Johnson's Preface on Doomed to Clear Rubbish (1755) Flashcards
- What kind of image does Johnson portray of lexicography in using terms such as ‘humble drudge’?
If we break down the term “humble drudge” we have attributive pre-modifying adjective ‘humble’ which denotes someone who is modest and the concrete noun “drudge” denoting a person who does menial, dull, or hard work. Together, this portrays the image of lexicography as unnecessary & time-wasting. Lexicographers think that they’re doing the language a favour, however in actuality, this is not required.
- Focusing on evidence from paragraph 4, what view of language change does Johnson present? (First quote)
Johnson holds stickerlist notions about Language change which is seen especially within this paragraph. When Johnson talked about how there ‘perplexity to be disentangled’ this is reminiscent of Lynn Truss, a famous stickerlist who in her book ‘Eat, Shoots, Leaves’ described going to several shopping centres and supermarkets correcting incorrect grammar mistakes such as the misuse of commas e.g. ‘Potatoes’ sold here’ Johnson uses the abstract noun “perplexity” as a metaphor to describe the English grammar as complex as science. There is also this notion of “confusion” that is present with the lexical choice, language users that don’t seem to know certain rules. Furthermore, the predicative adjective ‘disentangled’ suggests a clutter of messiness and untidiness that needs to be organised. This implies that Johnson’s interpretation of the English language is one that has no rules or order and it disorganised.
- Focusing on evidence from paragraph 4, what view of language change does Johnson present? (Second quote)
Johnson also talks about how ‘choice was to be made out of boundless variety; without any established principle of selection’. Here again presents a negative view on language change. Johnson is not viewing language like descriptivists – diverse. According to Johnson we are presented an image of English language that is based on “established principle” i.e. there are rules that strictly must be followed always to avoid the disruption. This image is suggested using “established” used an attributive adjective to denote “something or someone that is certified to teach knowledge etc.” Paired with “principle” another abstract noun which denotes a system that governs how something should out to take place. Additionally, there is ideas of power that is being suggested within his use of language. He views that English language should have the power to dictate what is wrong and what is right. If there is are no rules to dictate the English language, there is ultimately chaos
- In paragraph 6, Johnson says he feels it is his role to ‘correct or proscribe’ certain spellings. What, in his opinion, are writers to blame for which has given rise to these ‘improprieties and absurdities’?
According to Johnson, writers are to blame for the “ignorance” and “negligence” that writers have who pass on “irregularities” in the English language. He notes that writers should have the duty to correct ‘‘improprieties and absurdities? Rather than spreading them ignorantly, infecting our language users.
- On page 2, paragraph one, what explanation does Johnson offer for different spellings? What metaphors are present in his representation of this issue and what meanings come across?
He gives the explanation that it was due to the ‘penman endeavoured to express as he could, the sound which he was accustomed to pronounce or to receive’ as a result of the ‘great diversity’ the English language. In order words, as speech precedes writing this means there is a diversity in spelling. He presents letters as having ‘powers’ an abstract noun pluralised by the suffix ‘s’ to agree with the concrete countable noun ‘letters’. Something or someone to have ‘power’ denotes superiority, authority and influence. He wants to represent the unpredictability and capacity of how language can influence to language users. Orthographers would not expect for these letters to be used by future language users. He wants use to be cautious about the way we pass on forms of language to other language users. As this, whether subconscious or not triggers a form of influence and adaption to the language user. Furthermore, Johnson wants to assure that English shouldn’t be spelt the way it is sounded. He describes the way in which people with two predicative adjectives “wild and barbarous” there is a notion of uncivilization and savagery.
- What is the conclusion Johnson draws in paragraph 4 about his work’s ability to ‘fix our language’? What imagery, metaphor does he employ to represent this point and how effective do you think it is in persuading you of his opinion?
The conclusion he draws out is that he nor any lexicographers can stop language change nor enforce Standard English regardless of their intentions to stop it from ‘corruption and decay’. Firstly, he employs the image of men growing ‘old and die at a certain time or one after, from century to century’ and uses the metaphor of how “we laugh” and the rather magical metaphor of a ‘elixir that promises to prolong life to a thousand years’. These two images demonstrate that despite how in life we, as humans live and die. Language change will continue to live on. The English dictionary is the magical metaphor of ‘elixir’ denoting a magical or medicinal potion. Lexicographers & Johnson are going to use this ‘elixir’ to somehow cure the English Language. However, as Johnson described we ‘laugh’ because such beliefs are incredulous and fictitious. We cannot grant ourselves ‘a thousand years of life’ just like we cannot ask to enforce Standard English to every English language user.
- Why are these images effective?
These images are effective because they persuade the reader to think more openly about Language Change for the stickerlists/prescriptivists that want to enforce Standard English and free it from the ‘folly, vanity and affectation’ that is non-Standard English.
- In what ways does Johnson’s argument about academies (page two paragraph 5) link to Aitchison’s prescriptivist infectious disease and crumbling castle models? Use quotes to support your ideas.
