Struggling with writing a thesis on "Politics and the English Language"? You're not alone.

Crafting a
thesis on such a complex and nuanced topic can be incredibly challenging. From conducting
thorough research to formulating a coherent argument, the process demands time, effort, and
expertise.

The intricacies of politics intertwined with the subtleties of language require careful analysis and
critical thinking. Whether you're exploring the manipulation of language for political gain or
examining the impact of political rhetoric on society, the task can feel daunting.

Fortunately, there's a solution. ⇒ HelpWriting.net ⇔ offers professional thesis writing services

By entrusting your thesis to ⇒ HelpWriting.net ⇔, you can ensure that your work is in capable
hands. Our writers are dedicated to delivering high-quality, well-researched, and meticulously
crafted theses that meet the highest academic standards. Whether you're struggling with formulating
your thesis statement, organizing your arguments, or polishing your prose, we're here to help.

Don't let the challenges of writing a thesis on "Politics and the English Language" overwhelm you.
Order from ⇒ HelpWriting.net ⇔ today and take the first step towards academic success. With
our professional assistance, you can turn your ideas into a compelling thesis that makes a meaningful
contribution to the field.
Orwell's view is that Modern English has become a mess of abstractness, inaccuracies and
slovenliness and this essay attempts to relay exactly where we all went so wrong. George Orwell
argues that: “In certain kinds of writing, particularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal
to come across long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning.” I too have come
across overly verbose and opinionated books of art criticism, full of words such as “living”, or
“romantic”. Fourthly, to please and delight ourselves, and others, by playing with our words, for
pleasure or ornament, innocently. He goes on to examine the connection between political
orthodoxies and the debasement of language, identifying a link between the degraded English
language of his time, and the degraded political situation of the 1940s. His objection to such dying
metaphors is that writers use them without even thinking about what the phrases actually mean, such
as when people misuse “toe the line” instead writing it as “tow the line”, indicating that they have an
incorrect visual image in their mind. I think that being more active and dedicated in the writing
process will lead to more effective writing where the thoughts in my mind are more accurately
transferred to the reader. The tones expressed in this essay were feelings of assertiveness and
bitterness. And, by labelling and spreading wrong identities done by manipulating the language, it
would be much easier to inflict violence upon him or on me. Speaking allows the receiver of the
message to have instantaneous feedback, if the meaning is not clear the receiver can alert the speaker.
Meanwhile, here are five specimens of the English language as it is now habitually written.
Hopefully I have got through this piece without breaking too many of his essential rules for
communication. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the
slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. Anyone writing under a
dictatorship evidently cannot write or speak freely, but we also see another important truth.
Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the
cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. The
remaining essays in this short volume focus on similar themes of language what it means to be a
writer. And, by labelling and spreading wrong identities done by manipulating the language, it would
be much easier to inflict violence upon him or on me. In 1943, he became literary editor of the
Tribune, a weekly left-wing magazine. Rewriting this essay, let alone any of Orwell's novels,
according to these six rules would have odd and sometimes ugly results. Most people who bother
with the matter at all would. This scholar says that in politics, people may be forced to say
statements that they do not mean. These include the influence of foreign languages, the increasing
use of technical language in everyday communication, and the growing reliance on cliches and
meaningless words as a means of filling space or avoiding difficult or controversial issues. The audio
quality of the narrator didn't help either. Describing the authorities in one or two paragraphs makes
the political context hidden and not apparent without the application of Orwell’s lens. George Orwell
was working full out, but was seriously ill, and desperate to get away from London to the island of
Jura, Scotland, where he wanted to start work on his next novel: “Nineteen Eighty-Four”. Loved
both essays, but, like I said, I would loved them even more if they were longer. Orwell knows the
value of nuance and that's not what he opposes, it is deliberate misinformation through vagueness
and familiar imagery that he is against. He suggests writers simplify their works to steer clear of
stupid and meaningless remarks. He comes back to the case that he opens with: that dialect is a
device, and not a characteristic transformative development. Mixed amongst these writings is George
Orwell's own political biases, and his predictions of the path journalism and writers will evitably
befall. This is because such obfuscating language serves a purpose: “In our time, political speech and
writing are largely the defence of the indefensible.” He points to the dropping of the atomic bomb
on Japan, which was just one year earlier.
