Observation on the nature of languages

 

PART I - Why is English so popular?

 

Introduction

The idea of this article is to put forward a few thoughts about the nature of various languages, in the hope that others will develop the ideas and stimulate an interactive debate. My own knowledge is of English and Spanish, so my initial observations are mainly about these. However, the subject can be enlarged by contributions from others.

 

In this first article, I want to hear opinions as to why English is the most popular language in international industry and commerce, and is reputed to be easy to learn. My own observations would indicate many difficulties with it, even though it is my own first language, and there might be a more convenient one. What do you think?

 

One of the fundamental parameters by which we can evaluate a language seems to be the extent and rigour of its grammatical structure. Spanish is a good example of a language with a strict grammatical system. This is to be expected, since its derivation is mainly from Latin. English is a language showing little grammar. (It might be a purely academic argument as to whether the language possesses some of the grammatical forms at all, or if they are all present but happen to be identical.)

 

1. The verbs

(a) Spanish

The conjugation of Spanish verbs, like the Latin verbs that most of them come from, is so precise that personal pronouns are rarely required, the person and number being indicated by the verb form. Spanish uses these pronouns mainly for emphasis.

 

All the verbs can be described by three regular conjugations, and most of the exceptions can be accounted for by systematic irregularities, there being few totally irregular verbs. (The verb "to be" seems to be wild in most languages.)

 

The perfect, pluperfect and future perfect tenses use auxiliary words in their construction; the other tenses are constructed by normal conjugation.

 

The subjunctive mode is used extensively, but its use is defined by reasonable rules. (Unless you believe a friend of mine who claims the Spanish Subjunctive is a person who assists the Spanish Ambassador!)

 

(b) English

On the other hand, English verbs generally have such a weak conjugation that it would be impossible to tell the person and number of the subject without the use of personal pronouns.

 

The system of conjugation is poorly formalised, except for the description of certain strong verbs, most of these having to be learned individually.

 

The use of auxiliary words for the construction of the tenses is extended to the future and conditional tenses.

The subjunctive is rarely used, (or at least it has become the same as the indicative), apart from the verb "to be": "If I were... " is the correct form. Yet, even here, how many say "If I was... " and are not corrected? Perhaps this too is about to disappear. (An in-depth description of the use of the subjunctive can be found by clicking here.)

 

It should be easier to learn a system rather than a series of individual verbs. Nevertheless, if so many forms in English are identical, the scope for error is minimised.

 

2. The nouns

Many languages use the concept of genders of nouns. Even a modern language like German has all three genders. French and Spanish have two genders, having dispensed with neuter (with rare exception like ello). This means that extra forms of the definite and indefinite articles are required, as are masculine and feminine forms of most adjectives. Here at least, English is easier. It only displays gender in a very limited form, never endowing inanimate objects with gender.

 

The declension of nouns, done very rigorously by Latin, is approximated in German, by declining the articles and adjectives that qualify the nouns with endings for nominative, accusative, genitive and dative. Both English and Spanish show the declension of pronouns but not ordinary nouns, though some might argue that the prepositions "of" and "to" and even " ...'s " are equivalent to genitive or dative forms of ordinary nouns. Russian is said to use rigorous declension of nouns. (Students of Russian please advise.)

This simplicity of gender should aid the learning of English.

 

3. Orthography

This is the area where English really makes itself difficult. Nearly every language has a complete set of rules for the writing down of its sounds, or conversely for the pronunciation of written symbols. The rules may be different for each language, but once understood apply equally to nearly all the words. Here, English has only a very vague system, with more exceptions than rules. Words can be learned by their sounds, and a student can rapidly speak the language. However, since the prosody is so vaguely represented by the orthography, reading and writing are very difficult, with words having to be assimilated almost on an individual basis.

 

A further lack of precision occurs with the representation of the stressing of words. Some languages like Spanish use orthographic accents, so that any departure from the rules is shown. With English, we are back to guessing here too.

 

These difficulties must surely negate all the benefits of the easy grammatical system? Your views are sought: this is interactive.

 

Ideas for future discussion:

What about non-linguistic factors? The dominance of the USA in world trade might be imposing its language on its trading partners.

What happens when languages travel? English, French, Spanish and Portuguese have all gone to the Americas.

