Toki Pona with grilled asparagus and a dill sauce…
No, I’m not about to give you the recipe. Toki Pona isn’t the latest tasteless but quick growing Vietnamese fish foisted on us by desperate supermarket fish finger suppliers. It’s a language; a remarkably constrained language, and one that forces you to think – rather than make assumptions based on your subjective knowledge of a particular word.
As such, reading about it was of special interest to me, since so much of the current hysteria abroad in this septic isle comes down to our personal knowledge of the meaning of particular words, and that in itself is driven by the age and the culture in which we first learned the meaning of that word.
Toki Pona only has 123 words – compare that to the Oxford English dictionary with its 250,000 plus entries. The French language has even more words, one reason why it was considered the best language for diplomatic missive – less chance of misunderstanding, it was said. (If you really want to distract yourself whilst roasting on the skin cancer racks of Brighton beach without the benefit of a cancer inducing cigarette – I do recommend learning Toki Pona in French. That will definitely take your mind off your troubles).
The limited vocabulary forces you to think about each item in terms of what it means to you. There is no word for knife, that essential tool in our civilisation. You would have to use ilo, a tool. Now you have to describe the purpose of that tool in subjective terms – is it a tool used to stab you, bring you harm; is it a tool used to free you from bondage, save you from harm; is it a tool used to cut a delicious steak, to bring you joy and freedom from hunger. We use the word knife, and leave it to the listener to embroider the word with their own prejudices, their own experience of knives, their own memories of past experiences with knives to put what we’ve said in context.
“He was carrying a knife”. Did you see the rescuer, the chef, or the robber? The picture that came into your mind is the one based on your subjective experience of knives, not the experience of the speaker relating the tale of his/her encounter involving a knife. Mark Pagel, who wrote ‘Wired for Culture’, says that our thoughts are ‘channeled’ by our language. Nowhere is this more true than when we adopt specific nouns or verbs to describe a wide range of states and actions.
Take the current words that you are most likely to see at least once in every newspaper. ‘Child’; ‘Rape’, ‘vulnerable’, ‘illegal image’. How about ‘Scout-Master’? Depends on your age, doesn’t it?
Anyone born 1940/1950, hearing the words ‘Scout Master with one previous conviction‘ would be up in arms at the thought of their young son being in such a Scout Group. The very word ‘Scout-Master’, like B.O.A.C cabin-crew, was taken a shorthand for gay, and thus ‘likely’ to interfere with small boys. A younger generation doesn’t harbour these prejudices. In America, those of a younger age group would ask ‘what is the conviction – drink driving, unpaid tax, does it impact on my child’s welfare?’
‘Rape‘ is another such word. To the younger generation it implies “woke up with someone I don’t like the look of, can’t remember how I got here, so was probably blind drunk, therefore perhaps I didn’t consent – that’s me off down to the scented rape suite at the local nick”. An older generation has a totally different view of rape, considerably harsher, and likely to be mildly unsympathetic towards the modern young Ms ‘rape victim’.
So what a word means to the listener is tempered by both the epoch and the culture in which they first encountered the word – by limiting the choice of words, you force the speaker to define what they mean by the word.
Twitter, with its 140 character limit, has made the multitude of nuances of words even more divisive. The Oxford English Dictionary describes ‘swarm‘ as both ‘a group of social insects – especially led by a Queen’ and also a ‘thong or mass, especially moving in turmoil’ – however the latter meaning has steadily declined in use since 1950. The Twitter crowd were oblivious to the meaning that Cameron would have grown up with.
Limited vocabulary – it has its uses.
- FrankH
August 1, 2015 at 12:35 pm -
“The Oxford English Dictionary describes ‘swarm‘ … and also a ‘thong or mass, especially moving in turmoil’ ”
I know what I thought when I saw the word “thong”. I wonder what your Australian readers will think.
(Feel free to delete this “smart alec” comment if and when you correct it. )
- Ho Hum
August 1, 2015 at 12:44 pm -
I’d like to agree, but I fear that in the world of tl;dr, not many are capable of getting to the end of what what would have to be said or written, let alone hearing it with a listening ear, or reading it with real understanding
- Ho Hum
August 1, 2015 at 12:46 pm -
BTW, where does ‘Cameron’ fit into this tale? Has he said or done something in particular that I may have missed?
- The Blocked Dwarf
August 1, 2015 at 1:15 pm -
Counterintuitively the word for coitus in Toki Pona is apparently ‘unpar’ (pronounced ‘unpair’?). Yep, always learn the rude words of any language first.
- Moor Larkin
August 2, 2015 at 9:09 am -
Unpar? That’s a birdie or a bogey, depending on which way you swing.
- Mudplugger
August 2, 2015 at 9:12 am -
Unless you’re Albert Ross, of course.
