Anna Chronistic terms

I am a freelancer. This term is almost universally understood, even in languages other than English.  Yet, at the same term, the word refers to a no longer existing profession wiped out by changes in technology.  Specifically, in Europe for some three hundred years, through the 17^th century, more or less, a group of men that were armed and skilled in fighting with a lance wandered around Europe searching for paying clients and generally found them.  The mass production of simple powder weapons that took much less strength and training to master ended the value of their services.  Still, any person not receiving a salary that is searching physical or virtual space for paying clients is a freelancer, not matter which service s/he is offering.

Changes in written communication technology have also bypassed some vocabulary.  For example, if a person is penciled in to work on a given day, the chance that the name is written in pencil is small.  Today, computer technology is our book and keyboards are pencils. Likewise, it is common practice with emails to cc a person or persons if they should be informed of its content.  Curiously, carbon copies, made by putting a carbon sheet between sheets of paper in typewriters have gone the way of those typewriters, i.e. disappeared except as a quaint period piece. Still, we cc in emails.

The revolution in long distance communication has also left behind victims.  While we still refer to the process of starting a telephone conversation as dialing, people actually press buttons today. In fact, most of those under the age of 40 have no idea what to do with a real dial telephone.  In the world of banking, money using wire transfers, which were once upon a time notices by telegraph or similar direct line means.  In 2019, modern and even not so modern banks use the Internet htlml messages to communicate money transfers. Yet, they are still “wired” in language.

In terms of the order of matters, language is also lagging a bit behind reality. It is unwise to put the cart before the horse for obvious reasons, but except on Aran Island in Ireland and few isolated places, people travel by car and motorcycle, not horse and carriage.  Likewise, a person jumping the gun leaves too quickly.  Yet, at all track events I have seen in the past few years, the started is an electronic beep, not a person firing a gun.  Still, the expression remains.

You could conclude, to paraphrase Tolstoy in Anna Karenina, that all long-lasting expressions are alike: they transfer the meaning and moment of the term, even if that term is no longer in the moment, unlike most short-lived slang, which fails to get anchored in the language for many different reasons. These outdated but ever effective terms have the horsepower, strength, to retain their places in our thoughts.

Love and Marriage – à la Dumas

This week, I took advantage of the flu to partake in one of my annual rituals, rereading Alexander Dumas’ The Count of Monte Cristo. One advantage of fluency in a foreign language is the privilege of reading literature in the original language.  In this case, I read the French, unabridged version, which is longer and contains several generally untranslated chapters, including one about taking Hashish. In any case, as I am well familiar with the story, I was able to concentrate, through the eyes of Dumas of course, on French upper-class society in the middle 19^th century. Specifically, it was interesting to consider the social relations between men and women at that time.

Among the families portrayed in the book, it was striking to see the loss of power of parents to determine marriages. All of the young people, either actively (Eugenie Dangler) or passively (Albert de Morceff) did whatever possible to escape the designs of their parents. Even if there is ostensible filial or daughterly obedience to the father, it is not internally accepted. In other words, love matches had already become common, if not completely accepted. By contrast, neither Edmond Dantės nor Mercedes even consider marrying each other at the end of the book. The reason may be that Mercedes was too emotionally wrecked or Edmond’s heart was with Haydėe but could be that widows did not remarry at the time.

Looking at the well-developed women characters in the book, you can see a high level of emancipation, at least as compared to most societies of the time. Women were entitled to inherit property, lead independent social lives and even have discreet lovers, of course as long as they did not make their husbands look ridiculous. Moreover, despite the clear legal dominance of males by law, in the book no husband actually orders his wife, merely politely but clearly requests. Women had a voice, albeit a smaller one than men.

One of the pleasures of the book, one shared by the dialogue of Tolstoy’s War and Peace, another of my annual reading pleasures, are the delightful and poignant conversations. Within the framework of formal politeness and respect, people express the entire range of emotions, from the closest friendship to the strongest hatred, all while never raising their voice or using a foul word. Civil society is maintained even while uncivil thoughts are expressed. At least in that respect, modern society has gone downhill.

If, by any chance, anybody distainly notes that I have not inserted any quotes to justify my opinions, it is by intention.  My purpose is not to produce a literary criticism but encourage the rereading of an old classic.  The book has not changed since the last time but our eyes and sensitivity have, rendering our experience as good as if not better than the first time. Ultimately, old friends are no less enjoyable than new ones.

*Image taken from Amazon.

Of Mice and Men Linguistically

The Canard Enchaîné (to which I am a proud subscriber) edition of December 11, 2013 published an article entitled “Do you speak franglish.”  This article was in response to an article in the Parisien of December 9, 2013 decrying the large scale entry of English expressions into French.  The gist of the Canard Enchaîné article was to question why, since English has no problem with French borrowings, the French should have a problem with the English language imports.  Among the cited examples of Frenchisms in English are matinee, je ne sais quoi, deluxe, cul-de-sac, petite (size), and bra.

This issue is not new.  I am reminded me of the Tolstoy’s War and Peace, which correctly noted that the upper class spoke a Russian that was strongly French, to the point of barely being able to have a conversion in pure Russian, like many Israeli Russians today.  To the best of my knowledge, this weakness in their native tongue did not seem to bother the vast majority of Russians, poor and rich alike.  In Israel when the Technion was founded, German was the mother language of most of the professors and was almost declared the language of teaching, not Hebrew.  Today in Germany, many job interviews are conducted in English, which I somehow find shocking given how important national pride is often connected with language. So, the matter of the acceptability of linguistic mercantilism, i.e. not allowing imports, is far from straight-forward.

It appears that countries that are secure in their cultural identity have no problem allowing foreign words to enrich their lives.  The expression it is no skin off my back would seem to apply.  By contrast, more insecure cultures, including the French in my opinion as they insist too much on their superiority, fret over the loss of linguistic “purity”.  In response to the Parisien article, the “language of Molière” disappeared long before Macdo and en direct live arrived in France.  Is modern French any less expressive than 17^th century French?  Is modern English less rich than Shakespearean English?  They are clearly different and include words from much wider sources.  However, each language is clearly distinct from each other in form and identity. 

It takes a confident person to accept and embrace change and novelty.   Likewise, it takes a confident culture to accept that foreign words can enrich the existing vocabulary, even if a native word already exists.  As English has proven, there is no problem being able to use tiredness and fatigue.  Neither word has become extinct due to its competition.  France has been struggling with the domination of English for some now.  I believe that while English will not disappear, nor will French, albeit a bit a franglished.  Vive la difference.