How strict should rules of grammar be? Spanish has its Royal Academy, English only has dictionaries.

Please send comments or further articles to: Michael Thornton

 

---

 

PART II - What are modern communications doing to languages?

 

Introduction

In some countries, for example in parts of Africa, people are often multilingual, and regularly switch between several languages during a single conversation. While this is an interesting subject for someone to elaborate later, for now I want to make observations relevant to the European model, where one major language is used in any one country, or at least any one region.

 

Modern information technology allows us practically unlimited access to each other's languages. If we have the inclination, we may learn some of them. The opportunities for people to learn from each other have never been greater. If we are careful, we can learn new languages in a pure and correct form, and not unnecessarily incorporate words of one language into another. Yet if we are not conscientious and systematic, it is easy to allow the character of a language to be diluted by the borrowing of words and writing practices.

 

This borrowing has always gone on, but now modern communications are greatly accelerating the process, simply because of the huge increase in social interaction they produce. Within countries, local dialects began to die out as soon as radio broadcasts began to reach the majority of the people, and impressed a standard language form upon them. Computerised communications are working on a wider scale, between different languages.

 

The various kinds of equipment used have their own specific effects:

 

Word processors

These have spell checkers, and even auto-correct facilities, so we can all write correctly, but this must tempt us to forget how to do it without such help. These tools are particularly helpful with the orthographic accents used by many languages, but the rules for their use can be lost to the individual, if they are always written automatically.

 

Similarly, punctuation marks traditionally used in some languages are not readily available on another country's standard keyboard, so alternative symbols are imposed. Examples are the en dash, em dash, and «....» sometimes used for quotation marks in older writings in several European languages. They are often replaced by ".... " as in modern English.

 

Electronic mail

This can give problems with the many special characters not on the standard keyboards (those characters hidden under the "Alt" key). This includes the aforementioned letters with accents, and they will not function with certain E-mail viewers, so they are often missed out altogether on electronic messages, or an alternative spelling is used to approximate them. Messages are still readily understood, but this could lead to a relaxed attitude to the use of accented letters and other special characters, and ultimately to their demise. However, the use of E-mail formulated with HTML has become very popular, despite the warnings given to its users about security. This has facilitated the use of the special characters, but many are still written wrongly.

World wide web

  Web pages naturally will show the special characters in the same way as HTML based E-mail, but if the raw source text of a page is captured, it can contain strange groups of symbols that represent the special characters. These require the use of the search and replace functions of the word processor to produce a readable document. For instance, the letter o with an acute accent is seen as "ó" This can be such a hindrance that occasionally there must be a temptation to ignore the accents when writing pages, or to use the E-mail techniques of approximation. (so, for example, "ó..." can be avoided by writing "o'..." to indicate an o with an acute accent.)

 

Mobile phone text messaging

This the latest test of our writing skills. It is also the greatest temptation to use shorthand, because messages cost money. A whole new set of trendy abbreviations has arisen, and many are understood only by those thoroughly immersed in the style, particularly young people. A simple example is "m8" for "mate", but many are much more devious. It is used almost as a secret language by some. However, it has become so far removed from real language that maybe we can hope that its users can write both.

 

Use of foreign words

Apart from the orthographic considerations, there is also the straightforward borrowing of words and phrases. Again, this has always gone on, but is now increasing. It has often occurred in the past because people merely wished to show off their knowledge. They would perhaps give a better demonstration of their vocabulary by showing that they knew the correct equivalent word in their native language. There nearly always is one. Sometimes the equivalent is so long that maybe the use of the foreign phrase is justified. More usually there is no need to use foreign words, but electronic communications are ensuring that we encounter them with greater frequency than in the past.

The pretentious use of French in the English language is long established. One example is the use of savoir faire. Surely "know-how" would suffice? It is no longer or cumbersome than the French.

 

On the other hand, to express the meaning of the German Schadenfreude in English requires the clumsy phrase: "malicious delight in the misfortune of others". Perhaps here is an example of the acceptable convenience of using a foreign phrase. Incidentally, the use of Schadenfreude was only recently popularised, and was so as the result of a television advertisement. Can you translate it into English more economically? Let us know.

