Contenu du sommaire : Les langues de bois

From Orwell's Newspeak to 21st Century Spin
The term « langue de bois » (literally « tongue of wood ») is highly polysemic in French and has no single translation in English. The term appeared in France in the 1980s as a borrowing from the Russian, possibly via Poland at the time of the events in Gdansk and the movement started by the Solidarność trade union. How did a term used to describe the language of a totalitarian state, coined by George Orwell as « newspeak », come to be used in so many different ways? Orwell himself provides the explanation: in a celebrated article on the language of politics, he argues that subverting the truth is not an exclusive mark of totalitarian regimes. Today, we have a form of expression known as « straight talk », which, when it comes out of the mouths of spin doctors, could well be seen as the latest incarnation of newspeak.

On the Unbearable Lightness of the West Regarding « Doublespeak »The French expression « langue de bois » – literally « wooden language » but often referred to as « doublespeak » in English – originated in Eastern Europe. In its current usage in France, however, it has come to cover a range of meanings and refers to any kind of stereotyped discourse, serving as a mere code-word for public speaking, and is often confused with « politically correct ». In Eastern Europe, which has seen totalitarianism of two kinds, this semantic weakening is regarded with dismay. In these countries, the expression has lost none of its weight of meaning, and its offhand use in the West is perceived as equating with a lack of understanding and even ignorance of what it really means. To those who fought against it, there is a difference not only in degree but actually in nature between a living language and the « wooden language » of officialdom. This is what we would like to illustrate, briefly, first through the strength of the protests against it and secondly by attempting to shed some light on what the protest was really about, mainly through the example of Poland.

Newspeak: Rooted in Rhetoric, Branching into Metaphor
Based on its functions in totalitarian regimes, the type of language George Orwell called « newspeak » has been treated as an oddity, a language foreign to democratic societies. However, when compared with the classic figures of rhetorical speech, its singularity begins to fade. It is related, in fact, to a potential, a tendency or a predisposition of « natural language » to create metaphor – a propensity that « newspeak » exploits, accentuates, radicalises and subverts. But the affinities that appear between this particular type of language and other very common forms, such as the language of « political correctness », suggest that rather than an exotic dialect, it is actually very much a kind of « lingua franca ».

Stereotyping and Doublespeak: All in the Same Family
This article takes a variety of examples of usage that could be described as « doublespeak » in an attempt to characterise the meaning of the term, which we contrast with what is known as « straight talk ». We then show that « doublespeak » has many traits in common with stereotyping, of which it appears to be a specific form: « doublespeak » is a stereotype of a form of specialised or public-speaking language that enables the speaker to avoid exposure or discredit. Although its use is essential to the ethos the speaker is attempting to convey, it has fundamentally negative connotations: it is referred to only to stigmatise and denounce its lack of clarity and transparency. And yet, like stereotyping with which it shares a number of uses and functions, doublespeak can be delivered and received in a variety of ways that are by no means confined to the negative register.

When Language Turns « Wooden »The characteristic « wooden language » of totalitarian bureaucracies can be described in linguistic terms as a distortion of the various « fundamental components of speech ». When language turns « wooden », there is no longer a « subject » or « referent » to whom or to which the words apply, no real « interlocutor », no real exchanges between interlocutors, and no shuttle movement between speech and « the resources of the language » in which it is delivered. However, given that communication is always problematic, in that it cannot be taken for granted, there is no remedy when « language turns wooden » other than freeing it to bring all its different components into play.

Discrediting Newspeak: Hungary in 1954In 1954, in Budapest, the linguist Iván Fónagy and his colleague Katalin Soltész published « A mozgalmi nyelvről » (On the language of the labour movement). Fónagy's « Languages within Language » was published in 2006, a year after his death. In 1954, Fónagy and Soltész had not only described the characteristics of the language used in official writings and events, but also how it was debasing communication within society at large. A particular reason they described was the lack of culture of a large part of the political leadership and the fact that using an impoverished form of language was so easy. But they had already shown in 1954, with impeccable style, that this phenomenon was not the sole preserve of Hungarian communism. Fifty years later, Fónagy returned to the power of attraction of certain types of discourse that are still a feature of social communication. A work of original thinking that significantly broadens perspectives on the « newspeak », which the Hungarians call the « tongue of beech ».