According to orwell, there are modern metaphors that are “technically dead,” concealed “being an
ordinary word,” which can “generally be used without loss of vividness” (2). The essays with
publication dates are: Politics and the English language (1946) Politics vs. Anyone writing under a
dictatorship evidently cannot write or speak freely, but we also see another important truth. Things
like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the
atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most
people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. He then
elaborates on the key faults of modern English prose, namely: Dying Metaphors: These are the
figures of speech which writers lazily reach for, even though such phrases are worn-out and can no
longer convey a vivid image. Secondly, to show to others that knowledge which we have attained;
which is to counsel and teach one another. A poor language implies poor ideas which imply a weak
society, and poor ideas lead to a poor language. If you simplify your English, you are freed from the
worst follies of orthodoxy. Something might be said to be “not unclear” rather then simply “clear”.
That was not Orwell's intention, which is why he didn't follow them slavishly in his own writing: not
in this essay, and not even this list. Bukowski for suggesting this essay in the comments on
yesterday's post pointing to Orwell's diaries. He's taken a few bad phrases and brought out the
reasons that they're harmful in political commentary (or helpful depending on which side of the
situation you are). Ironically enough, in the middle of the essay he point out that he has been making
some of the mistakes that he criticizes as a testament to how pervasive this problem is. I would be
artificially inflating my first statement, in order to add a veneer of authenticity. He stipulates that
these rules are not intended to include any works of poetry, or where a particular effect is intended
in literary writing, emphasising that he is not “considering the literary use of language, but merely
language as an instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought”. Things like
the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the
atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most
people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of political parties. He identifies the
word “fascism”, as losing all meaning in the political writing of his time, effectively meaning
“something not desirable”. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best.
One can only hope. modern-classic non-fiction re-read.more 8 likes Like Comment Sam Quixote
4,607 reviews 13.1k followers June 2, 2013 This pamphlet-sized publication contains George
Orwell’s superb 1945 essay “Politics and the English Language” and his 1941 review of Adolf
Hitler’s book “Mein Kampf”. It’s possible that next time while reading a newspaper or watching
news channels, you’ll find yourself forming a critique about the manipulation of facts and trivializing
of important matters in today’s times. I await the day when language is obsolete in favor of emojis.
George Orwell gives examples of such Latinate words as “expedite” and “ameliorate” scathingly
decrying their use as pretentious. Political writing often strives to be vague; it uses this as a
technique to obscure the details. However by then they had escaped from Spain and returned to
England. The remaining essays in this short volume focus on similar themes of language what it
means to be a writer. The rundown incorporates predictable or blended representations, bombastic
lingual authority, and dynamic or futile dialect. What this reporter wanted to say was that the
individuals were in full full condition, which in its improved form, is still not a Standard English. It
is always a timely reminder of how dilapidated our language has become. Ironically enough, in the
middle of the essay he point out that he has been making some of the mistakes that he criticizes as a
testament to how pervasive this problem is. Would that this was everyone’s aim in writing them, or in
composing any document whose purpose is to inform.