 

There are specialised uses of foreign languages in the arts: Italian in musical notation, and French in the choreography of classical ballet. This usage makes the art forms universally understood in any country. Here there can be no doubt of the advantage of the use; international groups of artists can all use the same musical scores and follow the same dance directions. International understanding and co-operation are greatly enhanced.

 

Compare such use of a standard language format by the artists themselves with the unnecessary use of foreign words by commentators and critics of the arts. For instance, they do not need to describe a musical interpretation as Schmalz; they are not just addressing artists, but the public as well, and all need to understand. So would it not be more appropriate to say the performance was over sentimental?

Then what can be said about words so specialised that a general translation might not convey the exact meaning? A Leitmotiv can be translated as a theme tune, but perhaps that would not convey the exact way that Wagner allocates musical themes to his characters. Sometimes a character is not even seen, but is known to be there by the music. Is this more than a theme tune, and does it need the foreign word?

 

Sometimes a borrowed word is modified to fit in with its new surroundings. Consider the English word "meeting " which could be adequately represented in Spanish by reunión, but instead the English word is taken and modified to accord with orthographic requirements, and it becomes mitín.

 

Technical terms

As communications become increasingly technical, new words and phrases emerge more often in English, this being perhaps the most popular language of science. There is usually a satisfactory translation of an English technical phrase, but often it is left as English in another language. (The examples given are all of transfers between English and Spanish; these are the only languages of which I have a substantial knowledge at present. We are of course always hoping for more contributors to expand the horizons of these pages.) There is no single reason for the export of the phrases, but more often than not the source language does not itself use a full version of a technical term, and the shortened form becomes used universally.

 

Consider the term "electronic mail". It translates into Spanish as correo electrónico, a phrase which is an exact equivalent, and is not long or cumbersome. However, neither term is used, because the shortened and hence more convenient form "E-mail" has become popular first in English, and then in most other languages. Also "World Wide Web" could become telaraña a lo ancho del mundo, but this would be clumsy. Red mundial would be shorter. However, here we are dealing with another phrase that is often already shortened in the source language to "WWW", and so is received like this in other languages. Such use can be taken too far; Web pages are viewed with a "browser". Spanish does not need this word, because it can use navegador, but mostly it still uses the English word.

 

Computer based communication seems the most obvious modern form of data transmission. However, we should not forget television and cinema; both are much more available to the general public. Furthermore, vast amounts of films and television programmes are exported, specially from the USA. The same Hollywood epics and old soap operas are seen world-wide. Many have the dialogue dubbed into other languages, and we can learn little from these, but others have subtitles, and these are invaluable for education. I remember seeing US and British films with Spanish subtitles in the cinemas of Rosario, and enjoyed the combined entertainment and learning.

 

To summarise:

1. Modern information technology provides tremendous opportunities for the learning of pure languages, if used with care. Carelessly used, it can accelerate the casual usage of foreign words, where they are not necessary.

2. Languages use foreign words and phrases most often where the foreign word is shorter and more convenient. This is understandable, and there seems to be no way of stopping it.

3. There is also much use made of foreign words without good reason, when a short and exact equivalent word in the native language is available. Laziness and exhibitionism are the main reasons for this, and only education will reduce this vice.

4. Modern equipment makes us lazy, and threatens to make us forget how to use good orthography, when we have to go back to the old ways of writing. Again, education could help, by insisting on the learning of handwriting.

5. The proliferation of electronic terminology has imposed many English phrases on other languages.

6. There are some really good cinemas in Rosario!

 

Please send comments or further articles to: Michael Thornton

 

 

Brendan McSherry has kindly contributed some very interesting comments on the above articles. He writes:

Fascinating stuff! Five European languages are 'official' languages of American states. In addition to Spanish, English and Portuguese these are French and Dutch/Netherlands. Dutch and French were once more widely spoken in the Americas but declined following political defeats.

The reason why these are state languages in the Americas is related to the geographical position of their motherlands, on the Western fringe of Europe, and to their history, all were relatively centralised, maritime states by the sixteenth/seventeenth century. Had European history been different perhaps Irish/Gaelic, Danish or Basque would have been official American languages.

 

English is 'the' world language today because it is the official language of many rich, developed states. It is not intrinsically better or worse, in a holistic sense, than any other language, though it is undoubtedly better at certain specific tasks, e.g. business.

