Friday 18 January 2013
Buzzwords and catchphrases
Anybody at all familiar with the British home education scene will be aware of the way in which certain words and expressions are seized upon and then used and misused to death. Some word will catch the attention of home educating parents who do not really know its meaning and they will then work it into almost everything they write. ‘Conflation’ was one such word which enjoyed a vogue two or three years ago. The problem is that it quickly became apparent that few of those employing the word actually understood its meaning. Conflation means the combining of disparate things into a single entity. We might, for instance talk of, ‘the conflation of military and economic assistance’ to a country. Now possibly because both words began with the same four letters and ended with ‘ion’, many home educators soon persuaded themselves that ‘conflation’ was a synonym for ‘confusion’. This gave their observations a slightly surreal air, to say nothing of making the authors appear, at best, semi-literate.
Another old favourite, still widely used, has been ultra vires. The idiosyncratic way that this legal expression is often used makes me despair. I blame Ian Dowty for its widespread adoption by parents!
A word which has been gaining ground in the vocabulary of home educating parents over the course of the last year or two is ‘statist’. This is invariably used in a pejorative sense, as in ‘That Ed Balls; what a statist!’. Once again, it is clear that few of those using the word have the least idea what it means. They evidently believe that a ‘statist’ is somebody who wants more state intervention in the lives of citizens! I imagine that this meaning has been arrived at by a neat bit of folk etymology. ‘Statism’ sounds a bit like ‘state’ and must therefore indicate state control, right? Well, no. Wrong, actually!
Over the last fifteen years or so, we have witnessed a massive increase in state interference in our private lives. This is absolutely undeniable and we have now reached a point where applying for a job can require the production of one’s passport; a situation unthinkable even a few years ago. The state seems determined to poke about in every aspect of our affairs. Side by side with this rise in state intervention in our lives has been a corresponding and dramatic decline in statism. Statism is the doctrine that strong and centralised control is beneficial for society; control of the police, social policy, economic affairs and so on. The political developments which we have seen over the last decade and a half are the opposite of statism. From the devolution of power to Scotland and Wales, to the recent introduction of locally elected Police Commissioners; everywhere we look, statism is on the run.
Why does it matter to me if many home educating parents use words and phrases in a bizarre fashion? I suppose the main reason is that it casts home educators in a poor light. These are supposedly fulltime educators and they do not apparently even own dictionaries which would enable them to check the meanings of unfamiliar words! I am not of course the only person to notice this. Many of the submissions made to select committees, letters to newspapers, public statements by people on behalf of other home educators and so on, are riddled with elementary errors of language and grammar. Since, as I say, these are people claiming to be educating the younger generation, it does tend to give a poor impression. If they cannot write coherent English, some might say, how on earth can they hope to provide a decent education for their children?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"If they cannot write coherent English, some might say, how on earth can they hope to provide a decent education for their children?"
ReplyDeleteOn that basis, Simon, I have found schools and home education inspectors to be unfit to provide - or judge - decent education.
Yep,
DeleteI downloaded some worksheets from the TES workseet-sharing section and couldn't use them because of the spelling errors.
That's humans for you. Imperfect.
Like my typing - worksheet.
DeleteTo someone outside of the offices of the state - whether those are local or central - the state looks like a central power, in that power is held by a relatively small core of people. There is nothing in the definition of statism that says the power has to held at the geographic centre.
ReplyDelete'On that basis, Simon, I have found schools and home education inspectors to be unfit to provide - or judge - decent education.'
ReplyDeleteHa! You touch there upon a very good point. It cannot be doubted that this is true and that some teachers and officers working for local education authorities do indeed give one the impression that thsy are in need of remedial English classes.
"Another old favourite, still widely used, has been ultra vires. The idiosyncratic way that this legal expression is often used makes me despair. I blame Ian Dowty for its widespread adoption by parents!"
ReplyDeleteWhat's wrong with ultra vires?
I can use a dictionary Simon, look -
ReplyDeleteintransigent /ɪnˈtrænsɪdʒənt/ adj. not willing to compromise; obstinately maintaining an attitude.