Since reading the essay I have also begun to analyze the phrases that I use in daily speech, it would
be very difficult to craft original sentences for everything that I say. Community Reviews 4.29 7,323
ratings 741 reviews 5 stars 3,550 (48%) 4 stars 2,631 (35%) 3 stars 938 (12%) 2 stars 158 (2%) 1
star 46 ( Search review text Filters Displaying 1 - 30 of 741 reviews Cecily 1,178 reviews 4,471
followers January 20, 2023 Note the first word of the title: Politics. There are certain associations
with specific words that have manifested in society due to the influence of the phenomena related to
these words provided. White Guard, etc.) consists largely of words translated. In person
communication also allows other aspects of communication such as body language and intonation,
which are extremely important for accurate communication. Orwell is self-aware enough to pre-empt
the most obvious criticism: “ Look back through this essay, and for certain you will find that I have
again and again committed the very faults I am protesting against. ” He was surely being satirical
when he criticised writing in which “the passive voice is wherever possible used”. These five
passages have not been picked out because. Orwell argues that just as thought corrupts language,
language can corrupt thought, with these ready-made phrases preventing writers from expressing
anything meaningful or original. The rundown incorporates predictable or blended representations,
bombastic lingual authority, and dynamic or futile dialect. But this is lazy, can lead to
misunderstandings, and also can lead to muddled thinking. Rewriting this essay, let alone any of
Orwell's novels, according to these six rules would have odd and sometimes ugly results. His 1938
book Homage to Catalonia, an account of his experiences as a volunteer on the Republican side
during the Spanish Civil War, together with numerous essays on politics, literature, language, and
culture, have been widely acclaimed. First published in 1946, the essay exploded the language trends
of the time and served as an inflection point in the debate about communication in the 20th century.
Another example is the newsletters or “round robins”, families increasingly send to their friends and
relations. I will often use canned phrases when writing, I acknowledge that this occurs due to
economic reasons; it simply takes more effort and time to write well. This decline in language is not
permanent and can be prevented by the writer if he or she strives to write good English. George
Orwell would understand as we do, that this refers to civilians: ordinary people who are the innocent
victims of violence, but who—we are implicitly told—are somehow viewed as a justifiable price to
pay for the “greater good” of the ruling regime. In the lens of the “verbal false limbs or operators,”
some contemporary works have “trouble of picking out appropriate verbs and nouns,” simultaneously
providing “each sentence with extra syllables” resulting it to appear symmetric ( orwell 3). In a way,
it is the same age with the same threats. Professor Harold Laski Essay in Freedom of Expression 2.
We just need to be aware of the temptation to use meaningless or hackneyed phrases, which George
Orwell warns us are like a “packet of aspirins always at one’s elbow”. Rather, we can simplify them
in the sense that we understand what we really think of a certain thing. If the book is under
copyright in your country, do not download or redistribute this file. In addition to his literary career
Orwell served as a police officer with the Indian Imperial Police in Burma from 1922-1927 and
fought with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War from 1936-1937. Consider this: I am a
woman, an athiest, A.R.Rahman Fan, a non-brahmin, bibliophile, street food lover, a feminist, a good
daughter and many more. But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. Such
phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. Read
Orwell's Review of Mein Kampf You can read it (1 page), free, HERE. Orwell brings up numerous
problems that plague writers’ works. It is not only with political prose that we all need to be more
self-questioning.
It’s clear the themes and ideas of the debasement of language discussed here serve as a foundation
to his magnum opus. Orwell's influence on contemporary culture, popular and political, continues
decades after his death. No doubt George Orwell would be saddened to know that his analysis
remains relevant today. In these essays, Orwell discusses specifically how totalitarianism affects the
arts and especially the written word. This is what George Orwell wants us to be aware of, both in
others and in ourselves. It could be that the writers of these passages had a clear meaning to convey,
but were unable to express it clearly, or it could be they simply didn’t care whether they
communicated any particular meaning at all: they were simply saying things for the sake of it. “The
great enemy of clear language is insincerity. There are a few key differences between writing and
speaking. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.
My personal bugbear here is the overuse of Latinate words in the American Education system, such
as “summa cum laude” instead of simply saying “honours”. I would add “beautiful”, “luminous” and
“spiritual” as other words overused in art criticism. An example on Goodreads is the rather odd
convention of speaking of oneself in the third person, as if one were writing a reference. The biggest
impact that this essay had on me was Orwell’s critique of phrases. Orwell was severely wounded
when he was shot through his throat. Orwell also suggests avoiding pretentious and inappropriate
words. Another example is the newsletters or “round robins”, families increasingly send to their
friends and relations. He further adds that words can do wonders of they are used properly but in
politics these words are used by the leaders and the politicians to fulfill their means and motives;
they are used to play with the innocent minds of the public. If one gets rid of these habits one can
think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration: so that
the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.
