas (2003). "Foreword to the Centennial Edition" to Nineteen Eighty-Four, pp. vii–xxvi . New York: Plume, 2003.
   Fromm, Erich (1961). "Afterword" to Nineteen Eighty-Four, pp. 324–337. New York: Plume, 2003.
   Orwell's text has a "Selected Bibliography", pp. 338–9; the foreword and the afterword each contain further references.
   Copyright is explicitly extended to digital and any other means.
   Plume edition is a reprint of a hardcover by Harcourt. Plume edition is also in a Signet edition.
3. ^ Orwell, George (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four.

[edit] References

• Orwell, George (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four, "Appendix: The Principles of Newspeak", pp. 309–323. New York: Plume, 2003.
  Pynchon, Thomas (2003). "Foreword to the Centennial Edition" to Nineteen Eighty-Four, pp. vii–xxvi . New York: Plume, 2003.
  Fromm, Erich (1961). "Afterword" to Nineteen Eighty-Four, pp. 324–337. New York: Plume, 2003.
  Orwell's text has a "Selected Bibliography", pp. 338–9; the foreword and the afterword each contain further references.
  Copyright is explicitly extended to digital and any other means.
  Plume edition is a reprint of a hardcover by Harcourt. Plume edition is also in a Signet edition.

[edit] Further reading

NB: Cf. ELECTRONIC EDITIONS WARNING.

• "1984-Appendix". Retrieved on 21 April 2006. The complete Newspeak appendix to Nineteen Eighty-Four (NB: Copyright).
• "Newspeak Dictionary". Updated 16 April 2006. Retrieved 21 April 2006. ("The Newspeak Dictionary has moved." New URL shown.)
• Burgess, Anthony. Nineteen Eighty-Five. Boston: Little Brown & Co, 1978. ISBN 0-316-11651-3. Anthony Burgess discusses the plausibility of Newspeak.
• Green, Jonathon. Newspeak: a dictionary of jargon. London, Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985, 1984. ISBN 0-7102-0673-9.
• "Find in a library: Newspeak: A dictionary of Jargon", by Jonathon Green. Retrieved 21 April 2006.
• Klemperer, Victor. LTI - Lingua Tertii Imperii: Notizbuch eines Philologen.. Original German language editions.
• Klemperer, Victor & Watt, Roderick H. LTI - Lingua Tertii Imperii: A Philologist's Notebook. Lewiston: E. Mellen Press, 1997. ISBN 0-7734-8681-X. An annotated edition of Victor Klemperer’s LTI, Notizbuch eines Philologen with English notes and commentary by Roderick H. Watt.
• Klemperer, Victor & Brady, Martin (tr.). The language of the Third Reich: LTI - Lingua Tertii Imperii: A Philologist's Notebook. London, UK; New Brunswick, NJ: Athlone Press, 2000. ISBN 0-485-11526-3 (alk. paper). Translated by Martin Brady.
• Young, John Wesley . Totalitarian Language: Orwell's Newspeak and Its Nazi and Communist Antecedents. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1991. ISBN 0-8139-1324-1. John Wesley Young wrote this scholarly work about Newspeak and historical examples of language control.
• Newspeak Dictionary
• The complete Newspeak appendix to 1984
• An independent completion of the Newspeak language

Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell v • d • e
Characters	Winston Smith | Julia | O'Brien | Big Brother | Emmanuel Goldstein
Places	Oceania | Eastasia | Eurasia | Airstrip One | Room 101
Classes	Inner Party | Outer Party | Proles
Ministries	Ministry of Love | Ministry of Peace | Ministry of Plenty | Ministry of Truth
Concepts	Ingsoc | Newspeak (wordlist) | Doublethink | Goodthink | Crimestop Two plus two make five | Thoughtcrime | Prolefeed | Prolesec
Miscellaneous	Thought Police | Telescreen | Memory hole | Goldstein's book Two Minutes Hate | Hate week
Adaptations	1956 film | 1984 film | 1953 US TV | 1954 BBC programme | Opera
Influence	Nineteen Eighty-Four in popular media Parody: Me and the Big Guy