George Orwell was right, but not quite the way he intended.
In 1984 (the book, not the year) one of the methods that the oppressive governments put in place in order to control the populous was to alter their language. The way it was sold to the people was that removing complex words means people would have an easier time communicating. Why worry about which word is correct when you can refer to something as just "bad", "plus bad" or if it's truly awful "double plus bad".
Of course, removing the means of communication ensures that people, well, have no means of communicating. If they have no means of communicating, you can pretty much shovel whatever you like at them and they have no way of refuting it.
You have to admit, Mr. Orwell had a point. One of the key things governments want to do is control the media. This is pretty much true of any form of government, beneficent or less so and one of the struggles of a successful nation.
Still, what would happen if the people decide to dumb down themselves?
Lynne points to a memorial created for a student, by a student that i believe was written in New Speak 2.0. i'll admit that i like messing with language just as much as any other literary nerd, but this is dangerous.
Yes, Dangerous.
Look, i don't care if "It's more important that the student expresses themselves rather than worries about how they do it". i don't care if "English is a dynamic language and subject to constant change." Allowing people to speak this way is horrifying. If they don't understand what i or someone else is saying, they can be made to believe whatever that person is trying to pitch. This sort of speech does not free you of the rules of language, it robs you of the tools of discourse.
If you have children, show them why this is a ++bad idea. Let them see why not mastering language skills will set them up for a lifetime of getting pwned by folks like me, because i do it every chance i get.