Comparing languages one always finds examples like 'schadenfreude', where one language has a neat word that another language needs a whole phrase to put across. This adds to the richness of life and is one of the best things about learning other languages - comparing the differences and constancies - seeing how other cultures see the world.

 

One real advantage that English possesses is its open, organic and 'democratic' nature. Precisely because English, unlike French, German, Spanish and Irish, has no central, controlling and defining authority it is free to change and adapt in real-time. This may mean it is less 'beautiful' and less consistent than regulated languages but it adds flexibility and makes it more 'user-friendly' and creative.

Its spelling is appalling because of the Norman Conquest of England, after which all official documents were written by French speakers, with a knowledge of Latin/Romance orthography but not Germanic! It has been seriously suggested that English is actually a creole, a mix of the Germanic tongue of the English and the French language of the conquerors. This theory explains the loss of inflection, declension and the three original English genders during the Middle Ages.

 

---

 

These ideas were discussed on the AABS Language Forum :

 

Graciela writes:

 

I think you are right. In my view, many times foreign words are used, unnecessarily, because the speaker wants to appear as a little 'exotic' or to show that they have travelled. Sometimes, they might have the idea that "if I use difficult words that you cannot understand, you will perceive me as being better than you".

 

Not only foreign words but also certain style of speech, where 'key' words are introduced, for their own sake, can be used to cause this effect in the reader/listener rather than to convey a meaning.

 

But it is true that Spanish borrows many words from English and, as Alejandro Raiter says, we are not going to return them!  

 

Quote:
Según José Luis Moure, los anglicismos no son un problema grave. "Cuando se habla de los peligros del idioma - dice - inmediatamente se piensa en los anglicismos. Pero no hay lenguas puras, se construyen con incorporaciones permanentes de otros componentes léxicos. Qué sería de nuestro español sin los arabismos.  
"Los galicismos en algún momento también fueron aterradores". Moure explica que, en buena medida, el fenómeno depende de necesidades técnicas concretas, de la falta de palabras específicas en nuestro idioma para nombrar cuestiones de la computación o la ciencia. Y agrega: "Si a esto se suma la incorporación de anglicismos por parte de los jóvenes, más permeables a las modas y a lo que imponen los medios, es muy difícil ponerle coto de manera consensuada entre todos los países de América. Pero yo creo que van a quedar las palabras que deban quedar y las demás van a desaparecer, como ha sucedido siempre".

Alejandro Raiter coincide con este punto de vista: "Es cierto que hay mucho inglés en el español de hoy, pero no me preocupa. Esto en lingüística se llama 'préstamo'. Se toma prestada la palabra delivery, living o computadora (de computer). Pero en la medida en que, como computadora, pase a ser propiedad del español, o sea que entra en la morfología de nuestra lengua, no se lo vamos a devolver y va a ser español. Hoy se usa mucho 'faxear' por enviar un fax y probablemente en el futuro tengamos el verbo en el español, de la misma manera que hoy tenemos hamburguesa".
(from Suplemento Cultura del diario Clarín)

(Alejandro Raiter es profesor de Sociolingüística y Psicolingüística y director de tesis de postgrado en la UBA.
José Luis Moure, profesor de Historia de la Lengua (UBA), Investigador del CONICET y miembro de número de la Academia Argentina de Letras )

La palabra 'mítin' es 'meeting' (=reunión) castellanizada. Pero se aplica más que nada a las reuniones político-partidistas, ya que las reuniones con amigos o de trabajo siguen siendo 'reuniones'!
Este es un ejemplo de cómo el castellano se ha enriquecido al incorporar una palabra del inglés.

Con respecto a 'correo electrónico', creo que sí, es largo, pero me parece que va a quedar para referirse al sistema de comunicación, mientras que para los mensajes es posible que terminemos adoptando el término 'email', ya que los términos 'cartas electrónicas' o 'mensajes electrónicos' no me suenan mucho...

 

+++++

 

---

 

Social spects of multilingual situations

 

 Specialist students of linguistics have developed an extensive system of description and classification of the social aspects of language usage. Much of such study is directed at societies that either use two distinct languages, or use several dialects of the same language. However, the study also recognises a further choice: that of a formal form or a vernacular form of a single language. In all these cases, the social dimension is manifested by how the various available language forms are selected for use in different circumstances.

