I think preemptive amelioration is too common a linguistic construct these days. A feels X, and he wants to say this to B, but he's aware that saying it bluntly might alarm B's delicate sensitivity, or it might color B's opinion of A. So either to justify himself, to ameliorate the "blow", A preambles X with Y, a fact that B will probably be pleased to receive. A manages to say
Y! + ", but " + X.
In this manner facts are cushioned, Truth is adorned, focus is made fuzzy, opinion is slanted, and ultimately our words' effect is dulled unto a less unpleasant, more average, less effective tone.
He has a nice build, but
I think your idea makes sense, but
Oh she's a great girl, but
It sounds really exciting, but
The course is fascinating, but
It's a good price, but
It has a lot of flavor, but
I'd love to, but
In Lak'ech
Y! + ", but " + X.
In this manner facts are cushioned, Truth is adorned, focus is made fuzzy, opinion is slanted, and ultimately our words' effect is dulled unto a less unpleasant, more average, less effective tone.
He has a nice build, but
I think your idea makes sense, but
Oh she's a great girl, but
It sounds really exciting, but
The course is fascinating, but
It's a good price, but
It has a lot of flavor, but
I'd love to, but
I'm all for freedom of speech, but
I want this as much as you do, but
On the other hand, this construct might be our current culture's natural way of emphasizing the difference between matters of the daily, non-critical, frivolous kind, and those less frequent cases in which urgency is rightly called for, when we need our words to have a sharp effect. So with this tool, one might simply be reserving the sharper power of words for urgent matters, and one ameliorates them when one addresses the same people every day, in order to avoid dulling their sensitivities to one's words.
If one's words are always at their sharpest, one's peers will learn to shield themselves appropriately against them, and afterwards one will have a really hard time getting through to them when one needs to. This reminds me of a quote from somewhere:
No digas todo lo que sabes,
no hagas todo lo que puedes,
no creas todo lo que oyes,
no gastes todo lo que tienes,
no juzgues todo lo que ves...
Porque quien dice todo lo que sabe,
hace todo lo que puede,
cree todo lo que oye,
gasta todo lo que tiene,
y juzga todo lo que ve...
Un día dirá lo que no conviene,
hará lo que no debe,
creerá lo que no es,
gastará lo que no puede,
y juzgará lo que no es...
no hagas todo lo que puedes,
no creas todo lo que oyes,
no gastes todo lo que tienes,
no juzgues todo lo que ves...
Porque quien dice todo lo que sabe,
hace todo lo que puede,
cree todo lo que oye,
gasta todo lo que tiene,
y juzga todo lo que ve...
Un día dirá lo que no conviene,
hará lo que no debe,
creerá lo que no es,
gastará lo que no puede,
y juzgará lo que no es...
I had not seen the judging "verse" before. I saw references to different quotes showing 3, 4, or 5 different "dont's". I guess people just add and take away verses as they pass it along. I don't know the name in English, but that's the Teléfono Descompuesto effect, right there.
Also, some webpages claim it's an arab saying, and some say it's chinese. I guess if that can be changed, I'm gonna claim it's Guatemalan!
Nah, just kidding. But this reminds me of a claimed Mayan saying, which I'll mention here:
It's a greeting, and it means "I am another you". I like it.
Regardless of the previous justification, I still think preemptive amelioration is excessively used these days. Think about it the next time you use it.
No comments:
Post a Comment