The “nonsense” of the year is not about language criticism

updated: The “nonsense” of the year 2022 is actually “climate terrorists”. It goes in a long line. The jurors may see themselves as language custodians, but their real concern is the political sovereignty of interpretation.

Pippi’s father is now called “South Sea King” instead of “Negro King”.

imago

Susanne Gaschke is an author for the NZZ in Berlin.

Susanne Gaschke is an author for the NZZ in Berlin.

You are reading an excerpt from the weekday newsletter “The Other View”, today by Susanne Gaschke, author of the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” in Germany. Subscribe to the newsletter for free. Not resident in Germany? Benefit here.

The jury of the Marburg Philipps University presented their “nonsense” of the year 2023. As was to be expected from statements made by those close to the jury, the linguists chose the word “climate terrorists”. In doing so, they remain true to their tradition: for years, the jurors have been pursuing an agenda that, without being unfair, can be described as red-green-well-meaning.

They want to warn against “inappropriate use of language”, against linguistic violations of the principle of democracy and human dignity, or against “euphemistic, trivializing” formulations.

And in their perception, it is of course inappropriate to call young people who, in the name of saving the climate, dangerously interfere with road or air traffic or throw soup at valuable works of art, as terrorists. After all, saving the climate is an irreproachable purpose.

The Monster’s Dictionary

“Non-words” in previous years were, for example, “lying press”, “do-gooder” or “anti-deportation industry”. In other words, expressions that are considered “right” and therefore unusable in the well-meaning red-green milieu. Now the language experts are quite right that not only thoughts shape our language, but that language – especially a simplifying and inflammatory language – can also shape thinking.

The Germans have had extensive experience with this, to the chagrin of many. There are texts that are well worth reading, such as “Lingua Tertii Imperii: the language of the Third Reich” by Victor Klemperer or the “Dictionary of the Inhuman” by Dolf Sternberger.

The Germanist and linguistic historian Horst Dieter Schlosser describes in his book “Language under the Swastika” how in dictatorships every public statement ultimately becomes propaganda and serves to maintain power; how much dictators fear the free speech as a weapon of opposition and how deliberately they use derogatory terms to dehumanize their opponents.

awareness-raising regulations

The right-wing battle terms “lying press” and “do-gooder” certainly fall into the category of disparaging terms – but so do words like “covidiots” or “climate deniers”. While Schlosser, who invented the “non-word” campaign in 1991, was fundamentally concerned with dealing with language in a considered manner, the jury developed somewhat one-sidedly politically after he left.

It fits into a zeitgeist that not only wants to raise awareness about language or argue about it, but also likes to make awareness-raising regulations.

For example, gendering with an asterisk or underscore is intended to ensure equality for women (and all sorts of other gender identities). Equality is an undeniably good goal. But shouldn’t it be possible to push good goals through arguments, without official language regulations at universities and in administrations?

Hitler, Stalin, Kastner, Hindenburg

Renaming streets, squares and barracks has been very fashionable for a long time. There are obvious cases in which no one would object: Adolf Hitler Square and Josef Stalin barracks are no longer allowed.

But also no Erich-Kästner-Strasse, just because the author, whose books were burned by the National Socialists, did not go into exile? No Hindenburg-Ufer for a (definitely problematic) Reich President whose re-election in 1932 even the Social Democrats had called for? Language may determine the consciousness of the present, but it cannot heal a bad past.

The well-meaning do not want to discriminate against anyone, and that too is honorable. But does it make sense to delete the word “Negro King” from the classic children’s book “Pippi Longstocking”? When there is not even agreement on whether one should speak of “black people” today or rather say “African Americans” or “people of color”?

Calling ugly things by their names

Astrid Lindgren, a single Swede, wrote her revolutionary children’s book about the strongest girl in the world in 1945, and it was ultimately about the discrimination of the South Seas people, where Pippi’s ever absent father is king. Can’t you expect the few parents who still read books to their children to explain how language and thought develop?

New Year’s Eve 2022/23 showed once again that there are parallel societies in Germany: Nazi parallel societies in some East German towns, migrant parallel societies in Berlin and in the Ruhr area. Only the willingness to address these ugly facts promises the prospect of sensible counter-strategies.

Instead, the Berlin police are now being given a 30-page catalog of recommendations that only serve to cover up: In future, there should be no mention of suspects who look “Southern” or Nazi “xenophobia”. As if the problematic reality disappears if you simply stop thinking about it.

source site-111