 

1. The single language situation

In this situation, there is a formal language that is used more in written form, to those who are not close acquaintances, and to those regarded as social superiors. On the other hand, informal or vernacular language is used more in spoken form, to family and friends, and to those with equal or inferior social status.

 

The most obvious distinction between the two forms is seen with languages that have polite and familiar forms of personal pronouns, like French, German and Spanish (i.e. tu or vous, Du or Sie, tu or Usted). Where this is not possible, as in English, an equivalent distinction is available, and this is based on the use of either a person's title or their first name (e.g. "Mr. Smith" or "John"). In fact this is a useful guide for those learning new languages. If they are not sure whether to use the polite personal pronoun or the familiar one, they need only remember those situations in which either the titled address or the first name address would be used in their own language.

 

One other difference between the formal and vernacular forms of a single language is the use of slang words by the vernacular form. These are often new words that are temporarily fashionable, particularly with young people, and will not be incorporated into formal speech or writing until they have stood the test of time. Some are never heard of again, others eventually find their way into the standard dictionaries. I was taught not to use the word "horrific". This was said to be a word invented by journalists by adding parts of "horrible" and "terrific" together, and was used to sensationalise their reports. Nowadays, news readers say it every day, and the dictionaries include it without even a mention of its supposed origin as a convenient invention. So this word has been promoted from informal to formal language. (You will now have an idea of how long ago it was when I went to school!)

 

Some languages, like English, have contracted versions of certain groups of words e.g. "isn't" for "is not", and "won't" for "will not". These are often used with informal communication, specially the spoken form, but not so much with formal language, and particularly they are less common in writing.

 

2. The situation with several dialects of the same language.

Dialects have to be defined here as more than regional accents. They have distinct vocabularies too. Both the accents and the local words are gradually disappearing, under the influence of the modern media. They survive best in a rural situation, where social mingling and the reach of communications are least. Old people cling to their local languages more than the young do. Within small isolated communities, dialects give people something with which to identify, and they take comfort in the collective statement of identity.

 

Some English dialects and accents have long been regarded as socially acceptable alternatives to Standard English, while others have been ridiculed. Most Scots accents, apart from the very strong Glaswegian, have been accepted, while others, like the West Country and Northern accents, have not. It is not obvious why this should be. If you have a theory, let us know your thoughts.

 

It is convenient to have a standard language, so that all the inhabitants of a country or region can use the same form, and the news media can relate to all the people. Sometimes a standard form evolves on its own from one dialect e.g. as in England where most of the people surrounding the monarchs came from the South of England, and their speech became known as Court English. This variation of the language evolved into a standard known as Received Pronunciation. One of the earliest influences that started a move towards standarisation was probably William Tyndale's English translation of the Bible. It was read by people from all regions and they would learn the same new forms of English from it. The new standard was propagated by public schools, and their pupils took their accents home to all parts of the country.

 

However, not only standard forms were spread: local influences spread too, and modified the standard. Railways would increase interaction between communities, and the telephone would continue this and the standard was influenced. It has been modified more recently by a more rapid incorporation of these local influences because of modern media. For example, the rise of pop music from Liverpool in the 1960's led to all parts of the country using Liverpudlian phrases. Later, television soap operas spread US, Cockney and Australian phrases. One effect that many find annoying is the rise in the use of the Australian question intonation at the end of sentences that are not questions at all. The Neighbours and Home Away programmes are blamed for it. Other changes, mainly coming from Cockney influence are the use of the glottal stop and decrease in the vocalisation of the letter L. Even the Queen has been observed to change vowel intonations during the last 50 years.

 

Sometimes the standard has to be deliberately constructed from a set of dialects. This happened in Norway, where scholars took the most widely used parts of several dialects and put them together to make a standard language. In most cases the standard is no better grammatically than any dialect, yet it becomes more socially acceptable.

 

3. The situation with two distinct languages in one area.

Where two distinct languages are spoken in any area, the term diglossic is used. However, this has now been extended to mean two varieties of one language as well. In a diglossic situation, the two languages or varieties are often classified as High or Low language, with the High form being occupied more for business and technical use, and the Low form being used in the home, and for the description of natural things.