Johnson disapproves and subtly mocks academics that try to ‘guard the avenues of their languages’” against the “impulse intruders” that is Non-standard English. This metaphor can not only be viewed in a criminally but pathologically. Where Scientists talk about ‘intruders’ i.e. ‘germs, viruses’ that ‘intrude’ your body, immune system and infect it with their diseases. This connects to Jean Aitchison’s ‘Crumbling Castle’ how it described how non-standard English is ‘infecting’ our language, it is our fault because we’re catching these forms and spreading it to other language users. This use of language is also reminiscent of Jean Aitchison’s other language change metaphor the ‘Infectious Disease’ model.
Additionally, whilst on this topic of ‘guard’ which denotes someone appointed by a person who hold very hierarchical power to safeguard/protect an important building such as castles where they reside. Such lexical choices present Standard English language to hold not only hierarchical power but influential too. Which is to improve the forms and prevent it from being “intruded”. The pejorative criminal material verb “intrude” denotes to without permission; unlawfully enter a protected space or building. Just as discussed, a metaphor for Non-standard English and its bad forms who according to academics think that they exist to deliberately damage Standard English when it is simply language change occurring. This view links with Jean Aitchison’s Crumbling Castle view which presented similar issues about how this once prestigious and very-well-structured castle that is Standard English is effectively falling to pieces, losing its structure, its significance. The cause? Non-Standard English.
- What external force does Johnson cite for language change in the first paragraph of page 3? What does he say it has done to language?
He cites ‘Commerce’ as the external factor to blame for language change. He uses the metaphors such as ‘revolutions of the sky’ or ‘intumescence of the tide’ to show importance as to how much of a significance this external factor is. With these metaphors, as humans we often don’t show much importance to despite knowing the big of an effect this has within our daily life. Just like Commerce. Tradesmen have made social contact with strangers and learnt ‘mingled dialect’ that has had the effect being ‘incorporated within our current speech.’
What quotes could you have also selected?
You could have also selected ‘depraves the manners’ & ‘corrupts the language’ to describe how commerce has negatively impacted the English language. Not surprisingly, very negative images to show the so-called “damages” that it has inflicted upon English language.
- Johnson appears to express a view close to linguistic reflectionism (page three paragraph two) where he comments on social change. Explain his view and how it links to linguistic reflectionism.
The paragraph summarises that language is all about choice and how a language user wants to reflect that. Through the means of using scientific or geometric lexis to explain how the Earth and humans are the way they are in this world. Johnson calls write ‘illerate’ that choose to ‘publick infatuation’ because they want to use it for ‘colloquial licentiousness’. It is ultimately their decision to use that language. Linguistic reflectionism is echoed particularly when Johnson mentions ‘politeness’ and how when it will increase, ‘some expression will be considered too gross and vulgar for the delicate.’ Culture is known to influence language, particularly with the English language. politeness is heavily engrained in the language thus it will affect how English language users perceive their views and the world. They abide not only to the language’s rules but its culture that it has been defined to. Thus, if users perceive a certain word to be deemed inappropriate then it is their choice not to use the word according to the rules of their culture. However, this is highly subjective, as different users will perceive a word differently, like Johnson who disagrees in changing words because they are inappropriate to one language user. What Johnson implies is the idea of ‘semantic reclamation’ the idea of taking back words that hold a pejorative meaning and reusing them with pride.
What is Johnson’s argument (made in the last paragraph) again Swift’s assertion that words should not be allowed to become obsolete? Do you agree with Johnson or Swift? Explain your view.
Johnson is arguing that words according to Swift that are considered ‘offensive’, ‘unfamiliar’ or ‘unpleasing’ should not be. They do not serve the purpose of enriching or expanding the English language. Which goes back to the previous idea of Euphemism Treadmill where we are constantly cycling, exchanging, inventing euphemisms to avoid being offensive. I disagree with Johnson’s view to an extent. I agree with his part in saying that we should not use these words as they no longer have a place in society. However, we shouldn’t completely eradicate them from our lexicon as they preserve a certain time in history to remind mankind of its destructiveness and apathy to other human beings.
What is the counter argument?
The other argument is that we should not use the words as our culture has changed. In this modern age, we are more tolerant than ever. We are constantly going through this euphemism treadmill as language users become more politically correct.
- Look at Johnson’s definitions for lexicographer, oats and patron. What do you notice about these definitions which might differ from a modern dictionary?
What I notice is the extra denotation that is added beside the “true” denotation. The denotation that the writer themselves has decided perhaps to write subjective comments that could perhaps aid the reader in defining the terms. His subjective comments provide some xenophobic views too. Whereas original denotations provide no suggestion of opinion or stance towards the word. The additional denotation does due to the lexical choices the writer has chosen to use.
in conclusion, what can we say about his preface?
- Words shouldn’t be allowed to become obsolete (countering Swift’s argument)
- Opinion sin dictionary definition
- Language change -> Inevitably recognises that he is unable to stop language change.
- His language use and ideas echo Jean Aitchison’s metaphors and her ‘tangled web.’ We must untangle this web in order to language to function
