Critics come and go, but language is forever

Language is an infinitely versatile tool that defies the notion of a single correct form. It encompasses a wide array of approaches and methods for shaping its structure and influencing its usage. So you will always find the right words, no matter the situation.

‘Whenever I use the gender-inclusive form of *innen in German, someone feels less left out.’ This statement in a recent post on LinkedIn received widespread acclaim, as many of the commentators believe that language has the potential to shape our perception of reality. That’s certainly one way of looking at it. However, language is not a direct reflection of an individual’s inner world. How I speak depends largely on who I am talking to, what my intention is, my personal linguistic repertoire, and whether I am a professional blabbermouth or just an everyday rhetorician.

Plato once remarked, ‘Words are merely images of impressions. If these impressions are false, then so are the words.’ This assertion underscores the profound link between language and truth. He believed that the choice of words and the way they are used can greatly influence how we perceive and understand the world around us. However, it is crucial to recognise that Plato’s statement does not address the inherent nature of reality itself.

Incidentally, the use of *innen in German to include women has nothing to do with innen, meaning ‘inside’ in a spatial sense. Rather, it serves as a linguistic tool to address gender inclusivity. 

Straight talk

Criticising language, as mentioned earlier, involves the analysis and evaluation of language, particularly in terms of its social, cultural and political implications. It also takes other aspects into account, such as grammar, vocabulary, syntax and semantics. The goal of this criticism is to promote a thoughtful and deliberate use of language – aiming for outcomes such as justice, integration or even distinctiveness. After all, the average language critic is often smart, taking a certain pride in being a know-it-all.

Many daily newspapers now include language criticism as part of their editorial content. The Hamburger Abendblatt, for example, features a weekly commentary dedicated to this subject. It focuses on instances of language misuse, chalked up mostly to a lack of understanding of grammatical rules. In one case, the author rightly points out that personal language use is necessarily stylistic and can vary significantly between individuals. This becomes particularly relevant because our word choice has a deliberate impact on the effectiveness of our statements. By speaking ‘distinctively’ and consciously employing language deviations, for instance, the desired effects can be achieved.

All-inclusive?

Contemporary issues such as gender and the use of Anglicisms in German are particularly topical and have taken on an important role in language criticism. Gender-inclusive language, or the concept of Gendern in German, aims to foster inclusivity and support gender equality. Critics, however, argue that it can be quite complicated, impairing the readability of the text. Language criticism in this context serves as a critique of social circumstances.

While Anglicisms are often seen as modern and fashionable, many critics feel that their use impairs the German language, as well as being an indication of cultural subordination to English. Despite the presence of loanwords from various languages (such as Latin and Ancient Greek also being notably prominent in German), languages are inherently dynamic and continuously evolve. It must be recognised that this development is an organic process, rendering it impossible to freeze it at a fixed level.

Language criticism encompasses more than mere efforts to steer language in a particular direction or distance it from certain aspects. It aims to promote the use of language that is respectful towards various groups, such as people with disabilities. In the past, numerous terms have been used that stigmatise and dehumanise such individuals. For instance, instead of stating that someone ‘suffers’ from a disability, a more inclusive approach would be to acknowledge that they simply ‘have’ it.

Criticism, the only constant

Throughout history, there have always been people who have engaged in critical examination of language. Notable figures include:

• Martin Luther, the theologian and reformer, who created a standardised form of the German language through his translation of the New Testament into German. He advocated for language to be understandable and accessible to all people, famously coining the phrase ‘Look at the people’s mouths.’
• Wilhelm von Humboldt, a linguist and statesman, who is widely regarded as the founder of modern linguistics. He placed great emphasis on the significance of language in shaping human thought and understanding. He advocated for a nuanced and differentiated perspective on languages and cultures. ‘Man is only human through language,’ he once remarked, highlighting the connection between language and human identity.
• Karl Kraus, the Austrian writer and satirist, who specifically targeted the use of clichés and empty phrases in political and social discourse, demanding a more precise and truthful language. His famous quote, ‘In no language can one communicate as difficultly as in language,’ underscores the inherent challenges and complexities of effective communication.
• Theodor Adorno, a philosopher and sociologist, who extensively explored language and its role in society through his writings. He criticised the use of abstract and generalising terms, urging a stronger consideration of individual experiences within language. His texts are, however, difficult to read. ‘“We” say and “I” mean is one of the choicest insults,’ the philosopher once provocatively stated.

Last but not least

Language criticism must also acknowledge the constraints of language and expressing what it cannot capture. For example, German has no direct equivalent of ‘satt’, the opposite of hungry, to express a feeling of satiety when it comes to thirst (English doesn’t either, for that matter). If someone is not thirsty, it implies they have probably had enough to drink, but a specific word to describe that state simply doesn’t exist.

Nevertheless, the lack of an expression to describe the state of being well hydrated doesn’t negate the reality of the sensation of not being thirsty. So, as we recognise both the capabilities and the limitations of language, let’s raise a glass and say cheers!