Confirmation bias. Confirmation Bias is the tendency for people to only seek out information that conforms to their pre-existing view points, and subsequently ignore information that goes against them. It is a type of cognitive bias and a form of selection bias toward confirmation of the hypothesis under study
Projection. Projection is the psychological phenomenon where someone denies some aspect of their behavior or attitudes and assumes instead that everyone else is doing or thinking so instead. It is usually seen as the externalisation of a person's negative traits, placing blame on an outside force such as the environment, a government, a society or other people.
Projection can also extend to philosophy and knowledge. This occurs when a person or small group of people assume that everyone else is working with the same ideas and/or information that they are. When this fails to happen, however, it can lead to pluralistic ignorance.
A telltale sign of this is when a speaker says that "Everybody knows that...(a certain course of action)" is either beneficial or harmful, so society should avoid an impending catastrophe by following the course of action that the speaker proposes.
Another common forum for projection is in internet arguments, where it is usually pathetically obvious to everyone except the projector.
Ooo and here is another -
ReplyDeleteThe State - "a compulsory political organization with a centralized government that maintains a monopoly of the legitimate use of force within a certain territory."
A centralised government may from time to time delegate or devolve part of its law making monopoly to local or regional bodies by enacting statutes. These local or regional bodies have no powers in and of themselves and this is demonstrated by the fact that a statute is required in order to grant them any authority at all. Any attempt to wield power independant of central government would be an act of war. Power is granted by and may be withdrawn by central government. These local and regional bodies are in effect "departments" of the central government.
' These local and regional bodies are in effect "departments" of the central government.'
ReplyDeleteYou mean that the Scottish Parliament is really no more than a department of the administration in Westminster? It is an interesting idea, but you might not find many, either in London or Edinburgh, who would agree with your understanding of the situation.
Do you imagine then that the Scottish Parliament has powers in and of itself? That it did not need Westminster to enact a statute to grant powers to the Scottish Parliament?
ReplyDelete'Any attempt to wield power independant of central government would be an act of war'
ReplyDeleteGolly, does that mean that if the Scottish referendum on independence goes one way, then we will be at war with Scotland? An alarming prospect, indeed! Meanwhile, back in the real world...
There is a difference is there not between power and license.
ReplyDelete'Any attempt to wield power independant of central government *grant* would be an act of war'
ReplyDelete"You mean that the Scottish Parliament is really no more than a department of the administration in Westminster?"
ReplyDeleteNo the Scottish "parliament" is, like the Welsh Assembly, a department of the European Union.
There is no issue here; Simon favours removing from parents some control and decision making powers relating to their children's education and handing them to local authorities - which are an integral part of the state.
ReplyDeleteThis is statism and Simon is a statist in this. This is not contradicted by any definition I've seen, including the anything given by Simon.
Conflation was entirely appropriate in the contexts that I've seen (and occasionally used) it; the government and LAs were conflating education and child welfare issues to form a kind of catch-all rag-bag of excuses for their legislation.
ReplyDelete'Simon favours removing from parents some control and decision making powers relating to their children's education and handing them to local authorities - which are an integral part of the state.
ReplyDeleteThis is statism'
By this 'logic', since well over 99% of parents voluntarily surrender control of their children's education to local authorities by sending them to school, must mean that almost 100% of parents in this country are statists! Have I got that right?
'Simon favours removing from parents some control and decision making powers relating to their children's education and handing them to local authorities - which are an integral part of the state.'
ReplyDeleteThis is, incidentally, quite false. It is the precise opposite of my own view, which is that parents should reclaim control of their children's education by doing as I did and not sending them to school for a single day.
But only if they are tested in the correct use of the semi-colon first.
Delete"By this 'logic', since well over 99% of parents voluntarily surrender control of their children's education to local authorities by sending them to school, must mean that almost 100% of parents in this country are statists! Have I got that right?"
ReplyDeleteNo, you haven't got it right Simon, as there is no logic in your statement. Firstly, those parents are free (at present) to choose without requiring permission; secondly, even if they had no choice, compliance and submission to control would not necessarily imply support.
"'This is, incidentally, quite false. It is the precise opposite of my own view"
ReplyDeleteNo, Simon, it is not false; for example, you have described the Welsh proposals - in which parents will be obliged to obtain permission from the LAs - as making "logical and legal sense". This amounts to removing from parents some control and decision making powers and therefore my statement stands:
Simon favours removing from parents some control and decision making powers relating to their children's education and handing them to local authorities - which are an integral part of the state.
