How often do we consider the implications of the words we use in everyday conversation? Probably not at all. The most any of us try to do with language is communicate some sort of message to another person. We use those words that are accessible and able to convey our meaning.
But sometimes a word will carry a hidden meaning or connotation beyond it’s simple requirement of fitting into a sentence. In Going Nucular Geoffrey Nunberg talks about the way he sees words demonstrate our changing ideas and sensibilities; one word replaces another, an old word is adopted to a new point of view, or sometimes it’s just the way little words like and or of are used.
Words usually have something to hide—you have to shake them until the top pops off and some revelation tumbles out, an insight into some attitude that it would be hard to put your finger on by any other means.
—Going Nucular, Geoffrey Nunberg, pg.xiii Public Affairs 2004, 2005
Like a detective revealing clues in a mystery novel, Nunberg creates his case through the republication of essays that examine and cite different examples of his search for hidden meanings. While light-hearted in tone, and quite funny at times, his topic is far more serious.
Unlike his fellow linguist, Noam Chomsky, he isn’t looking for some massive conspiracy which he can blame on somebody or other. Instead he shows us something equally insidious; that manipulation of thought and emotions can be carried out with just one word.
In building his argument he examines the different environments that words function in: politics, business, media, technical, and culture. He also broaches areas slightly less definable; how words are used within the context of symbols, warfare and in society in general.
The book is divided up into sections that correspond (as in "agrees with," not "writes to") to the above categories. Nunberg than looks for and cites examples of each of his three ways in which words reflect changing ideas and sensibilities. By this means, he is able to build his case one layer at a time, and establish the pervasiveness of the problem.
.jpg?t=20120209092158)
Article comments
1 - DrPat
Fascinating premise. I'm sure that it would be a revelation to find ways in which politically-uncharged words are skewed to serve a political purpose.
But what was Nunberg's conclusion for the reason for "plain folks" mispronunciation of "nuclear"? Or did he say?
2 - Phillip Winn
I'm amazed at the idea that George Bush is deliberately mis-pronouncing nuclear. What makes people believe this is deliberate? I hear it all the time, from people on the left and right alike, and from different socio-economic brackets as well. Of course, I live in Texas.
And if the author truly comes across as "a kindly schoolmaster remonstrating with students," well, I tend to call that condescending.
3 - gypsyman
Philip the author says that he thinks George is saying it deliberatly because he grew up around people who can say it properly(his father for one)and he was educated at Harvard and Yale where they teach you how to speak English.
He says the ultimate litmus test would be to see how he pronounces nuclear in relation to famlies as opposed to weapons.
His implication for why so many people mispronounce the word is because that's how they hear it pronounced by the people at the pentagon and other military types. Nucular according to the author is the standard way of pronouncing weaponary at the pentagon.
I think the author's point is that any word,can be made to have implications beyond it's meaning. Depending on context, placement, and emphasis. It's by far one of the subtler forms of maniputlation that all politicians are guilty of.
Depending on your own personal bias you can probably find hidden meanings in anybody's speech. Commentators from both sides of the spectrum are always talking about certain words being "code" for something else. Of course that in itself is manipulation.
The fun never stops does it?
gypsyman
4 - alpha
Arresting review on a topic that becoming bilingual has made more obvious.
As Gypsyman quoted, "Words usually have something to hide� You have to shake them until the top pops off and some revelation tumbles out, an insight into some attitude that it would be hard to put your finger on by any other means."
Going Nucular, Geoffrey Nunberg, pg.xiii Public Affairs 2004, 2005
In going from Spanish to English as I am slowly learning to do; the words shake out into often alien insights. They not only hide their own meanings; they hide immense amounts of cultural differences.
Comparing "ruidoso"to noisy hits a brick wall as Alan Riding in Distant Neighbors wrote of the Mexican love of noise. "Noise", he wrote, "is just another form of music" to the Mexican.
Even here in America culture changes the meaning and power of words. Obscenities on the streets of New York and anywhere in Smallville would be regarded differently.
The part I don't understand is the pronunciation of "nuclear". We all know it to be a simple form of the verb, "to nuke" which is often shortened to "nookem".
5 - Phillip Winn
In my mind, I've heard him say "nucular family," but I could be mis-remembering.
I personally despise the "nucular" pronunciation, but it's disturbingly common.
6 - carl olson
words have weight none of us realize, or at least we have a jungian memory that what we speak, is, or becomes.Hence: spells and incantations. The power of words should not be underestimated. A person can hurt forever a loved one by the slightest slip.