Romani ite Domum
Councils ban ‘elitist’ and ‘discriminatory’ Latin phrases.
I won’t repeat the article ad nauseam, though I might at points use a reductio ad absurdum to emphasise what ought really to be a prima facie case. Many of you who read this ought to be familiar with my sesquipedalean style and fondness for lofty language that stirs the soul in lieu of satisfying the busybody with too much time on their hands.
I am not against efforts to help people understand official language per se, but in this instance the councils have gone entirely the wrong way about things. That the average reading age is twelve years old is not something to be indulged. The argument that immigrants might not get the difference between e.g. and “egg” is ultimately rather stupid as well: all that such behaviour by officialdom does is provide an unrealistically low standard for people to aspire to linguistically, and works to push people down rather than holding them up to the common linguistic standard necessary for effective communication. English is a language that cannot be artificially separated from its latin roots. Look no further than their attempts to remove the word “via” - infused into the english language and a perfectly acceptable english word, albeit one with Latin roots.
Terms such as “bona fide, eg (exempli gratia), prima facie, ad lib or ad libitum, etc or et cetera, ie or id est, inter alia, NB or nota bene, per, per se, pro rata, quid pro quo, vis-a-vis, vice versa and via” exist in the English language because they have been so clear and useful that we have not needed to construct any native version. They have worked their way into our language . Many other words likewise have assimilated so easily and have ingrained themselves so much into our linguistic heritage that one would be lost without them. Councillors, after all, work for the benefit of the public. These are no longer latin words, but english ones with latin origin. Look no further than the Plain English Campaign’s website, which offers a Diploma (joint greco-roman term) in its subject. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
Where will this end? The logical conclusion of this absurd crusade is that we should ban the use of words such as “Khaki” because they did not originate from the vocal chords of a native Anglo-Saxon? Do they suggest that the medical profession rename so many procedures and body parts to satisfy their petty small-minded little war against civilisation? Should the councils rename themselves because of the latin origins of that word? Perhaps we should do away with the term politics and public as they are not sufficiently anglo-saxon to satisfy the primal urges of these syntax nazis.
We have complex words and jargon because they help to distill complex ideas into elegant terms. They may not be immediately obvious, but upon any decent inspection the meaning of terms such as “unknown unknown” (one that I have found immensely useful in the International Relations part of my degree). There are problems when you get the David Brents of this world trying to use them to give the appearance of being clever, and trying to obfuscate rather than clarify. But that is not sufficient argment as to do away with their use.
All that can be said to the guilty councils ultimately is thus: stercorem pro cerebro habetis. They are promoting the regression of the english language into infancy, spurred on by stupidity, bigotry and parochialism.
Challenges are there to be met, not banned on the grounds that they’re challenging. You cannot remove the latin heritage from the english language, and to try and do so is an act of crass stupidity.