Then in a vicious circle, this further degrades the language we use. I would be artificially inflating
my first statement, in order to add a veneer of authenticity. He was a prolific polemical journalist,
article writer, literary critic, reviewer, poet, and writer of fiction, and, considered perhaps the
twentieth century's best chronicler of English culture. Surprisingly, the issues and ideas could be
from today’s newspapers or TV drama. Now, it is clear that the decline of a language must. Like
Comment Katarina Ristveyova 155 reviews 3 followers February 20, 2021 The only thing I missed is
more detailed writing, more pages. Or, if one needs to be more precise, this essay is about how
language is being used by those in power to gain their desired ends, which in most cases is morally
unjust, without ever irking the masses whom they profess to serve. Keep on browsing if you are OK
with that, or find out how to manage cookies. In the future, I will try to put Orwell's advice to
practice and try to catch myself when making these mistakes. Similarly, someone from across the
border could be identified as a Pakistani, Muslim, and as nothing else. He was a prolific polemical
journalist, article writer, literary critic, reviewer, poet, and writer of fiction, and, considered perhaps
the twentieth century's best chronicler of English culture. I will come back to this presently, and I
hope that by that time the meaning of what I have said here will have become clearer. It was first
published in the April 1946 issue of “Horizon”, having been turned down for “Contact” magazine.
This decline in language is not permanent and can be prevented by the writer if he or she strives to
write good English. However, Orwell points out that political writing is often mechanical and
ineffective. Referred to as England’s national poet and the “Bard of Avon,” Shakespeare has a. As
one reads through these essays, one has to blink in disbelief that the words were written in a
different age. To illustrate meaningless prose, George Orwell rewrites a passage from the Holy Bible
(Ecclesiastes 9:11) putting it into modern English, complete with all our contemporary vagueness of
language, saying: “The whole tendency of modern prose is away from concreteness.” He draws
attention to the everyday images such as the words “bread” and “riches” in the original Bible
passage, and the lack of any such images in his own rendering in the modern idiom. Meanwhile, a
new template pressured by politics should not be discovered as ideal, as figurative language and
vagueness are usually used to change the opinion of the audience about problems. Reading The New
York Times’ (NYT) article through this lens will help understand the true meaning of the publication
and show that focusing on details and facts can make the article clear and concise and unveil its
implicit meaning. Contrary to common UK practice, Oxford University does not even award
bachelor’s degrees (B.A.) with honours, although they are considered “to have achieved honours
status”. Inwardly we think there is a grain of truth in this, and that George Orwell is exaggerating for
our entertainment, by using metaphors to describe what we know to be politicians’ typical “white
lies”. This essay has hit home especially hard for me as I have just finished a series of final exam
essays that may have broken every rule Orwell listed. Many writers do not take the time to craft new
sentences with select words that specifically get the writer’s meaning across. See my detailed review
HERE - also recently updated. Politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and
schizophrenia. Defenceless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the
countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called
pacification. In this sense, I would argue, political writing is effective. He makes it quite clear that
where one cannot think clear and needs a guidance, then the rules must be followed. Later the
organization that he had joined when he joined the Republican cause, The Workers Party of Marxist
Unification (POUM), was painted by the pro-Soviet Communists as a Trotskyist organization
(Trotsky was Joseph Stalin's enemy) and disbanded. George Orwell gives examples of such Latinate
words as “expedite” and “ameliorate” scathingly decrying their use as pretentious. Then in a vicious
circle, this further degrades the language we use. With the knowledge and experience I will gain
from teaching in Spain, I plan to look for employment opportunities within the U. People who write
in this manner usually have a general. Orwell's precise, clear and simple language is an example of
how theoretical and political discourse should be rather than the meaningless and pretentious endless
formations of misused jargon we encounter nowadays in newspapers and books. AgeOfConsent.net
is a free public resource site, and cannot offer legal advice. I have spent many years, in different
contexts, simplifying language making sure to convey the original meaning, without all the waffle. A
