Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

thoughtco.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 429 posts

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#21

Post by cyber_kinetist »

jacquesm wrote: post #4
squarefoot wrote: post #2

George Carlin should be studied, translated and dubbed in every possible language.

The better stand-up comedians are hard to distinguish from philosophers. Carlin is right up there. It's a pity he's gone, we kind of need him right now.

Note that the opposite can also be true: some philosophers can also be good comedians (in spite of the general stereotype that all philosophers are excruciatingly boring and dry, which can partially be attributed to the proliferation of analytic philosophy.)

For example Slavoj Zizek has a whole book dedicated to cataloguing his (often "politically incorrect") jokes. Link here: https://meydanehonar.com/Panel/Uploads/6/3/7/8d1a8c61-47d2-4...

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#22

Post by filmor »

harryvederci wrote: post #3

My favourite one in Dutch: People with a disability used to be called "handicapped". At some point, that was no longer acceptable. The correct term to use became "invalid". So it was better to say "that person is invalid" than "that person is handicapped".

Invalid is derived from Latin with validus meaning "strong" or "in order". The German and Dutch uses of the word are derived directly from invalidus meaning ~"weak" (maybe via French), while the English word (as its mostly used) is an English(!) negation of "valid", which leans on the "in order" part to get to "inappropriate" or "not correct".

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#23

Post by prakhar897 »

constantly wrote: post #9

What’s the effect here? I don’t think I like soft language, but can’t really pinpoint why I don’t like it. Is it bad that some company came up with toilet paper and now it’s bathroom tissue? Shell shock is now PTSD? Who cares?

Because saying

'the economically disadvantaged' occupy 'substandard housing' in the 'inner cities.'

compared to

"Poor people live in slums"

works better for politicians. They haven't improved the situation, just swept it under the rug that is Oxford Dictionary.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#24

Post by mbb70 »

One I recently heard was "conducting a rif" == "conducting a reduction in force" == "firing people".

Soft language is alway to the benefit of the speaker, to assuage guilt or obfuscate intent.

It's always to the detriment of the listener.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#25

Post by constantly »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #16
constantly wrote: post #9

What’s the effect here? I don’t think I like soft language, but can’t really pinpoint why I don’t like it. Is it bad that some company came up with toilet paper and now it’s bathroom tissue? Shell shock is now PTSD? Who cares?

Deflection, (self)censorship, there's a number of reasons. Toilet paper became bathroom tissue because some people think toilets are gross. Shellshock became battle fatigue so that people aren't discouraged from going to war; "they're just tired". It became post-traumatic stress disorder to make it both clinical, and to put it on the person having it - YOU have a disorder after a traumatic event. Modern day example,…

I understand the reasons (i.e. toilets probably evoke more subtle grossness than bathrooms or washrooms do), and I haven’t heard some of those you mention, but still unclear why it’s a bad thing vis a vis an observation of changing language.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#26

Post by bazoom42 »

oceanplexian wrote: post #7

The idea comes straight out of modern Academia. It’s also called linguistic relativity, and critical theory, literary theory, and postmodernism all have roots in it. The idea is that if you believe hard enough, for example a duck can actually be a goose depending on what “lens” you see it though Obviously, this is ridiculous. But this has invaded our culture like a cancer and is responsible for the proliferation of P…

Euphemisms are not particular to academia. Euphemisms for sex and death are as old as language.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#27

Post by jdub »

hfuyf65 wrote: post #10
jacquesm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The better stand-up comedians are hard to distinguish from philosophers. Carlin is right up there. It's a pity he's gone, we kind of need him right now.

He would have had a field day if he was alive. It is a loss for all of us that he is gone. Still, we now have Chapelle, who is building similiar legacy and potentially Bill Burr one day. Absolute agreement on the philosopher/jester vibes.

They're not even in the same sport, let alone the same league.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#28

Post by hfuyf65 »

dralley wrote: post #14
constantly wrote: post #9

What’s the effect here? I don’t think I like soft language, but can’t really pinpoint why I don’t like it. Is it bad that some company came up with toilet paper and now it’s bathroom tissue? Shell shock is now PTSD? Who cares?

A common theme with a lot of Carlin rants - they resonate well, but they're completely wrong. I don't think we want to describe sexual assault victims as having "shell shock". Even a soldier could get "shell shock" without encountering any shells. The language got softer not because we're all a bunch of softies but because we noticed a general pattern and generalized the name to match.

If they resonate well, it either means the population as whole thinks it is accurate or that the population as a wholr is wrong.

Either is possible, but I think you are wrong about Carlin being wrong. Language defines the quality of our conversations. If we can't be honest with it, some nuance will be lost.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#29

Post by baggy_trough »

dralley wrote: post #14
constantly wrote: post #9

What’s the effect here? I don’t think I like soft language, but can’t really pinpoint why I don’t like it. Is it bad that some company came up with toilet paper and now it’s bathroom tissue? Shell shock is now PTSD? Who cares?

A common theme with a lot of Carlin rants - they resonate well, but they're completely wrong. I don't think we want to describe sexual assault victims as having "shell shock". Even a soldier could get "shell shock" without encountering any shells. The language got softer not because we're all a bunch of softies but because we noticed a general pattern and generalized the name to match.

Completely wrong?

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#30

Post by constantly »

prakhar897 wrote: post #23
constantly wrote: post #9

What’s the effect here? I don’t think I like soft language, but can’t really pinpoint why I don’t like it. Is it bad that some company came up with toilet paper and now it’s bathroom tissue? Shell shock is now PTSD? Who cares?

Because saying 'the economically disadvantaged' occupy 'substandard housing' in the 'inner cities.' compared to "Poor people live in slums" works better for politicians. They haven't improved the situation, just swept it under the rug that is Oxford Dictionary.

That seems like a whole different problem than the language used. Would it have been acceptable to keep using the original language and still not do anything about it? Probably not.
Post reply on HN