This is statism and Simon is a statist in this.
This is not contradicted by any definition I've seen, including anything given by Simon - or his statements above or below.
'This is statism'
ReplyDeleteI think that until those debating here can bring themselves to a better understanding of what is meant by the word 'statism', there is probably not much point in continuing this. Once again, one of the people commenting here makes my point for me. I explain in the post that many home educators use words in peculiar and ideosynchratic ways and then lo and behold, one pops up and wishes to put his or her own, individual meaning to the word 'statism'. It really is not possible to hold any sort of conversation unless both sides mean the same thing by the same words!
As you do so often on this blog, Simon, you choose to define things in a narrow or perverse way to suit your own ends. There is nothing peculiar or idiosyncratic about the way statism has been used. Your claims are simply a form of pseudo-pedantry intended to pull the wool over people's eyes.
Delete"Your claims are simply a form of pseudo-pedantry intended to pull the wool over people's eyes."
DeleteYou're assuming intelligent dishonesty. That might be the case, but he could also be stupid or insane, so that he honestly believes what he says.
'You're assuming intelligent dishonesty. That might be the case, but he could also be stupid or insane, so that he honestly believes what he says.'
DeleteWhy do Simon's opponents always stoop as low as he does? This months blog entries have been about him 'diagnosing' other people's mental health. Now you do the same thing?
The way in which statism/statist has been used by the original respondent in the previous thread and others in this thread is consistent with the definitions given by Simon, in spite of his objections. Here's another one, from Collins English Dictionary, and - as is obvious - the definitions are much broader than Simon's narrow interpretation:
ReplyDeletestatism
n
The theory or practice of concentrating economic and political power in the state, resulting in a weak position for the individual or community with respect to the government.
'he could also be stupid or insane'
ReplyDeleteIt would of course be unwise to discount entirely this possibility; it is however an unnecessary hypothesis. The fact that I use words according to their commonly accepted meanings should not arouse, at least among ordinary people, the apprehension that I am stupid or mad.
'pseudo-pedantry'
When they run out of ingenious new meanings for words, these types often fall back on creating wholly new expressions. What this one means, the good Lord alone knows! Are we to understand that I am a pedant? Or that I have the ambition to be a pedant, but fail miserably at it? Or perhaps that I am like a pedant?
'The theory or practice of concentrating economic and political power in the state, resulting in a weak position for the individual or community with respect to the government.'
As I have already explained, giving as an example the newly created and elected Police Commissioners, the trend is away from statism, even using this definition. We have seen nationalised industries move from government control, we are currently seeing an increasing number of schools which will not be under the control of local authorities; to give a couple more instances of the trend. Statism is declining. As for why anybody should think that I am a statist, this is something of a mystery. Perhaps people commenting here have created yet another definition of 'statist' and are now using it to mean 'someone of whom we disapprove'?
"Are we to understand that I am a pedant? Or that I have the ambition to be a pedant, but fail miserably at it? Or perhaps that I am like a pedant?"
ReplyDeleteI dont see anything new about "pseudo" or "pedantry", so "pseudo-pedantry" sounds about right to me; you could consult a dictionary.
'I dont see anything new about "pseudo" or "pedantry", so "pseudo-pedantry" sounds about right to me; you could consult a dictionary.'
ReplyDeleteNeither word is unfamiliar to me; it was the juxtapositioning which was novel. So following, as you suggest, the dictionary definitions of the words, this means that I am not a genuine example of a person who is excessively concerned with minor rules or displaying academic learning?
I must say that this is a great relief to me! I have sometimes harboured the fear that I am exactly that kind of irritating person. To be assured that I am not at all like that is welcome news indeed.
'
"As I have already explained, giving as an example the newly created and elected Police Commissioners, the trend is away from statism, even using this definition."
ReplyDeleteThe PCs are a nice example of the state creating a figure to take the blame while the state still holds the purse strings. The PCs hardly have a mandate from the electorate either; one has the support of nearly 11% of the electorate, the rest less than 10%.
"The fact that I use words according to their commonly accepted meanings should not arouse, at least among ordinary people..."
ReplyDeleteSimon frequently employs this device; he asserts that his view is correct and is supported by lots of "ordinary people" and sometimes "concerned professionals". It's a little like saying "my Dad's bigger than yours, so I'm right".