Spanish and Guaraní are so used in Paraguay. Guaraní is a traditional language that was not written down much until recently. Some of its sounds are difficult to represent on paper, and many words with completely different meanings are almost identical in the written form, their difference being shown by vocal intonation only understood by a native speaker. People who are only used to writing Spanish are surprised by the need to employ the letter k and the apostrophe. For these reasons, it is not convenient for business use. However, its value for the description of Nature is without question. Many animals are named by the sounds they make, which is an excellent way to give their description. For instance, the Spanish description of the Wood Rail as a Gallineta does not convey as much as the Guaraní name, Ypecahá, because that is just what the bird seems to say. In other cases, the Guaraní is just more poetic. The White Egret that is merely a Garza Chiflón or "Whistling Heron" in Spanish is the beautiful Cuarahý Membý or "Child of the Dawn" in Guaraní. Incidentally, during the Stroessner regime in Paraguay, Guaraní was encouraged by the Government to stimulate nationalism among the common people, but this allowed a Spanish-speaking elite to monopolise business. So language can even be used for political purposes. The philosophy of many Paraguayans at that time was "Learn to read before you learn to sign your name!"

 

People with two codes of speech switch between them frequently, often within a single conversation. This is usually not because they confuse the two languages; it is a deliberate tool used in conversation. It creates special effects, and shows off the speaker's knowledge. Moreover, the person addressed feels more comfortable hearing some of his or her own code. It gives a sense of solidarity, or "belonging".

 

Where immigrants take languages into new areas, they are usually lost after several generations, but they can add dialect words to the area. Old people change their language less, and rural areas preserve it longer. Both sides of the language interface change their way of speaking to fit in with the other. This is described by specialists as "accommodation", and satisfies the need to belong to a social group, in the same way as the code switching described above.

 

Where many languages meet, for example in international trade, a language of convenience is sometimes used. This can be an already established language, and then it is known as a lingua franca. Even Latin has been used for this.

 

However, the required vehicle of communication is often newly invented. This usually occurs when there is a meeting of languages with such different properties that neither side can easily learn the code of the other, e.g. where European and Asian languages interface. Such invented codes are called "Pidgin" languages. These are often transient, falling into disuse as trading patterns, and hence international encounters change. If one of these languages becomes permanently established, then it is called a "Creole". There are many examples of these constructions of convenience, especially in remote islands, but as always, they are being diluted and abandoned, as modern communications bring in more permanently established languages.

 

+++++

 

---

 

What is good writing?

 

As part of a series of articles that are making observations on the nature of languages, this is an attempt to find out what it is that distinguishes good writing from bad. It does not pretend to be authoritative; it deliberately uses many quotations from established and respected writers, in the hope that they might give an indication of where to look for an answer. Furthermore, it is accepted that these are suggestions only, and the final interpretation rests with you, the reader.

 

Introduction
What is it for?
What else can be added?
Avoid the obvious
Form versus content
What about humour?
Who does it right?

 

Introduction

When we read anything, we unconsciously sense the quality of the writing, but can we identify what it is that decides our judgement? There will be as many opinions as there are readers as regards the details of our preferences, but surely we can isolate some universal principles of quality behind these details. One thing is apparent to all those who write at any level: making a start is the hardest part. After that the rest follows more easily. Furthermore, it is well known that a convenient way to launch into any subject is to recount its history up to present time, and then expand the topic from there. Science teaching has always done this; Einstein's gravitational theory is always explained as a counterpoint to Newton's, rather than being taught first as the nearer approximation to reality. I too am surrendering to the convenience of the historical approach to set the writing in motion. My own experience of literary criticism started at school, and my starting point now is based on the ideas that were knocked into me then. (Literally sometimes - it was an "old-fashioned" school.)

 

What is it for?

We were told that the purpose of the writing has to be defined first, and it must do that predefined job well before anything additional can be contemplated. If a work of non-fiction such as a textbook or manual is attempted, then the content must be correct and well laid out, and the facts must be explained simply and clearly, so that the reader can gain maximum learning from the account. If, on the other hand, we are considering a work of fiction, then we simply have to tell a good story that is consistent and grips the reader. Whatever else the writing does, it must do these basics things first.

What else can be added?

 

Despite the above, there are thousands of useful manuals and gripping stories about, and so few of them stand out as truly great literature. So there has to be more than the basic idea. Just as a musician has to learn to hit all the right notes first, but after that can progress to add style and interpretation, so the author can add further artistic content, once the soundness of the carrying vehicle is assured.