Victor Klemperer and Totalitarian Language, Past and Present
The term « totalitarian » is a product of a discursive system that is inseparable from acts of murder, hence the meaning given to the expression « totalitarian language » as a language of coercion linked to violence, murder and terror. The papers given in Cerisy-la-Salle attempt to characterise this language, through the reflections of researchers in communication, language sciences, sociology and literature on the logical tyranny of the discourse of terror and its murderous manipulations, both past and present. Victor Klemperer's analyses of Nazi discourse and his scrupulous observations on signifiers in the Nazi regime are references of paramount importance. The different studies show how the logic of subjection takes hold as it spreads from a body of signifying material and the representations given to it. Finally, the question is raised of forms of resistance to language of this kind.

Varieties of « Doublespeak » in Present-Day Romania
This article describes how forms of « doublespeak » have multiplied in present-day Romania. A historical overview reveals the similarities between slogans and expressions used by politicians or the media in the contemporary and communist periods. The current debate on « doublespeak » in organisations reinforces the idea that, looking beyond the jargon and the manipulative aims, this type of language is constantly – and naturally – evolving. But contemporary « doublespeak » is virtually absent in Romanian research on the subject, which has not looked beyond the fall of the communist regime in 1989.

Political Doublespeak in Peru
Political doublespeak in Peru turned a corner during the 1990 elections, which revealed the population's utter disillusionment with politicians and the political discourse of the time. To avoid arousing suspicion or getting on people's nerves, politicians now have to be very economical with words, resorting to clichés, slogans and words often chosen purely to differentiate them from other politicians who have supposedly fallen from grace with the population. As a result, rather than making proposals and promises, politicians are merely trying to avoid getting on the wrong side of the population's – highly volatile – perceptions. The result is a triumph of marketing over traditional political discourse, and an ever more demanding art of doublespeak.

A Language for « Reform and Openness »: Doublespeak in Post-Maoist China
From the economic point of view, the policy for « reform and openness » to other countries initiated by Deng Xiaoping as the Cultural Revolution ended in 1978 was a genuine success that made China a top-ranking world power in the space of barely thirty years. The outcome was very different from the social point of view, however: the reforms that turned a planned economy into a market economy caused radical upheaval in Chinese society as collateral damage from the demise of the welfare state and the restructuring of the State-controlled production sector plunged millions into precariousness and insecurity. The late 1980s saw the emergence of a new « dangerous class » of landless peasants, unemployed workers and poverty-stricken individuals: the « dangerous masses » that the Chinese party-state would have to discipline so that the « Chinese miracle » could be built by exploiting their labour. Thus did China's Communist party leadership deploy a whole arsenal of political doublespeak, developed and honed over three decades, designed to (re)formulate perceptions and « correct » the « erroneous conceptions » of these populations to lead them to acceptance of a social order which is fundamentally opposed to their interests.

European Subsidies and EU Newspeak: the Polish Example
This article shows how the EU's structural funds have influenced the Polish language. What is emerging today is a new language called Euro-Polish, the Polish version of Eurospeak – or possibly the Euro-version of Polish. It certainly looks like Polish, but it is so saturated with bureaucratic terms that one may well wonder whether it is really the same language. How did this problem – a linguistic one – arise? Why is Euro-Polish so pointlessly complicated? Why are EU texts so difficult to understand, and particularly its calls for tenders? This article answers these questions, and pleads in favour of the plain language, without which true democracy cannot exist.

Jargon, Pedantry and Sociolects: Scientific Publishers vs Authors
Where does scientific jargon come from? How do publishers and authors relate to each other in the writing process? Pascal Rouleau, drawing on his own experience, shows that a distinction has to be made between three kinds of writing – creative writing, jargon and technical language – and that publishers should not attempt to « popularise » at any cost.