'Simon frequently employs this device; he asserts that his view is correct and is supported by lots of "ordinary people" and sometimes "concerned professionals". It's a little like saying "my Dad's bigger than yours, so I'm right".'
ReplyDeleteAh, I think I take your point. You appear to be saying that we should disregard both the dictionary definitions of words and also their usual usage and instead adopt the meanings which have become current on lists frequented by home educators? I shall certainly bear this in mind for the future!
"concerned professionals"
Not at all sure who these might be. Professional etymologists, perhaps?
"So following, as you suggest, the dictionary definitions of the words, this means that I am not a genuine example of a person who is excessively concerned with minor rules or displaying academic learning?
ReplyDeleteI must say that this is a great relief to me! I have sometimes harboured the fear that I am exactly that kind of irritating person. To be assured that I am not at all like that is welcome news indeed."
Then worry no more, Simon, although I doubt it ever bothers you; pseudo-pedant is an apt description of you.
'But only if they are tested in the correct use of the semi-colon first.'
ReplyDeleteDear me, I'm getting a bit muddled up now! Is this pseudo-pedantry or is it the genuine article?
"You appear to be saying that we should disregard both the dictionary definitions of words and also their usual usage and instead adopt the meanings which have become current on lists frequented by home educators? "
ReplyDeleteYou are the one ignoring the dictionary definitions, Simon. I think you are confusing "usual usage" with whatever you want things to mean.
' I think you are confusing "usual usage" with whatever you want things to mean.'
ReplyDeleteIs this an example of what somebody described earlier in this thread as projection?
""concerned professionals"
ReplyDeleteNot at all sure who these might be. Professional etymologists, perhaps?"
Given that you've used the phrase a number of times on this blog, it's somewhat disconcerting that you're not sure who you're talking about. I've sometimes wondered who these people are, but you've never given a straight answer.
Simon's wife is a social worker, I think, so I expect that it's their social circle he keeps referring to when he says 'Everyone knows' etc
DeleteThat explains a lot.
Delete"We have seen nationalised industries move from government control, we are currently seeing an increasing number of schools which will not be under the control of local authorities; to give a couple more instances of the trend. Statism is declining."
ReplyDeleteHow is a change that takes control from a locally elected body, leaving central government in sole control with powers to shut down the school if the school does not comply with central government dictates, an example of statism in decline?
' when he says 'Everyone knows' etc'
ReplyDeleteI truly do not believe that I have ever used this expression in the whole course of my life!
Etc. The usual usage of this abbreviation is to indicate that there are other similar egs. Such as this one:
Delete'Anybody at all familiar with the British home education scene will be aware...' ETC
Your writing, Simon, is littered with phrases which mean the same as 'everyone knows'.
Sometimes, such an extreme level of pedantry as you exhibit is a hindrance to communication.
But, as has been pointed-out, he's only a pseudo-pedant. A real pedant would be concerned to display their academic learning, whereas Simon is simply trying to twist his own limited knowledge and regurgitated Google findings to his own ends.
Delete'regurgitated Google findings to his own ends.'
ReplyDeleteThere have been a few comments of this sort recently and they shed a good deal of light on the type of person that comments here. On some of the places where I discuss things, people ask for references such as publishers and dates. Here, it is invariably a request for a link. It is plain that these are the kind of people who cannot conceive of somebody sitting in a room lined with books! Research can only mean one thing; a look at wikipedia. This is rather sad, but I suspect that it has something to do with prior education.
Or they simply have access to online academic libraries as I do. Most (all?) reputable publications publish online as well as in print. Often the online version appears before the print version.
DeleteThat's laughable coming from you. I remember at least one occasion when you were asked for references and claimed that you give them when you found the papers - you eventually provided a link to an online summary of a study. It was clear from your comments and misrepresentations that you did not have access to the full article.
Delete"a room lined with books!"
ReplyDeleteMostly fairy stories, no doubt.
"Research can only mean one thing; a look at wikipedia."
ReplyDeleteIt has certainly transformed Simon's life, although he still hasn't attained true pedant status.
My child's letters home from school were littered with malapropisms, grammatical and spelling errors. Perhaps we're at an evolutionary stage of the English language where usage is changing? Regardless of this, it's a bit rich to complain only about home educators on this subject. Maybe you don't get out enough?
ReplyDelete