man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely
because he drinks. His objection to such dying metaphors is that writers use them without even
thinking about what the phrases actually mean, such as when people misuse “toe the line” instead
writing it as “tow the line”, indicating that they have an incorrect visual image in their mind. Orwell
suggests reasons for this deterioration of English. They are by the English political theorist and
economist Harold Laski, the English experimental zoologist and medical statistician Lancelot
Hogben, an essay on psychology by the American writer on social criticism Paul Goodman (which he
calls “simply meaningless” ), a communist pamphlet which he dismisses as “an accumulation of stale
phrases”, and a reader’s letter in the newspaper “Tribune”, in which he scornfully says “words and
meaning have parted company”. Politics and the English Language is one of George Orwell’s best-
known essays. Orwell is self-aware enough to pre-empt the most obvious criticism: “ Look back
through this essay, and for certain you will find that I have again and again committed the very faults
I am protesting against. ” He was surely being satirical when he criticised writing in which “the
passive voice is wherever possible used”. Orwell say the process is reversible; that getting rid of the
habit of bad language enables you to think more clearly.
He argues that the decline in language quality is a reflection of deeper problems in society, and that it
is essential that we work to improve the quality of our language if we are to have any hope of
addressing these problems and creating a more just and free society. Bad writing occurs because the
writer is rushed and lazy. These grab our attention, and help us remember the point. Defenceless
villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle
machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Propelled by
the various works of eminent writers, English has been able to develop, grow and expand to a
standardised language which holds the key to future. Far from it. This is really about clear, honest,
thinking. See my detailed review HERE - also recently updated. The writer must ensure meaning
through the use of words alone. It's important. “ If thought corrupts language, language can also
corrupt thought. ” This essay demonstrates how political writers use language to persuade,
dissemble, and deceive, and conversely, how to write factual information in a way that is honest and
clear. You can shirk it by simply throwing your mind open and letting the ready-made phrases come
crowding in. Orthodoxy, of whatever colour, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style. In addition,
since language is decadent, there are “times” that we have to adjust to the existing social conditions
and changes. While some observations are still applicable, others are hopeless. With the knowledge
and experience I will gain from teaching in Spain, I plan to look for employment opportunities within
the U. Loved both essays, but, like I said, I would loved them even more if they were longer.
Recommended reading for those who have enjoyed George Orwell's novels, to get an insight into
his political thought and biases. Do the politicians take advantage of this trend? ’. Read Orwell's
Review of Mein Kampf You can read it (1 page), free, HERE. They are a little below the average,
but are fairly Download Free PDF View PDF Austin, F. 2004. “Points of Modern English Usage
LXXX”. George Orwell takes a deep dive into the soul of a writer and the choices made between
their political biases and the desire for objectivity. People who write in this manner usually have a
general. We just need to be aware of the temptation to use meaningless or hackneyed phrases, which
George Orwell warns us are like a “packet of aspirins always at one’s elbow”. We just need to be
aware of the temptation to use meaningless or hackneyed phrases, which George Orwell warns us
are like a “packet of aspirins always at one’s elbow”. What it is that causes political groups to dig
their heels in and oppose each other so relentlessly is certainly a vast and complex question. Or, if
one needs to be more precise, this essay is about how language is being used by those in power to
gain their desired ends, which in most cases is morally unjust, without ever irking the masses whom
they profess to serve. George Orwell says that this vagueness spreads like a “contagion”. In addition,
since language is decadent, there are “times” that we have to adjust to the existing social conditions
and changes. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with
no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers.
According to orwell, there are modern metaphors that are “technically dead,” concealed “being an
ordinary word,” which can “generally be used without loss of vividness” (2). For a similar purpose,
the author provides a variety of unnecessary facts from authorized sources and repetition such as
presenting information about delays several times.