- Mudplugger
- Moor Larkin
- Joe Public
August 1, 2015 at 1:52 pm -
“So what a word means to the listener is tempered by both the epoch and the culture in which they first encountered the word”
One now has to actively wonder who the ‘do-gooders’ are:
http://www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail/20150731/281732678193140/TextView
- macheath
August 1, 2015 at 2:30 pm -
Here’s an odd coincidence: some hours before the PM uttered the ill-fated words, after a long and increasingly one-sided conversation with the Spouse about migration and the Calais situation – “For goodness’ sake, just go away and put it in your blog or something!” – I wrote a post which included the following sentence:
‘Yes, these people are individuals and human beings, but they are also now part of a collective swarm.’I then shut up shop, electronically speaking, and headed off for a couple of days of media-free hill-walking, so you can imagine my surprise at the headlines on my return. Being older than the PM – and a beekeeper – the term seemed to me the correct one to describe the large numbers involved and the sense of purpose directed at finding a new home. In fact, I was writing in the context of ‘swarm intelligence’ – a systematic collective approach to overcoming an obstacle.
I’m not so sure it’s all generational, however; look at the opportunist knee-jerk reactions from Opposition figures who are clearly old enough to know better and whose intelligence would surely be better applied to investigating possible solutions to the problem. Sadly, there are all too many people out there looking for excuses to take offence – twitter just gives them virtually unlimited opportunity.
- Mudplugger
August 1, 2015 at 2:33 pm -
It is quite telling that all Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition could raise with regard to the pressing issue of illegals thronging through Calais on their way to the nearest UK Benefits Office was Cameron’s use of a particular word, ‘swarm’. No policy difference, no alternative plan, no moral positioning – it’s almost as if the ghost of Ed Miliband’s still there.
- Alice
August 1, 2015 at 3:33 pm -
Be fair. Harriet Harman did have an alternative plan: she said Cameron should ‘deal with the situation’!
- binao
August 2, 2015 at 8:25 am -
Is she the one demanding that Cameron claim compo from the French?
- Mudplugger
August 2, 2015 at 9:11 am -
The words “wind” and “pissing in the” spring to mind.
- Mudplugger
- binao
- Ms Mildred
August 1, 2015 at 4:41 pm -
It is amazing how one word, considered to be unwisely used, can land almost anyone in a storm of disaproval. Other words have been declared off limits. No pity for the slipshod oldie, when a word used freely in childhood is now completely out of bounds. The police are searching for 3 go**y*ogs who dressed the part to raise funds. What about when they degog themselves? Who is going to be the whistleblower? One wonders why the fuzz do not have more urgent business elswhere? Other words are pathetically overused ie victim/survivor/grooming/groomed/abused/pervert. Our dearly beloved Gordon got roasted for using bigot with his mike still switched on. Prince Phillip for referring to slitty eyes. Prince Charles for whispering about someone he heartily disliked. Lip readers united. Laughing gas is no laughing matter but there is a giggle demo to be outside parliament….chuckle…chuckle…makes a change!
- Cascadian
August 1, 2015 at 6:25 pm -
If traditional usage of words can be ignored then new usage must be acceptable.
I propose a new usage for the word smarm, to describe any grouping of two or more politicians. Henceforth they should be described as a smarm.
Example -A smarm of politicians assembled today for a COBRA meeting to discuss the ongoing refugee crisis created by PM camoron after he destroyed Libya. - Time Waster
August 2, 2015 at 12:02 am -
I thought the collective noun for politicians was “a slime”
- Ho Hum
August 2, 2015 at 12:31 am -
Nah. It’s PollyWallyDooDoos
- Edgar
August 4, 2015 at 5:18 pm -
A slime of pollywallydoodoos?
- Ho Hum
August 4, 2015 at 6:41 pm -
A ‘Slime’?
Maybe…. but I thought the big ones were in a dump in Westminster, though
- Ho Hum
- Edgar
- Ho Hum
- Alex
August 2, 2015 at 7:41 am -
Once again, another example of those idiots in society who are just looking (and longing) for any opportunity to be offended – usually on someone else’s behalf. As far as I’m concerned, the word “swarm” clearly describes the immigrant situation – a bloody huge number of individuals making up a vast horde. I’m sick to death of these thin skinned wasters, jumping up and down, and demanding an apology for some percieved offence, very often where none was implied or intended.
- Moor Larkin
August 2, 2015 at 8:10 am -
Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. As people moved westward, they found a plain in California and settled there. They said to each other, “Come, let’s make chips and bake them thoroughly.” They used silicon instead of paper, and pixels for ink. Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves an internet, with a social newtwork that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the facebooks of the whole earth.”
But the Lord came down to see the internet and the forums the people were building. The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”
So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the internet. That is why it was called Babble—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth… again.
- Don Cox
August 2, 2015 at 11:34 am -
If we can’t keep the immigrants and colonists out, at least we can offend them. We should be as offensive as possible.
The red indians called the immigrants “palefaces”, so why not call ours “darkfaces” ?- Moor Larkin
August 2, 2015 at 11:49 am -
Possibly bcause that will lead to you getting black looks from the boys in blue.
- Moor Larkin
{ 31 comments… read them below or add one }