Scunt

[poliphilo]

George Orwell believed that words come before ideas- that, for example, in order to form the concept "tiger" we first have to form the word "tiger". I don't know if this is true or not- I don't suppose anybody does-  but I think it's plausible.

As does Stephen Fry, who develops it in his blog, suggesting that the quality of a word affects the quality of the concept it designates. If the word is weak our grasp of the concept will be fuzzy.  He writes about encountering a huge graffito in London (by Banksy, I believe) which fills the side of a house with the slogan One Nation under CCTV- and feeling that its impact is undermined by the feebleness of the final word (if it is a word). How can you get indignant at such a playful, internally rhyming acronym?  (Seeseeteevee- it could be the name of a character from a CBeebies show) .  Maybe, he suggests, we'd be less placid under continual suveillance if we had an angrier, more visceral word for it. He suggests "scunt".  As in, "I passed three scunts on my way to the office" or "I just got scunted" or One nation under scunt.

I think he's onto something. And I'm adopting the word. From now on, as far as I'm concerned, a CCTV camera is a "scunt". Pass it on.

Comments

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

The person who names a thing controls everyone else's perception of it. "War on terror" is a good example of this. Even its opponents have had to accept the name- which immediately puts them on the wrong foot.

Some words become battlegrounds. "Feminism" is a good example. "Liberal" is another. Maybe with conservatives all mixed up and falling over one another we can win those two back.

But other words just change their meaning over time for no particularly good reason. "Disinterested" for example.

I hope we're not going back to grunts and cave paintings. One way of avoiding that is to write- and speak- well.

[ryanstrong.livejournal.com]

I remember hearing something about the primal nature of certain words, particularly those of old-english and germanic etymology, which inspire certain feelings in us.

Many of our nastiest swear words certainly fall in this category, being the words used by the anglo-saxon peasantry to describe directly those things which the nobility would rather allude to, which explains why the 'polite' versions of those words are all latin and french derived.

Obviously 'scunt', which I think is brilliant, by the way, is a perfect example of this, with its close similarity to the mother (if you'll excuse the pun) of all curses.

In a slightly related point, the late, great comedian George Carlin once did a bit about euphemistic language where he described the ways in which those in power manipulated public opinion by changing the way they speak.

A good example, off the top of my head, is 'shell shock' which became 'battle fatigue' which became 'combat stress reaction' which has now been enveloped within 'post traumatic stress disorder'. Phrases which exist to obscure meaning rather than enhance it.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Cunt and fuck are marvellous words. Blunt and percussive. I believe cunt has the honour of being one of the oldest in the language. It goes right back to the origins. I've been told you can find it in Chaucer.

A neat example of the Carlin effect is the way our own Ministry of War morphed- sometime mid-century- into the Ministry of Defence. We need to be very aware of these linguistic smoke-screens. We need to challenge them.