Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: shrinking/vagueness (anti flame capsule)

Author:David McCusker
Posted:9/26/2000; 12:27:08 AM
Topic:anti flame capsule
Msg #:21702 (In response to 21696)
Prev/Next:21701 / 21703

Joshua Allen: As for general population finding value in vagueness, you may be right

Vagueness is also useful when being over-specific is either wrong or careless. Being specific can be wrong when one really means to be more general, and a reader misses the point. Also, being very specific can be the same as showing all one's cards, which amounts to carelessness when someone else wants to spin the words. By not saying everything, one can easily unspin most attacks by saying still more.

I'm vague myself lots of times. I'm sure I must abuse this more than I should. But it also gives me more scope to be funny through understatement, so I don't mind so much. :-)

Joshua Allen: -- I cannot fathom why people would value this (beyond laziness, maybe?), but you seem to be right.

Maybe the opposite of vague in this context is strong, rather than specific. Making strong statements is to be valued. Folks often make much weaker statements than they could. It might be laziness, or fear of getting too close the edge of places where one looks foolish.

Okay, but even though I like strong statements, I might not have any such in some context, but I want to write anyway. I think being vague for starters is a good way to open negotiations with other folks. That way one can use dialog to vector in on a message one could not reach in one jump.

Joshua Allen: The whole point of a good vocabulary is that it allows you to communicate more effectively, using less words.

Yes, and I like to evangelize the use of more short and single syllable words by using them myself more often. I think we should keep all the four and five letter words in play. :-)

Some longer words are much more vague than shorter words. In particular, many words of Latin extraction have roots in common with many other words, and they can also have a large number of meanings. Such Latin words can easily subvert a carefully chosen word with unintended vagueness, because a reader must discriminate meaning in actual usage from other options.

(I often weigh word efficiency in syllables rather than word count. A piece of text can look long but read very fast. So using fewer words need not always be the main goal.)

Joshua Allen: Ability to express a great deal of meaning in a short sentence is a hallmark of a well-designed vocabulary (and for its domain, I think street-language does rather well).

Yes, but vocabularies have side effects. Words are often strongly associated with certain contexts in which the words normally occur. So using a word can invoke the context willy nilly. One might end up telling the same story told the last time a word was used, just because readers can't turn off normative expectations.

One can't always use words in perfectly a la carte fashion as one might expect. As soon as one says 'beanstalk' one can end up telling a giant story whether wanted or not.

Joshua Allen: Generally used language in middle-class America is shrinking, though, and I am alarmed.

Yes, and it's disturbing. I wonder if it's related to the consumer culture. (Should I leave it as an exercise to guess why I might say that? I'm thinking about 19th century written correspondence culture in particular for contrast, when folks were personally limited by vocabulary in expressing themselves.) Maybe a dwindling vocabulary is the way to streamline the mental roles suitable for couch potatoes (this is just a cynical joke).

Joshua Allen: Maybe people don't have big thoughts to express anymore?

Maybe something like that. The idea of big thoughts provokes the memory of reading Thomas Carlyle (spelling?) many years ago. The way he used words was crisp and intriguing, and gave me a panicky feeling the world might have gotten more stupid since he was alive. But I think he was just a great writer.

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:50 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.