Specific words matter--

Philtrum. Aglet. Timbrel.

Logorrhea.

I'm in love with specific, little words-- the ones that people tend to circumvent when they are talking, describing the thing, instead of naming it, and by doing so, erasing part of its essential specificity. I was talking with a couple of colleagues yesterday, and the proper term for the "jingly things" on a tambourine escaped us all. I knew there was a word for them, but I was drawing a blank. The other two didn't know that there was a term, content to describe instead of name. Which, of course, is no big deal, in the context of our conversation, but still, it niggled at me that I knew there was a proper name for them. The word came to me in my sleep last night (thanks, subconscious, for working overtime). 

To name things properly is to give them their power, to instill dignity. Ampersand. Interrobang. Dingbat. (Yes, that is not always an insult.)

This brings me to the "Letters to the Editor" section in our local newspaper yesterday, in which two people politely called out the editors for using a term to describe human beings that is not consistent with current thinking and not in compliance with the AP stylebook:

Illegal Aliens

The people in question may well be in the country illegally, and they are, perhaps, undocumented immigrants, but human beings are not and cannot be illegal. A human being is neither legal or illegal; they merely exist. The only time I can see this happening is in the (I hope not near) future when robots are created to mimic sentience: then, we may have to determine if the "human" is legal one, or one that is not actually a human being, created through viviparous reproduction. 

We'll have to define human better, I suspect, as we go forward. Elon Musk's implantation experiment this week is pushing us closer to the blurring of that line. But that day is not today, and language is already contracting far too much due to texting and other forms of quick but ultimately inaccurate and inefficient communication. 

I'm on a small crusade to keep language specific, and not used to mis-identify or erase things and people. Yesterday, in a congressional hearing about social media, Senator Tom Cotton (R) hectored (and yes, that word literally comes from the Iliad) the CEO of Tik Tok. Now, while I'm also concerned about the effects of unregulated social media on children and teens, that is not my quibble. Cotton repeatedly tried to misidentify the man, pushing him on his nationality: the man is Singaporean, which is distinctly different from Chinese, let alone a "Chinese Communist," as Cotton tried to pin him with. Over and over, Cotton pushed his ignorance for all the world to see and hear, and I, for one, am ashamed, yet again, at the overt and willful ignorance of so many people. Asia and the entire Pacific Rim area of the world is not one nationality, and regardless of similarly-appearing features, the people living there are not all the same people. I learned that in grade school. How ridiculous, rude, and obstreperous of the erstwhile elected official. I suppose he represents (and many of his colleagues as well) the overwhelming ignorance of so many people in our country. And they want to restrict what and how we teach? 

Ah, there's the issue: educated people make some others rather nervous. Compassionate and empathetic people make them nervous. Curious and interested people make them nervous. Heaven forfend a long-held mistaken idea should be challenged and replaced by accurate information. 

Petulant, cantankerous, obstructionists. 

I hope you have a good day,

C