This additional content can be of various forms. All of us are introduced to our own nation's most respected authors, and here in Britain this naturally includes a lot of Shakespeare. Students hear that one of his greatest assets is his use of fine language, and this does indeed add greatly to his writing, but it must be noted that this is on top of already superbly sculptured works. He can afford pretty upholstery in his coach, because its body is strong. The fancier the trimmings, the more ridiculous does the owner look, when the user notices that the wheels are held on with string. So the enlightened use of words can transform good writing into great writing, yet cannot disguise poor initial ideas. Indeed, it will expose them in even sharper relief. For example, in his later works, Góngora (1561- 1627) developed excessively flowery language and many have claimed that the content could not carry it.

 

The other extension that can be made to an already sound literary idea is the addition of social, political, economic or religious comment. Most great works of the past have survived into modern times because they make observations on the human condition that have been seen as universal. The best do not do this in an over obvious way. To go back to the idea of first defining the purpose of writing, it seems reasonable to make the most overt commentary in essays specifically defined and clearly stated as studies or lectures. If, on the other hand, the predefined purpose is to write a good story, this must be achieved first. Then after that, the addition of observations of fundamental truths is another of the ways in which a good work can be turned into a great one. It can be elevated from mere entertainment to the status of enlightenment. It can point the way to social improvement, and give people hope.

 

Avoid the obvious

Readers do not take kindly to writers who pontificate. They like to make their own minds up, and though they can thank a writer for suggesting an idea that they might not have stumbled upon unaided, the development of the idea is up to each one to pursue as they please. The best writers have always known this:

 

Anton Chekhov (1860 - 1904) : "The artist's duty is to put the questions, but let the reader find the answers."

Good writers do not need to overstate; they can make commentary merely by recounting their own observations, because their superior writing skills let them describe the reality which is there for all to see, but which most do not have the ability to express. Many accomplished artists have themselves said that art is nothing more than the shrewd observation of life, and the good artist is the one with the capability to use his chosen medium to interpret the signs and transmit them in a form capable of appreciation by the recipient. After that all the readers will make a personal interpretation, based on how their own thoughts are echoed by the writer.

 

Leo Tolstoy (1828 - 1910) : "Art is not a handicraft; it is the transmission of feeling the artist has experienced."
From "What is art"

 

Emile Zola (1840 - 1902) : "A work of art is a corner of creation seen through a temperament."
From "Mes Haines"

 

Michelangelo (1574 - 1637) : "The true work of art is but a shadow of the divine perfection."
From his notes

 

Henry James (1843 - 1916) : "Art is nothing more than the shadow of humanity."
From his lectures

 

Some go as far as to say that all of us are part of art, whether we know it or not :

William Shakespeare (1564 - 1616) : "All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players: They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts,....."
From "As you like it"

 

John Lennon and Paul McCartney : "Behind a shelter in the middle of the roundabout, the pretty nurse is selling poppies from a tray. And though she thinks she's in a play, she is anyway"
From "Penny Lane"

 

Form versus content

Many lesser writers have assumed that they have the solid basis on which to expand their work, because their writing has the correct form; it has a beginning , a middle, and an end. A playwright can ensure that his offering follows Freytag's Pyramid, with its exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution. However, this is definitely not enough. If a piece of music is written in the form "ABA", then it can be loosely defined as a sonata, but the majority of popular songs have the main theme interrupted by a "middle eight" bars, and then return to the starting tune. If, as is usual, the variations on the theme are minimal, and show little imagination, then the quality will be poor. The form is correct but the content is banal. It will not be a sonata like one of Beethoven's. So it is with writing. Ullyses, by James Joyce, progresses by "free association" of its ideas, and seems to have little form, but on a broader scale it has its own kind of form. This is sufficient, because the content is an expert interpretation of genuine human thoughts - too realistic for some readers, because all have base thoughts at times, and Joyce unforgivingly reminds everyone of it.