Managerial Language and Corporate Art of Performance
Managerial language is a genre in itself and makes up a particular category of performative speech. The stated objective when presenting strategic goals or team building strategies is always dressed up in a particular way that will determine its aptness and success. The context of internationalisation and interdependence in which business activities take place reinforces a stereotype of management-speak, based on a particular format, vocabulary and grammar permeated by anglicisms and lack of syntax. Aimed at unifying and galvanising business teams, « corpu-speak » conveys a sense of power and distinctiveness, suggests exclusiveness rather than inclusiveness, generates bewilderment and anxiety and is very much at one with the strategy of obfuscation that seems to be the sole contemporary register where the economic future is concerned. Circulating freely within the international and finance community and uniting it as it goes, it acts with the hypnotic effect of incantation on the financial and media scene but has a paradoxical impact on the daily working lives of men and women. As the language of speculation and anticipation, it is more akin to performance discourse than to performative speech.

Jargon and Aphasia in Modern Life
In this article, the author offers a study of the mechanisms of language destruction in contemporary society. Language is under threat from above and below: the elites are contaminated by the ubiquitous jargon of the human sciences, while the younger generation is being won over by suburban slang. The disappearance of articulate language goes hand in hand with a gradual loss of freedom, debasing human relationships to the point where brute force is replacing the mediating power of speech.

Think Tanks and the Doublespeak of Politics and Bureaucracy
Politicians and bureaucrats are masters of doublespeak. To them, it is a matter of survival with all the risks this implies: democracy has gone astray, voters are frequently misled and the functions of the State are being corroded as a result. Think tanks – which are private research organisations representing civil society – have been set up in an attempt to remedy the situation. Their role is to reveal the ambiguity of political discourse, denounce demagoguery and the misuse of power by the State and its bureaucracy, criticise bad public policy and propose solutions. In the US, these think tanks are funded exclusively by private donations and have become, in American society, almost as powerful as the media.

Communication Professionals and the Problem of Doublespeak« Doublespeak » in its different forms is by no means the sole preserve of authoritarian or totalitarian regime: open democratic societies are equally afflicted. Professionals in « communication », working under the influence of processes of civilisation whose main effect is to produce increasingly policed societies, receive commissions to develop patterns and methods of discourse whose aim is to minimise the risks inherent to communication itself. In treating communication primarily as an instrument, these « communicators » may well find that their activities are turning into a particularly lethal weapon against the democratic and humanist values that are inherent to communication. To move beyond this subverted form of communication and liberate it from the many forms of doublespeak that have imprisoned it, the practical conditions in which they exercise their profession need to be transformed by reinforcing their role as mediators.

How Journalese and Political Doublespeak Feed on Each Other
How do you fight doublespeak? This ought to be the main concern of every political commentator, whose job is to comment on, analyse and editorialise what politicians say. But, like politicians, commentators use a language whose main purpose is to not say everything. It is made for them to address the widest possible audience, without giving offence and often by offering listeners or readers thoughts they can recognise as their own. This sort of language also exists in another more problematical form among commentators, as a kind of reflexive newspeak made up of clichés, commonplaces and metaphors involving warfare, sports or cookery. One of the more spectacular trends in the last few years is the advent of what the French call « parler cash », meaning « rude straight talk », as an antidote to doublespeak. « Talking rude and straight » then becomes a political – and hollow – act in itself, for which journalists are equally responsible since they are constantly working live with the Internet and 24-hour news channels. On the other hand, everything that is said can now be stored and classified on digital media. The archives of politics are becoming available to all and anyone can use the Internet to access anything a politician has ever said. This is a welcome development for the relationship between discourse and commentary, after decades of blood relationships between politicians and political commentators.

Public Health Communication and HIV/AIDS Prevention
During a qualitative survey we made among AIDS prevention campaigners in France, respondents stated in particular that they believed in the effectiveness of activities that prompt subjects to accomplish « mini-acts » before and after receiving persuasive arguments. As their opinion does not derive from scientific literature, we carried out an experiment, in an everyday environment with 196 subjects chosen at random and based on theories of persuasive communication and commitment, to investigate the validity of representations concerning these « mini-acts » accomplished via the Internet. The results show, in particular, that the campaigners' intuitive beliefs are sound, since these mini-acts effectively contribute to AIDS prevention.