 

An excellent exposition of the relative importance of form and content in art is to be found in Maxs Felinfer's essay, "Sketch in the day of comedy." In this, animals are used to characterise humans, much as in Orwell's "Animal Farm." They pretentiously applaud the bear's dancing, except for the perceptive monkey, who notes :

 

"All that happened was loaded with the most luxurious formal displays, but I have not found in them the objectives that art should pursue, beyond the purified technical plan..........in his state as a bear, he has managed to reply to the craving of a multitude, educated for the superficial. However, we need to consider whether his plantigrade head can conceive of movements that fit his big hairy body. Why force it to perform established choreography, underestimating how much more inherent dance is in snakes or cheetahs, who have essentially another concept of corporal expression? Furthermore, I would add that we must try to conceive of an expressive language that has nothing to do with what the majority applaud, thinking it correct, but one that is appropriate and describes the essence in all of us."
From "Sainete en el día de la comedia" © by Maxs Felinfer

 

How many stories are churned out by cheap authors who write much as the bear dances? The stories are given the "technical plan" of a beginning, middle and end, yet this footwork is irrelevant, because the headwork is "flat-footed". However, a surfeit of shallow literature is only to be expected, because people do not want to think deeply all the time, and there is a good market for pure escapism. People can and will make money out of it, but their work will not be remembered. The money will compensate them for the ridicule inevitably thrown at such writing :

 

Clive Anderson, interviewing Jeffrey Archer, asked : "Is there no beginning to your talent?"

 

What about humour?

In a work of fiction, we have seen that any deeper social messages need to be carried as a subtle undercurrent to the story, and will not carry so much weight if they are overstated. Humour in the writing can also take this subtle form, and will not be out of place in even the most serious work. It will lose its effect if overstated, but in the form of irony, or allegory, or even the so-called black humour, it has a place. The modern Argentine author, Julio Cortázar strongly defends himself from the many critics who can see no place for humour in serious modern writing. In his fascinating book, "Around the day in eighty worlds", he points out that the critics are assuming that slapstick is the only form of humour. In fact the finest authors of the past, the very people held up as examples by the critics, have used jokes to good effect, but the humour has often been subtle, and the slow-witted, including the critics themselves, cannot see it. Moreover it would be pretentious to be always serious, because life is often funny, and art should portray all aspects of life.

 

Julio Cortázar (1914 - 1984) : "Those ugly people believe that seriousness has to be solemn or not be anything at all; as if Cervantes had been solemn, damn it! Discount seriousness needing to be based in the negative, the tremendous, the tragic, the Stavrogin, and only from there will our writer access the positive signs, the possible happy ending, and something that has more of a semblance to this confused life where there are none of those Manichean choices that can lead nowhere."
From "La vuelta al día en ochenta mundos", 1967, © Siglo XXI.

 

Who does it right?

Each reader will have personal favourites from the vast range of literature that exists. To end this article here are a few examples that are merely my own very subjective choices, and are used to demonstrate that they possess the aforementioned attributes, and have been served well by them, since they have passed the test of time, and received universal acclaim.

 

"And now gay-plumaged birds of all sorts began to warble in the trees, and with their varied and gladsome notes seemed to welcome and salute the fresh morn that was beginning to show the beauty of her countenance at the gates and balconies of the east, shaking from her locks a profusion of liquid pearls; in which dulcet moisture bathed, the plants, too, seemed to shed and shower down a pearly spray, the willows distilled sweet manna, the fountains laughed, the brooks babbled, the woods rejoiced, and the meadows arrayed themselves in all their glory at her coming........ And now bright smiling dawn came on apace; the flowers of the field, revived, raised up their heads, and the crystal waters of the brooks, murmuring over the grey and white pebbles, hastened to pay their tribute to the expectant rivers; the glad earth, the unclouded sky, the fresh breeze, the clear light, each and all showed that the day that came treading on the skirts of morning would be calm and bright."

 

"Be not afeard; the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices
That, if I then had waked after long sleep,
Will make me sleep again: and then, in dreaming,
The clouds methought would open and show riches
Ready to drop upon me that, when I waked, I cried to dream again."

 

 

Links to reference articles :

(Some of these are either text files or zip files containing plain text. They are complete works and can be a long download.)

"De la seriedad en los velorios"
(Part of "La vuelta al día en ochenta mundos") by Julio Cortázar

"War and Peace" by Leo Tolstoy

"Don Quixote" by Miguel de Cervantes

"The Tempest" by William Shakespeare

"Heart of Darkness" by Josef Conrad

 

+++++